Forward-looking: It's a bummer that, more than two decades later, commercial flights still can't touch the Concorde's blistering speeds. Today's airliners cruise between Mach 0.74 and 0.85 the sweet spot for fuel efficiency. But that's a far cry from the Concorde's incredible top speed of Mach 2.04. Will we ever experience those 3.5-hour jaunts from London to New York again? Not anytime soon, unfortunately. Still, one Canadian aerospace company is bringing us closer than ever to reliving that dream at least in the realm of private jets. Not many have heard of Bombardier, a business jet manufacturer headquartered in Montreal. The company trails the likes of Boeing, Airbus, and Embraer in sales volume, though it's still considered a leader in the business jet segment, especially at the high end.Bombardier's new flagship, the Global 8000, is a near-supersonic private jet inspired by the Concorde. It promises stunning speed and an extraordinary range all while pampering passengers with luxury amenities usually found in five-star hotels.Set to become the fastest civilian aircraft since the Concorde's retirement, the Global 8000 boasts a top speed of Mach 0.94 (1,152 km/h) just a whisker shy of breaking the sound barrier.But it's not just about raw speed. This jet is a true globetrotter, with a jaw-dropping range of 8,000 nautical miles (14,816 km). That's enough to fly nonstop from New York to Sydney with fuel to spare.Stephen McCullough, Bombardier's Senior VP of Engineering and Product Development, explained that the company focused on what matters most to customers: range, speed, and comfort. "We asked ourselves, 'What can we do?'" he said. // Related StoriesThe result beyond the impressive numbers is the innovative "Smooth Flex Wing" design, which essentially functions as two wings in one. It features a high-speed wing for speed and long-range cruising, plus a high-lift wing that enhances low-speed agility and dampens turbulence.Inside, the Global 8000 offers plush interiors divided into four distinct living zones, including a luxurious Principal Suite with a full bed and optional shower. Bombardier has also equipped the cabin with its signature Nuage seats, designed to provide a weightless "zero-gravity" sensation that helps reduce back strain on long-haul flights. Passengers are surrounded by cutting-edge tech, including a system that lets them choose between fresh outside air or recirculated cabin air.One major perk designed to reduce jet lag is the aircraft's low cabin altitude. It's pressurized to just 2,900 feet even when flying above 40,000 feet making it the lowest cabin altitude in its class, according to Bombardier.Perhaps most importantly for busy executives, the Global 8000 can access significantly more airports than its competitors: 1,900 more in wet conditions, and a staggering 2,050 more when dry.The jet is scheduled to enter service in the second half of 2025.

Love crossword puzzles but dont have all day to sit and solve a full-sized puzzle in your daily newspaper? Thats what The Mini is for!A bite-sized version of the New York Times well-known crossword puzzle, The Mini is a quick and easy way to test your crossword skills daily in a lot less time (the average puzzle takes most players just over a minute to solve). While The Mini is smaller and simpler than a normal crossword, it isnt always easy. Tripping up on one clue can be the difference between a personal best completion time and an embarrassing solve attempt.Recommended VideosJust like ourWordle hints and Connections hints, were here to help with The Mini today if youre stuck and need a little help.RelatedBelow are the answers for the NYT Mini crossword today.New York TimesAcrossPrice to pay COSTThe five unique letters of THE AREA HERE, fittingly EARTHUncomfortable thing to witness a couple do in public ARGUEGwen ___, Spider-Womans alter ego in the Spider-Verse movies STACYGive a tug YANKDownMagna ___ CARTAInstrument played at the ballpark ORGANIn need of a hint STUCKNonbinary pronoun THEYDifficulty level for a newbie gamer EASYEditors Recommendations

Global semiconductor stocks opened sharply lower, extending losses from last week as investors digest the extent of U.S. tariffs on chip-making hubs such as Taiwan.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr The speech police: Chairman Brendan Carr and the FCCs news distortion policy FCC invokes 1960s-era policy to punish media after decades of minimal enforcement. Jon Brodkin Apr 7, 2025 7:00 am | 28 FCC Chairman Brendan Carr delivers a speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on March 3, 2025. Credit: Getty Images | AFP FCC Chairman Brendan Carr delivers a speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on March 3, 2025. Credit: Getty Images | AFP Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreFederal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr is taking a hard line against broadcast TV stations accused of bias against Republicans and President Trump. To pressure broadcasters, Carr is invoking the rarely enforced news distortion policy that was developed starting in the late 1960s and says the FCC should consider revoking broadcast licenses.The FCC has regulatory authority over broadcasters with licenses to use the public airwaves. But Carr's two immediate predecessorsDemocrat Jessica Rosenworcel and Republican Ajit Paiboth said that punishing stations based on the content of news programs would violate the First Amendment right to free speech.Rosenworcel and Pai's agreement continued a decades-long trend of the FCC easing itself out of the news-regulation business. Two other former FCC chairsRepublican Alfred Sikes and Democrat Tom Wheelerhave urged Carr to change course.Carr has multiple probes in progress, and his investigation into CBS over the editing of an interview with Kamala Harris has drawn condemnations from both liberal and conservative advocacy groups that describe it as a threat to the Constitutional right to free speech. One plea to drop the investigation came in a March 19 letter from conservative groups including the Center for Individual Freedom, Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance."While we understand the concerns that motivate the complaint, we nonetheless fear that an adverse ruling against CBS would constitute regulatory overreach and advance precedent that can be weaponized by future FCCs," the letter said. The letter argued that "Democrats and leftwing activist groups have repeatedly worked to weaponize" the government against free speech and that the FCC should "help guard against future abuses by Democrats and leftwing organizations by streamlining license renewals and merger reviews and eliminating the news distortion and news hoax rules."The flimsiest of complaintsAndrew Jay Schwartzman, an expert on media law and senior counselor for the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, told Ars that "the CBS complaint is utterly lacking in merit. What is alleged doesn't come within light-years of a violation of any FCC policy."The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), an advocacy group, called Carr's investigation of CBS "a political stunt," an "illegitimate show trial," and an "unconstitutional abuse of regulatory authority." Democratic lawmakers are demanding answers from Carr about what they call "bogus investigations" designed to "target and intimidate news organizations and broadcasters in violation of the First Amendment."The CBS investigation was also lambasted in comments submitted by Christopher Terry, a professor of media law and ethics at the University of Minnesota, and J. Israel Balderas, a journalism professor at Elon University who is also a First Amendment attorney and a former FCC media advisor."The agency under Brendan Carr appears to be, based on the flimsiest of complaints, pursuing media outlets critical of Donald Trump during the 2024 campaign, while ignoring similar complaints from the public about Trump-friendly media outlets," Terry and Balderas wrote. "Being the speech police is not the FCC's job, but enforcing any restrictions in a selective, much less a partisan, way is problematic, and likely to lead to extensive legal actions challenging FCC authority."FCCs long shift away from news regulationThe FCC has historically regulated broadcast news with the Fairness Doctrine, which no longer exists, and the news distortion policy, which is still in place. The Fairness Doctrine was introduced in 1949 to guarantee "that the public has a reasonable opportunity to hear different opposing positions on the public issues of interest and importance in the community." This requirement to air contrasting views remained in place until 1987.After losing a court case brought by a TV station, the FCC was forced to reconsider its enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine and decided to repeal it. The Reagan-era FCC concluded that the Fairness Doctrine "violates the First Amendment" and works against the public interest. "Despite the physical differences between the electronic and print media, their roles in our society are identical, and we believe that the same First Amendment principles should be equally applicable to both," the FCC said at the time.US regulation of broadcast news continued to be lessened through a series of commission decisions and court rulings. "Even the relaxation of non-content regulations, such as the extension of stations' license terms from three to eight years, and adoption of rules that make challenges to license renewals by the public or potential competitors almost impossible, have bolstered broadcasters' editorial rights against outside review," said a 2001 article by Santa Clara University professor Chad Raphael in the journal Communication Law and Policy.The FCC's general shift away from regulating news content made it surprising that the news distortion policy survived, Raphael wrote. "Given this deregulatory trend, it is remarkable that the Commission has preserved its little-known rules against licensees' deliberately distorting the news... The distortion rules have drawn scant commentary in the regulatory literature, especially in contrast to the outpouring of debate over their cousin, the Fairness Doctrine," the article said.But the FCC never issued many findings of news distortion, and such findings have been nearly nonexistent in recent decades. Raphael's analysis found 120 decisions on news distortion between 1969 and 1999, and only 12 of them resulted in findings against broadcasters. Those 12 decisions were generated by eight cases, as several of the cases "generated multiple decisions as they went through the appeals process.""The number of reported decisions drops off dramatically after 1976, and there is only one finding of distortion after 1982, when the Reagan-era FCC began to remove content regulations on broadcast news," Raphael wrote. The one post-1982 finding of distortion was issued in a letter of admonishment to NBC in 1993 "for staging a segment of a Dateline NBC report on unsafe gas tanks in General Motors trucks," Raphael wrote.GM investigated the incident and NBC "admitted to staging the explosion, made an on-air apology to GM, fired three producers who contributed to the segment, and eventually dismissed its news president," he wrote. The FCC itself sent the letter quietly, with "the first mention of this action appearing in a 1999 decision rejecting a challenge to NBC's license renewals."Investigations rare, penalties even rarerThe rare findings of news distortion were usually accompanied by other infractions. "Most penalties consisted of issuing letters of admonishment or censure that did not figure heavily in subsequent license renewals, all of which were successful," Raphael wrote.Despite Raphael's paper being nearly a quarter-century old, it's practically up to date. "Since the time of Raphael's study, it appears that the Commission has only considered allegations of news distortion in a very small number of cases," said a 2019 paper by Joel Timmer, a professor of film, television, and digital media at Texas Christian University.Timmer found eight post-1999 cases in which news distortion allegations were considered. Most of the allegations didn't get very far, and none of them resulted in a finding of news distortion.The FCC technically has no rule or regulation against news distortion. "Instead, it has a news distortion policy, developed 'through the adjudicatory process in decisions resolving challenges to broadcasters' licenses,'" Timmer wrote.The FCC dismissed an allegation of news distortion over broadcast networks incorrectly projecting that Al Gore would win Florida in the 2000 presidential election, he wrote. The FCC said the incorrect projections were "not a sufficient basis to initiate such an investigation."The FCC did investigate an allegation of news distortion in 2007. Two reporters at Florida station WTVT alleged a violation when their employer failed to air reports on the use of synthetic bovine growth hormone by dairy farmers. "The reporters alleged that station management and ownership demanded changes in their report as a result of pressure from Monsanto, the company that produces BGH," but the FCC decided it was "a legitimate editorial dispute" and not "a deliberate effort to coerce [the reporters] into distorting the news," Timmer wrote.There was also a 2007 case involving a Detroit TV station's report "that a local official and several prominent local business people consorted with prostitutes during a fishing trip to Costa Rica," Timmer wrote. "It was alleged that a reporter from WXYZ-TV actually paid prostitutes to stay at the hotel at which the trip's participants were staying, then falsely reported that the participants consorted with them. While the FCC acknowledged that, if true, this could constitute staging of the news, there was a lack of extrinsic evidence to establish that the licensee, its top management, or its news management were involved in an attempt to deliberately distort or falsify the news, causing the news distortion claim to fail."Timmer's paper summarized the FCC's post-1999 news distortion enforcement as follows:In addition to the post-1999 cases already discussedthose involving reporting on bovine growth hormone, erroneous projections that Al Gore would win Florida in the 2000 presidential electionand reporting regarding prostitutes in Costa Rica with a public official and business peoplecharges of news distortion were raised and discussed in only a handful of instances. In addition to these three cases, there were five other cases since 1999 in which the Commission considered allegations of news distortion. In only two of the eight cases was there any detailed discussion of news distortion claims: the BGH story and the story involving prostitutes in Costa Rica. Significantly, in none of the cases was news distortion found to have occurred.Terry told Ars that he's not aware of any news distortion findings since the 2019 paper.The FCC has a separate broadcast hoax rule enacted in 1992. As of 2000, "no broadcaster had ever been fined pursuant to the rule, nor had any stations lost their licenses for violating the rule," and "it appears that the FCC has considered allegations of broadcast hoaxes only three times since 2000, with none of those cases resulting in the FCC finding a violation of the rule," Timmer wrote.The 60 Minutes investigationIn one of her last official acts before Trump's inauguration and her departure from the FCC, Rosenworcel dismissed complaints of bias against Trump related to ABC's fact-checking during a presidential debate, the editing of a CBS 60 Minutes interview with Harris, and NBC putting Harris on a Saturday Night Live episode. Rosenworcel also dismissed a challenge to a Fox station license alleging that Fox willfully distorted news with false reports of fraud in the 2020 election that Trump lost.Carr quickly revived the three complaints alleging bias against Trump, which were filed by a nonprofit law firm called the Center for American Rights. Of these, the ABC and CBS complaints allege news distortion. The NBC complaint alleges a violation of the separate Equal Time rule. The complaints were filed against individual broadcast stations because the FCC licenses stations rather than the networks that own them or are affiliated with them.Carr has repeatedly expressed interest in the complaint over 60 Minutes, which alleged that CBS misled viewers by airing two different responses to the same question about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, one on 60 Minutes and the other on Face the Nation. CBS's defensewhich is supported by the unedited transcript and video of the interviewis that the two clips show different parts of the same answer given by Harris.On February 5, the Carr-led FCC issued a public notice seeking comment on the CBS investigation. The FCC's public notices aren't generally seen by many people, but the FCC tried to encourage participation in this proceeding. The agency temporarily added a banner message to the top of the consumer complaints pageto urge the public to submit comments about the 60 Minutes interview."Interested in adding your comments to the proceeding investigating news distortion in the airing of a '60 Minutes' interview with then Vice President Kamala Harris?" the banner message said, linking to a page that explained how to submit comments on the proceeding.Former chairs blast CarrOne filing was submitted by the former chairs Sikes and Wheeler, plus three other former FCC commissioners: Republican Rachelle Chong, Democrat Ervin Duggan, and Democrat Gloria Tristani. "These comments are submitted to emphasize the unprecedented nature of this news distortion proceeding, and to express our strong concern that the Federal Communications Commission may be seeking to censor the news media in a manner antithetical to the First Amendment," the bipartisan group of former FCC chairs and commissioners wrote.The FCC has historically "enforced the [news distortion] policy very rarely, and it has adopted guardrails requiring that complaints be summarily dismissed in all but the most exceptional circumstances," they wrote, adding that there are no exceptional circumstances warranting an investigation into CBS."The Commission's departures from its typical practice and precedent are especially troubling when viewed in context. This Administration has made no secret of its desire to revoke the licenses of broadcasters that cover it in ways the President considers unfavorable," the filing said.Pointing to the Raphael and Timmer analyses, the former FCC leaders wrote that the agency "issued findings of liability on news distortion in just eight cases between 1969 and 2019and in fact in just one case between 1985 and 2019. None of the cases that found news distortion concerned the way a broadcaster had exercised its editorial discretion in presenting the news. Instead, each case involved egregious misconduct, including the wholesale fabrication of news stories."The FCC's news distortion policy applies a multi-part test, the group noted. A finding of news distortion requires "deliberate distortion" and not mere inaccuracy or differences of opinion, "extrinsic evidence (i.e., beyond the broadcast itself) demonstrating that the broadcaster deliberately distorted or staged the news" and that "the distortion must apply to a 'significant event,' rather than minor inaccuracies or incidental aspects of the report." Finally, FCC policy is to "only consider taking action on the broadcaster's license if the extrinsic evidence shows the distortion involved the 'principals, top management, or news management' of the licensee, as opposed to other employees."The FCC has historically punished licensees only after dramatic violations, like "elaborate hoaxes, internal conspiracies, and reports conjured from whole cloth," they wrote. There is "no credible argument" that the allegations against CBS "belong in the same category."CBS transcript and video supports network Kamala Harris on 60 Minutes. Credit: CBS Kamala Harris on 60 Minutes. Credit: CBS The Center for American Rights complaint says that an FCC investigation of"extrinsic evidence" could include examining outtakes to determine whether "the licensee has deliberately suppressed or altered a news report." The complaint criticized CBS for not providing the complete transcript of the interview.In late January, the Carr-led FCC demanded that CBS provide an unedited transcript and camera feeds of the interview. CBS provided the requested materials and made them available publicly. The transcript supports CBS's defense because it shows that what the Center for American Rights claimed were "two completely different answers" were just two different sentences from the same response."We broadcast a longer portion of the vice president's answer on Face the Nation and broadcast a shorter excerpt from the same answer on 60 Minutes the next day. Each excerpt reflects the substance of the vice president's answer," CBS said.The Center for American Rights complained that in one clip, Harris answered the question about Netanyahu by saying, "Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region."In the second clip, Harris responded to the question by saying, "We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.""Same interview, same question, two completely different answers," the Center for American Rights' complaint said.But the CBS transcript and video shows that Harris spoke these two sentences as part of one answer to the question. CBS aired the two sentences in different clips, but neither contradicts the other.Center for American Rights stands by complaintThe Center for American Rights declined to comment on the transcript and video when contacted by Ars, but it pointed us to the final comments it submitted in the FCC proceeding. The filing argues for an expansive approach to regulating news distortion, saying that "slanting the news to benefit one political candidate violates the distortion doctrine.""The core of our concern is that 60 Minutes' slice-and-dice journalism was an act of slanting the news to favor a preferred candidate and part of a pattern of CBS News consistently favoring a candidate and party... The Commission is uniquely positioned as the relevant authority with the power to investigate to determine whether CBS engaged in intentional news slanting," the filing said.The Center for American Rights filing also complained that "Fox and Sinclair [we]re subject to relentless regulatory pressure under the prior chair... but then everyone screams that the First Amendment is being eviscerated when CBS is subject to attention under the same policy from the new chair.""'Selective enforcement' is when Fox and Sinclair are constantly under regulatory pressure from Democrats at the FCC and in the Congress and from their outside allies, but then unchecked 'press freedom' is the sacrosanct principle when CBS allegedly transgresses the same lines when Republicans are in power," the group said, responding to arguments that punishing CBS would be selective enforcement.As previously mentioned in this article, Rosenworcel rejected a news distortion complaint and license challenge that targeted Fox's WTXF-TV in Philadelphia. "Such content review in the context of a renewal application would run afoul of our obligations under the First Amendment and the statutory prohibition on censorship and interference with free speech rights," Rosenworcel's FCC said.The conservative Sinclair Broadcasting Group was fined $48 million for portraying sponsored TV segments as news coverage and other violations in the largest-ever civil penalty paid by a broadcaster in FCC history. But that happened under Republican Ajit Pai, the FCC chair during Trump's first term. Pai's FCC also blocked Sinclair's attempt to buy Tribune Media Company.Carr defended his investigation of CBS in a letter to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). "During the Biden Administration, the FCC and Democrats across government repeatedly weaponized our country's communications laws and processes. In contrast, I am restoring the FCC's commitment to basic fairness and even-handed treatment for all," Carr wrote.Carr said he "put the CBS complaint on the same procedural footing that the Biden FCC determined it should apply to the Fox complaint." By this, he means that the previous administration held a proceeding to consider the Fox complaint instead of dismissing it outright."The Biden FCC's approach to the Fox petition stands in stark contrast to the approach the Biden FCC took to the CBS petition. Unlike the Fox petition, the Biden FCC just summarily dismissed the CBS one," Carr wrote. Carr also said the Biden-era FCC "fail[ed] to process hundreds of routine Sinclair license renewals" and that the FCC is now "clearing and renewing those licenses again."The Fox case involved very different allegations than the CBS one. While CBS is facing investigation for airing two parts of an interviewee's answer in two different broadcasts, a Delaware judge ruled in 2023 that Fox News made false and defamatory statements claiming that Dominion Voting Systems committed election fraud by manipulating vote counts through its software and algorithms. Fox subsequently agreed to pay Dominion $788 million in a settlement instead of facing trial.Carr could test FCC authority in courtThe Rosenworcel FCC said the CBS complaint was meritless in its dismissal. "Opening a news distortion enforcement action under Commission precedentas rare as it isturns on the important question of whether any information or extrinsic evidence was submitted to the Commission indicating an 'intentional' or 'deliberate' falsification of the news," the decision said. "The Complaint submitted fails to do so. The Commission simply cannot wield its regulatory authority in a manner completely inconsistent with long-settled precedent that the Commission not 'second guess' broadcast decisions."The comments submitted by former chairs and commissioners said the "transcript confirms that the editing choices at issue lie well within the editorial judgment protected by the First Amendment." TechFreedom, a libertarian-leaning think tank, told the FCC that "if the new standard for triggering a news distortion analysis is that any edits of raw interview video can be subject to challenge, then the FCC will spend the next four years, at least, fielding dozens, hundreds, thousands of news distortion complaints. Since every taped interview is edited, every taped interview that is aired will be ripe for an FCC complaint, which will have to be adjudicated. The news distortion complaint process will be weaponized by both political parties, and the business of the FCC will grind to a halt as it will have to assign more and more FTEs [full-time employees] to processing these complaints."Although CBS appears to have a strong defense, Carr can make life difficult for broadcasters simply by opening investigations. As experts have previously told Ars, the FCC can use its rules to harass licensees and hold up applications related to business deals. Carr said in November that the news distortion complaint over the 60 Minutes interview would factor into the FCC's review of CBS owner Paramount's transfer of TV broadcast station licenses to Skydance.Jeffrey Westling, a lawyer who is the director of technology and innovation policy at the conservative American Action Forum, has written that the high legal bar for proving news distortion means that cases must involve something egregiouslike a bribe or instructions from management to distort the news. But Westling has told Ars it's possible that a "sympathetic" court could let the FCC use the rule to deny a transfer or renewal of a broadcast license."The actual bounds of the rule are not well-tested," said Westling, who argues that the news distortion policy should be eliminated.An FCC webpage that was last updated during Rosenworcel's term says the FCC's authority to enforce its news distortion policy is narrow. "The agency is prohibited by law from engaging in censorship or infringing on First Amendment rights of the press," the FCC said, noting that "opinion or errors stemming from mistakes are not actionable."1960s FCC: No government agency can authenticate the newsThe high bar set by the news distortion policy isn't just about issuing findings of distortionit is supposed to prevent many investigations in the first place, the Rosenworcel FCC said in its dismissal of the CBS complaint:Indeed, the Commission has established a high threshold to commencing any investigation into allegations of news distortion. It is not sufficient for the Complainant to show that the material in question is false or even that the Licensee might have known or should have known about the falsity of the material. A news distortion complaint must include extrinsic evidence that the Licensee took actions to engage in a deliberate and intentional falsification of the news.The comments submitted by Terry and Balderas said that "case law is clear: news distortion complaints must meet an extraordinary burden of proof.""The current complaint against CBS fails to meet this standard," Terry and Balderas wrote. "Editing for clarity, brevity, or production value is a standard journalistic practice, and absent clear evidence of deliberate fabrication, government intervention is unwarranted. The current complaint against CBS presents no extrinsic evidence whatsoeverno internal memos, no whistleblower testimony, no evidence of financial incentivesmaking it facially deficient under the extrinsic evidence standard consistently applied since Hunger in America."Hunger in America was a 1968 CBS documentary that the FCC investigated. The FCC's decision against issuing a finding of news distortion became an important precedent that was cited in a 1985 court case that upheld another FCC decision to reject an allegation of news distortion."The FCC's policy on rigging, staging, or distorting the news was developed in a series of cases beginning in 1969," said the 1985 ruling from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. "In the first of these, Hunger In America, CBS had shown an infant it said was suffering from malnutrition, but who was actually suffering from another ailment."The 1960s FCC found that "[r]igging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest" but also that "in this democracy, no government agency can authenticate the news, or should try to do so." As the DC Circuit Court noted, in Hunger in America and "in all the subsequent cases, the FCC made a crucial distinction between deliberate distortion and mere inaccuracy or difference of opinion."Carr: FCC not close to dismissing complaintDespite this history of non-enforcement except in the most egregious cases, Carr doesn't seem inclined to end the investigation into what seems to be a routine editing decision. "Carr believes CBS has done nothing to bring the commission's investigation to an end, including a fix for the alleged pervasive bias in its programming, according to people with knowledge of the matter," said a New York Post report on March 28.The report said the Paramount/Skydance merger "remains in FCC purgatory" and that the news distortion investigation is "a key element" holding up FCC approval of the transaction. An anonymous FCC official was quoted as saying that "the case isn't close to being settled right now."We contacted Carr and will update this article if we get a response. But Carr confirmed to another news organization recently that he doesn't expect a quick resolution. He told Reuters on March 25 that "we're not close in my view to the position of dismissing that complaint at this point."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. 28 Comments

John Edwards, Technology Journalist & AuthorApril 7, 20255 Min Readphotoschmidt via Alamy Stock PhotoArtificial intelligence, for all its cognitive power, can sometimes arrive at some really stupid, even dangerous, conclusions. When this happens, it's up to humans to correct the mistakes. But how, when, and by whom should an AI decision be overruled?Humans should almost always possess the ability to overrule AI decisions, says Nimrod Partush, vice president of data science at cybersecurity technology firm CYE. "AI systems can make errors or produce flawed conclusions, sometimes referred to as hallucinations," he notes. "Allowing human oversight fosters trust," he explains in an email interview.Overruling AI only becomes completely unwarranted in certain extreme environments in which human performance is known to be less reliable -- such as when controlling an airplane traveling at Mach 5. "In those rare edge cases, we may defer to AI in real-time and then thoroughly review decisions after the fact," Partush says.Heather Bassett, chief medical officer with Xsolis, an AI-driven healthcare technology company, advocates for human-in-the-loop systems, particularly when working with Generative AI. "While humans must retain the ability to overrule AI decisions, they should follow structured workflows that capture the rationale behind the override," she says in an online interview. Ad hoc decisions risk undermining the consistency and efficiency AI is meant to provide. "With clear processes, organizations can leverage AI's strengths while preserving human judgment for nuanced or high-stakes scenarios."Related:Decision DetectionDetecting a bad AI decision requires a strong monitoring system to ensure that the model aligns with expected performance metrics. "This includes implementing performance evaluation pipelines to detect anomalies, such as model drift or degradation in key metrics, such as accuracy, precision, or recall," Bassett says. "For example, a defined change in performance thresholds should trigger alerts and mitigation protocols." Proactive monitoring can ensure that any deviations are identified and addressed before they are able to degrade output quality or impact end users. "This approach safeguards system reliability and maintains alignment with operational goals."Experts and AI designers are typically well-equipped to spot technical errors, but everyday users can help, too. "If many users express concern or confusion -- even in cases where the AI is technically correct -- it flags a disconnect between the systems output and its presentation," Partush says. "This feedback is critical for improving not just the model, but also how AI results are communicated."Related:Decision MakersIt's always appropriate for humans to overrule AI decisions, observes Melissa Ruzzi, director of artificial intelligence at SaaS security company AppOmni, via email. "The key is that the human should have enough knowledge of the topic to be able to know why the decision has to be overruled."Partush concurs. The end user is best positioned to make the final judgment call, he states. "In most circumstances, you don't want to remove human authority -- doing so can undermine trust in the system." Better yet, Partush says, is combining user insights with feedback from experts and AI designers, which can be extremely valuable, particularly in high-stakes scenarios.The decision to override an AI output depends on the type of output, the model's performance metrics, and the risk associated with the decision. "For highly accurate models -- say, over 98% -- you might require supervisor approval before an override," Bassett says. Additionally, in high-stakes areas like healthcare, where a wrong decision could result in harm or death, it's essential to create an environment that allows users to raise concerns or override the AI without fear of repercussions, she advises. "Prioritizing safety fosters a culture of trust and accountability."Related:Once a decision has been overruled, it's important to document the incident, investigate it, and then feed the findings back to the AI during retraining, Partush says. "If the AI repeatedly demonstrates poor judgment, it may be necessary to suspend its use and initiate a deep redesign or reengineering process."Depending on a topic's complexity, it may be necessary to run the answer through other AIs, so-called "AI judges," Ruzzi says. When data is involved, there are also other approaches, such as a data check in the prompt. Ultimately, experts can be called upon to review the answer and then use techniques, such as prompt engineering or reinforcement learning, to adjust the model.Building TrustBuilding AI trust requires transparency and continuous feedback loops. "An AI that's regularly challenged and improved upon in collaboration with humans will ultimately be more reliable, trustworthy, and effective," Partush says. "Keeping humans in control -- and informed -- creates the best path forward for both innovation and safety."About the AuthorJohn EdwardsTechnology Journalist & AuthorJohn Edwards is a veteran business technology journalist. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and numerous business and technology publications, including Computerworld, CFO Magazine, IBM Data Management Magazine, RFID Journal, and Electronic Design. He has also written columns for The Economist's Business Intelligence Unit and PricewaterhouseCoopers' Communications Direct. John has authored several books on business technology topics. His work began appearing online as early as 1983. Throughout the 1980s and 90s, he wrote daily news and feature articles for both the CompuServe and Prodigy online services. His "Behind the Screens" commentaries made him the world's first known professional blogger.See more from John EdwardsWebinarsMore WebinarsReportsMore ReportsNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also Like

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. How the Pentagon is adapting to Chinas technological rise Its been just over two months since Kathleen Hicks stepped down as US deputy secretary of defense. As the highest-ranking woman in Pentagon history, Hicks shaped US military posture through an era defined by renewed competition between powerful countries and a scramble to modernize defense technology. Over the past three decades, Hicks has watched the Pentagon transformpolitically, strategically, and technologically. In this conversation with MIT Technology Review, Hicks reflects on how the Pentagon is adaptingor failing to adaptto a new era of geopolitical competition. She discusses Chinas technological rise, the future of AI in warfare, and her signature initiative, Replicator, a Pentagon initiative to rapidly field thousands of low-cost autonomous systems such as drones. Read the full story. Caiwen Chen The must-reads Ive combed the internet to find you todays most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 Donald Trumps trade war could trigger a global recessionInvestors are sounding the alarm as markets struggle to react to his tariffs. (Economist $) + Unsurprisingly, the President has doubled down on his tariffs. (BBC)+ Its all part of his plan to reset global trade. (Politico)+ Trumps tariffs will deliver a big blow to climate tech. (MIT Technology Review)2 The White House was just hours from announcing a TikTok deal Until the Chinese government insisted on tariff negotiations first. (WP $)+ The two countries now seem likely to descend into tit-for-tat restrictions. (WSJ $)+ The President has extended the sale deadline by another 75 days. (NBC News) 3 DeepSeek is working on self-improving AI modelsIts working with Tsinghua University to reduce its models training needs. (Bloomberg $) + China is narrowing the AI dominance gap between it and the US. (Wired $)+ How DeepSeek ripped up the AI playbookand why everyones going to follow its lead. (MIT Technology Review)4 X is flourishing under the Trump administration Elon Musk appears to be positioning the platform as a new media outlet. (NYT $)+ X is cracking down on parody accounts. (BBC)5 A shingles vaccine could help lower the risk of developing dementiaWe might have to overhaul the way we treat neurodegenerative diseases. (Vox) + It may help to treat them like viruses. (NYT $)+ Dementia content gets billions of views on TikTok. Whose story does it tell? (MIT Technology Review)6 San Franciscos mayor is trying to convince tech leaders to come back He may be willing to offer tax breaks as an incentive. (TechCrunch)+ Some of his supporters arent in favor of his new upzoning plan. (SF Standard)7 TikToks algorithm promotes live streams of begging children While taking fees and commission of up to 70%. (The Guardian)8 Chinas EV makers are locked in intense competitionAnd consumers are spoilt for choice. (FT $) + Argentina has lifted tariffs on EVs. (Rest of World)+ Chinas EV giants are betting big on humanoid robots. (MIT Technology Review)9 This version of video game Quake was created using AI Microsoft has opened a demo up to Copilot users. (The Verge)+ How generative AI could reinvent what it means to play. (MIT Technology Review)10 Tracking celebrity heights is an internet obsession Is anyone actually 511? (The Guardian) Quote of the day Wed like to put this chapter behind us. Sean Murphy, executive vice president of policy at trade group the Information Technology Industry Council, tells the Washington Post how the tech industry is desperate to see the tariffs that affect it reversed as quickly as possible. The big story The messy quest to replace drugs with electricity In the early 2010s, electricity seemed poised for a hostile takeover of your doctors office. Research into how the nervous systemthe highway that carries electrical messages between the brain and the body controls the immune response was gaining traction. And that had opened the door to the possibility of hacking into the bodys circuitry and thereby controlling a host of chronic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, and diabetes, as if the immune system were as reprogrammable as a computer. To do that youd need a new class of implant: an electroceutical. These devices would replace drugs. No more messy side effects. And no more guessing whether a drug would work differently for you and someone else. In the 10 years or so since, around a billion dollars has accreted around the effort. But electroceuticals have still not taken off as hoped. Now, however, a growing number of researchers are starting to look beyond the nervous system, and experimenting with clever ways to electrically manipulate cells elsewhere in the body, such as the skin. Their work suggests that this approach could match the early promise of electroceuticals, yielding fast-healing bioelectric bandages, novel approaches to treating autoimmune disorders, new ways of repairing nerve damage, and even better treatments for cancer. Read the full story. Sally Adee 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.) + The internet is hating on the Beatles biopics before theyre even outbut why?+ Do you know the last time all of humanity was on Earth?+ The new Naked Gun film looks suitably unhinged.+ Heres some simple bits of advice to help make each day that little bit happier.

Walton Goggins and Aimee Lou Wood on season three of "The White Lotus." Fabio Lovino/HBO 2025-04-07T12:32:23Z SaveSaved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? "The White Lotus" creator Mike White said he pulled a "stealth move" to get fans to fall for Chelsea and Rick.It worked, Chelsea and Rick became two of the fan favorite characters of the season.White said the duo was inspired by age-gap couples he saw in Thailand.Warning: spoilers ahead for the season three finale of "The White Lotus."Chelsea and Rick are among the fan-favorite characters of "The White Lotus" season three, and the show's creator Mike White said this was by design.The couple, played by 31-year-old Aimee Lou Wood and 53-year-old Walton Goggins, seem like a poor match when they arrive at the White Lotus resort in Thailand together due to their big age gap, Chelsea's naive outlook on life, and Rick's dismissive attitude toward her.On Sunday's episode of "The White Lotus Official Podcast," White said Chelsea and Rick were inspired by the age-gap couples he met in Thailand."I got on an elevator, and there was this older guy, and the young girl was very hot, and you know, boobs all pushed up. She was showing him some runway photos or something, and you could just tell he could not give a shit. She was just living in her reality," White said. "I was like, it'd be fun to have this kind of relationship where it feels like he's probably in it for the sex, but it's almost not worth it." Rick and Chelsea reunite after Rick's trip to Bangkok in "The White Lotus" season three finale. Courtesy of HBO Age-gap relationships are having a moment in pop culture with films like "The Idea of You," "Babygirl," and "Bridget Jones: Mad About The Boy" featuring romances between older women and younger men.However, in 2022, the Pew Research Center, citing US Census Bureau data, said that the percentage of opposite-sex marriages in which the husband or wife is three or more years older is declining, which could suggest that people are moving away from long-term age gap relationships.The percentage of older husbands decreased from 43% in 2000 to 40% in 2022, while the percentage of older women went down from 11% to 10% in the same timeframe.Mike White said he wanted viewers to root for Chelsea and RickWhite said he wanted to surprise the audience by making them fall for Chelsea and Rick."I was just like, it'd be interesting to do kind of a stealth move where ultimately you suddenly find yourself really rooting for this couple, and you love them and have her be this kind of woo-woo and into astrology," White said.As Rick slowly opens up to Chelsea, fans too warmed to the couple which made the season three finale even more tragic.Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. What is your job title? (1 of 2) Entry level positionProject managerManagementSenior managementExecutive managementStudentSelf-employedRetiredOther What products or services can you approve for purchase in your role? (2 of 2) Advertising / MarketingClient / Account ManagementCompany strategyHR / Training / Office supportManaging budgetsIT / Telecoms / TechRecruiting new employeesSalesSoftware developmentFinancialOtherNone of the above By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . Thanks for sharing insights about your role. Rick has a secret agenda for being in Thailand, confronting his father's killer. But when he carries out the plan in the finale, it backfires and Chelsea is killed. As he tries to carry her away, Rick is shot, too, and they both fall into the nearby water and bleed out.Fans were split over the ending, with some blaming Rick for Chelsea's death, while others were sad the couple died after making a deeper connection.White said of Rick and Chelsea's death on the podcast: "There's something that feels a little like a hint to a life beyond, that love transcends this life. Even as they're wheeled out to the plane together in their symmetrical coffins, their love transcends this in some bittersweet way."Recommended video

Should I buy a house? Thats the question that a listener, Miranda, brought to Explain It to Me, Voxs weekly call-in show. I think thats always been the go-to investment for past generations, she says. You buy a house and thats kind of your retirement plan, and that just doesnt seem realistic or even attainable.Miranda is far from alone in questioning whether homeownership is still the reliable engine of building wealth as it was for past generations. The US is in the midst of a housing shortage as millennials and Gen Z reach their prime home-buying years, but many are locked out of the market. Gone are the low post-Great Recession interest rates, all while the net worth of homeowners eclipses that of renters. Its a complicated calculation, one that Mandi Woodruff-Santos knows well. Shes the host of Brown Ambition, a wealth and finance podcast. I bought my house in 2018, which feels like a thousand years ago, she says. And initially, she wasnt completely sold on the idea of homeownership. I didnt realize how little I desired to actually own a home until my husband was like, Get me out of this concrete jungle! I want to touch grass. Eventually, a house just outside New York City won her over. We were able to find a home in a great neighborhood that was within walking distance of the train. I saw this little house, and I thought, I want that house. And thats how I ended up here.How do you determine if homeownership is right for you? And if it isnt, what are other ways to build wealth? Thats the topic of discussion on this weeks episode of Explain It to Me, which has been edited for length and clarity. You can listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get podcasts. If youd like to submit a question, send an email to askvox@vox.com or call 1-800-618-8545.Weve been told for years that buying a home is this important milestone for adulthood and the first step to building equity and wealth. But with the current prices and interest rates, the barrier to entry feels especially high. What do you make of that advice about home buying? Its kind of like when you become a new mom: Dont get any of your parenting advice from someone who hasnt been a mom in like the last two years. You need fresh intel, and the reason is that so much changes. If youre getting advice from your parents, relatives, and, frankly, journalists, too we tend to be a little bit on the older side if youre getting advice from people who are not in the current market, its not as applicable because they bought in an entirely different environment.There are choices I made in 2018 that I definitely wouldnt tell anybody to make now. I think its really smart to ask for opinions and to be open to other points of view, but just understand the context from which they are giving you that advice.What do you make of the question from our listener? Is buying a house something she should be working toward?If you understand maintenance, if you understand property values and how they can be impacted by things like development and weather patterns if you understand all these things and you still really want to buy a house, then yeah, go get your house! The ultimate thing is can you afford it? If youre getting advice from people who are not in the current market, its not as applicable because they bought in an entirely different environment.Now there are all sorts of different trains of thought about if a house is a good investment. I think you have to understand why youre buying a house. Are you buying a house for your family to live in for the next 10-plus years? Thats a very different equation to me than if youre buying a home that youre hoping to fix up and flip on the market in a year or two, where you want to see a much higher return on investment. But if youre someone like me whos like, I want a place where my kids can grow up that is less about the ebb and flow of the current market and more about if this is a good long-term decision for me. So what I would look at today if Im thinking about buying a house are mortgage rates. They arent cute right now.Very ugly right now.But theyre not as ugly as they could be. In the 80s, people were just walking out the door with double-digit interest rates. So interest rates arent great, but theyre not the worst theyve ever been. Whats more difficult these days is inventory. I wouldnt just buy whatevers there because you want to buy something. If you can wait, wait until you find a home that you really like and fits all your needs. Its worth it. Speaking as someone who is stuck in a starter home, I got my cute little 2 percent interest rate, but Im in the tiniest little house in my neighborhood and we are busting out of the seams. Also, look at your lifestyle. At the end of the day, its your choice. Youre going to be living in it. Get clear with yourself on what you want.So if you sit down and you find out where you are emotionally, where you are when it comes to lifestyle, and you determine that buying a house is for you, what are the first steps? What do you suggest that a person do?Your credit score is going to determine how expensive that mortgage is going to be. I would say six months before you think youre ready, you want to look at your credit and take an assessment. Mortgage rates right now are around 5, 6 percent, 7 percent. Theyll be even higher if you have poor credit. You want to avoid taking out additional loans six months before you apply for a mortgage because mortgage lenders dont like to see new debt right before theyre going to potentially approve you for a loan.If you can wait, wait until you find a home that you really like and fits all your needs.Ideally, youre not going to have a fluctuating income. So if youre going to get a new job, thats fine, but it can make it a bit more complicated. Your lender wants to see a couple of years worth of income, and they like to see it from one employer because this is about them wanting to pick a candidate for a loan whos pretty reliable. So for my freelance girlies, my solopreneurs, like me, its not impossible, but you may want to talk to an accountant about how you can structure your business so that you are paying yourself as a W-2 employee.Also, saving up beyond that down payment. There are these things that pop up, and theres nothing worse than realizing you dont have the money in the bank for these extra expenses. If youre a first-time homebuyer, I would absolutely spend time researching first-time homebuyer programs. There are some through the federal government and Lord knows whats happening with them right now but check out the Department of Housing and Urban Developments website. Check out the Federal Housing Authority. See if you qualify for a first-time homebuyer loan. Theres also a program called NACA, based in homeowner education. So if you go through their education program, they help buyers who are not maybe the most marketable candidates for a mortgage access to homeownership. There are credit unions, local banks you may find state programs. So thats if you want to buy a home. But say you cant buy a house or just dont want to. How do you build equity? What can you do?Yes, a home can be a vessel for increasing equity and building wealth. But it is not the only game in town. Ever heard of index funds, mutual funds? You can absolutely invest in the stock market, invest through your 401(k), and max out your Roth IRA.Also, invest in yourself. I dont mean go get a brand-new degree. What do you value in life? And if thats travel for you, if thats helping to care for family members, if thats moving to the city youve always wanted to move to, or just taking a chance on yourself and investing in an experience that aligns with what you value and what you want. At the end of the day, you can look back on that and say, Yeah, I did that for me and I have no regrets about it. Whos to say thats not a wise financial decision? Maybe a calculator or an economist, but at the end of the day, youve got to live with yourself.I love that approach because there are all these different methods to finances, and I dont think that theres a right way.Im not trying to sugarcoat the entrepreneur lifestyle, but when I say invest in yourself, maybe its investing in a business goal that you have, setting aside some money that you can start earning and saving on the side while youre working nine to five. Invest in a business idea that you have. Whos to say that your business couldnt have a better return on investment than a home if it does well? Who knows?See More:

Bungie is still working to bring Destiny 2 into a new era, but the studio's second title, Marathon, will get a gameplay reveal next week here's all we know so farTech10:21, 07 Apr 2025Updated 10:23, 07 Apr 2025Marathon has a unique sci-fi style that sets it apartBungie has created some of the biggest shooter franchises on the planet between Halo and Destiny, but the company is returning to a classic with its new version of Marathon.The series, which began in 1994, will see a reboot as a PvP extraction shooter, but fans had been concerned it might never see the light of day after major layoffs at the studio in the wake of Destiny 2's Final Shape expansion.Article continues belowThankfully, after setting players some tricky puzzles to work their way through, Bungie has finally confirmed we can expect our first look at Marathon gameplay in just a few days' time less than two weeks after another big update to Destiny 2.Here's all we know about what's coming:Over the last few days, the Marathon community has been working to solve an ARG (alternative reality game) which featured a whole host of tricky challenges.The reward? The trailer you see above, showing a character seemingly meeting their end before meeting an adorable cyber cat and the promise of more to come on April 12.The game was revealed at the PlayStation Showcase in May 2023 and confirmed to offer a PvP extraction shooter. The new version of Marathon will offer "evolving, persistent zones" and is set in the same universe as the originals from the nineties.We're eager to get our first proper look at MarathonBehind the scenes, Bungie dismissed project lead Chris Barrett following "disturbing communications" with female colleagues, leading to Joe Ziegler taking over the role. Ziegler was previously Game Director for Riot Games' VALORANT, so knows a thing or two about competitive shooters.The game's initial reveal trailer, where pictures from this article are taken from, has been praised for its unique aesthetic.Some Destiny fans have railed against Marathon due to fears it'll take resources away from the loot-shooter franchise that began in 2014, but Bungie has committed to a revamped roadmap for the title.Destiny 2 will receive two mid-sized expansions each year, as well as additional free updates, rather than one major expansion each calendar year.Bungie's latest release was The Final Shape, a Destiny 2 expansion which launched to critical acclaim in June of last year, but wasn't enough to prevent the aforementioned layoffs at the fabled studio.Article continues belowFor the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletters.

Scalpers in action (Nintendo)Nintendo Switch 2 listings have already popped up on eBay, before the console has even launched, and all with a major mark-up.Nintendo announced all the major details about the Switch 2 last week, including the launch line-up, price, and features like the Joy-Cons mouse functionality.While pre-orders through the My Nintendo Store arent set to go live until Tuesday (in the UK and Europe at least), other retailers like Argos and EE put up listings mere hours after the presentation instantly selling out their initial stock in the process.Inevitably, the console has become a target for scalpers, who are now selling pre-ordered Switch 2 consoles at an inflated price on eBay.The Switch 2, which has a retail price of 395.99 (or 429.99 with Mario Kart World) is currently selling for upwards of 600 on the online auction site. At the time of writing, the most expensive listing is for 669.72, while other Mario Kart World bundles are going for 648.Meanwhile, a Switch 2 console without Mario Kart World is priced at 598. Just some of the listings (eBay)Nintendo has strict requirements in place if youre hoping to secure a pre-order through the My Nintendo Store, in a bid to prevent scalpers. More TrendingPre-orders are being conducted via an invite-only system, determined by whether you are a Nintendo Switch Online subscriber, how many hours youve played the original Switch, and if youve opted in to promotional emails from the company. However, Nintendo has said these requirements may be lowered in the future. If youre in the US, the pre-order situation has become somewhat murky. Last week, Nintendo delayed pre-orders in the country, which were set to go live on Wednesday April 9, so it could assess the impact of recently announced tariffs suggesting a price increase could happen.The Switch 2 is set to launch on June 5 and based on what weve played, its worth the retail price. Mario Kart World leads the consoles launch line-up, alongside Nintendo Switch 2 Welcome Tour, and improved versions of The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild and Tears Of The Kingdom. Mario Kart World is the biggest draw at launch (Nintendo)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