Neuroscience Memory manipulation is the stuff of sci-fi. Someday it could be real Scientists are experimenting with strengthening or weakening memories Altering people's memory could become possible and even be therapeutic. But is it ethical? Tim McDonagh By Andrea Tamayo 9 seconds ago In the world of Harry Potter, one’s memory can be manipulated with the flick of a wand. Albus Dumbledore reels wispy memories out of his head and puts them in a Pensieve. If he later dunks his head in that magical basin, he can see his past experiences with lifelike clarity. Hermione Granger, meanwhile, uses the spell “Obliviate” to remove herself from her parents’ memories to protect them from the wizarding world. In real life, memories are not storable liquids or files that can simply be deleted. Memories are made when a person has an experience that triggers electricity to course through connections between the brain’s neurons. The more exposure to an experience someone has, the stronger the connections become. But they can also weaken over time, leading to forgetting. Sign up for our newsletter We summarize the week's science breakthroughs every Thursday.

Nature, Published online: 10 April 2025; doi:10.1038/d41586-025-00832-7Researchers are experimenting with audio formats, and debating how to handle reviewer feedback.

Futuristic holograms you can manipulate have become a reality sooner than we thought, thanks to breakthrough display.

submitted by /u/fallonis [link] [comments]

RT Ilyasse L 🔸Got the same kind of message from a certain *Marcus* asking for 3D models. Be careful :)#b3dDaniel Salazar🔸: WARNING BLENDERHEADS. I have just detected a malicious attempt thru a @superhivemarket (blendermarket) message. The message from "marko" asked me to download a zip containing a blend file. (continued)

🐣 FlippedNormals Easter Egg Hunt is LIVE!We’ve hidden 10 eggs in the product galleries of our Exclusive products. Find them all, send us screenshots on support@flippednormals.com and get a digital surprise! 🎁Start hunting 🐇✨ http://flipnm.co/EasterHunt

Photo Credit: Apple The launch of foldable devices is considered a big step for Apple Highlights Pu believes that both models will start mass production in Q4 2026 Foldable iPhone could resemble the design of Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold iPhone Fold could get a 7.8-inch display Advertisement Apple is said to be gearing up to join the foldable market soon. While we're yet to see any official announcement from Apple regarding its entry into the foldable device market, multiple rumours and various credible sources have claimed that a foldable iPhone will land next year. Now, a reputed analyst states that Apple's first foldable iPad is on track for a 2026 launch. The purported iPad Fold is said to come with an 18.8-inch foldable screen.Apple Plans to Launch Two Foldable Devices in 2026As reported by 9to5Mac, Jeff Pu of Haitong International Tech Research shared details about Apple's foldable iPad in his latest research note. The purported iPhone Fold and iPad Fold are reportedly in the pipeline for launch next year. The former is said to have a 7.8-inch inner display, while the iPad Fold will reportedly feature an 18.8-inch screen.Pu believes that both models will enter mass production in the fourth quarter of 2026. The analyst made similar claims last month. He previously opined that mass production of the purported foldable iPhone and iPad Pro devices could begin in the second half of 2026. The two devices reportedly entered the New Product Introduction (NPI) phase at Foxconn.Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reported in March that Apple will launch a foldable iPhone in 2026. It is said to have a book-style foldable form factor and could resemble the design of Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold series.The launch of foldable devices is considered a big step for Apple. The brand has taken its own sweet time to enter the foldable market, but the competition in the space is likely to be intense with the arrival of the rumoured iPhone Fold and iPad Fold.Companies like Samsung, Vivo, Google, and Huawei have already launched multiple foldable smartphones. Apple's foldable iPhone is rumoured to come with a 5.5-inch cover display. It could ditch the Face ID and instead arrive with a side-mounted Touch ID sensor. The foldable iPhone is expected to get a starting price of around $2,300 (roughly Rs. 1,99,000) in the US. 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: Apple, iPhone Fold, iPad Fold Nithya P Nair Nithya P Nair is a journalist with more than five years of experience in digital journalism. She specialises in business and technology beats. A foodie at heart, Nithya loves exploring new places (read cuisines) and sneaking in Malayalam movie dialogues to spice up conversations. More Related Stories

What are Active and Total Parameters in LLMs?2 min read·Just now--Active vs TotalWhen working with large language models (LLMs), you might come across terms like “active parameters” and “total parameters.” While they may sound technical, understanding the difference can give you valuable insights into how these models function.First, What Are Parameters?In simple terms, parameters are the internal values-like weights and biases-that a model learns during training. They’re what allow the model to make sense of input and generate output.What Are Total Parameters?Total parameters refer to all the weights and biases that a model learns during training. Think of these as the model’s memory: they store the information the model has absorbed from its training data. The more parameters a model has, the more nuanced and complex its understanding can be — like having a larger library of knowledge.What Are Active Parameters?Active parameters, on the other hand, are the subset of parameters that are currently being updated or fine-tuned. For instance, if you’re fine-tuning a pre-trained model on a specific task, you might only adjust certain layers or parameters while keeping the rest frozen. These adjustable parameters are your active parameters.Why Does This Distinction Matter?Understanding the difference is crucial for various reasons:1. Resource Efficiency: When finetuning a model, updating only a subset of parameters (the active ones) can be more computationally efficient and faster than retraining the entire model.2. Specialization: By focusing on a subset of parameters, you can tailor a general model to perform exceptionally well on a specific task without altering its broader knowledge base.3. Interpretability: Knowing which parameters are active can help researchers and developers better understand how and where the model is adapting to new information.A Simple AnalogyImagine you’re a chef with a vast collection of recipes (your total parameters). When you decide to specialize in a particular cuisine, you focus on refining a subset of those recipes (your active parameters) to perfection. This way, you become a master of that cuisine without forgetting everything else you know.Impact on the Inference PipelineWhen it comes to inference — using the model to generate predictions or responses — the distinction between active and total parameters fades away. During inference, the model uses all of its parameters — those meticulously learned during training — to make predictions. This means the entire set of parameters is engaged, ensuring the model leverages all its knowledge to deliver accurate and comprehensive results.ConclusionWhile total parameters represent the full capacity of a model, active parameters are like the fine-tuning knobs that help adapt it to specific tasks. Understanding this distinction can help you make informed decisions when working with or deploying these powerful models.

OpenAI has launched a legal counteroffensive against one of its co-founders, Elon Musk, and his competing AI venture, xAI. In court documents filed yesterday, OpenAI accuses Musk of orchestrating a “relentless” and “malicious” campaign designed to “take down OpenAI” after he left the organisation years ago. The court filing, submitted to the US District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges Musk could not tolerate OpenAI’s success after he had “abandoned and declared [it] doomed.” OpenAI is now seeking legal remedies, including an injunction to stop Musk’s alleged “unlawful and unfair action” and compensation for damages already caused.    Origin story of OpenAI and the departure of Elon Musk The legal documents recount OpenAI’s origins in 2015, stemming from an idea discussed by current CEO Sam Altman and President Greg Brockman to create an AI lab focused on developing artificial general intelligence (AGI) – AI capable of outperforming humans – for the “benefit of all humanity.” Musk was involved in the launch, serving on the initial non-profit board and pledging $1 billion in donations.    However, the relationship fractured. OpenAI claims that between 2017 and 2018, Musk’s demands for “absolute control” of the enterprise – or its potential absorption into Tesla – were rebuffed by Altman, Brockman, and then-Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever. The filing quotes Sutskever warning Musk against creating an “AGI dictatorship.” Following this disagreement, OpenAI alleges Elon Musk quit in February 2018, declaring the venture would fail without him and that he would pursue AGI development at Tesla instead. Critically, OpenAI contends the pledged $1 billion “was never satisfied—not even close”.    Restructuring, success, and Musk’s alleged ‘malicious’ campaign Facing escalating costs for computing power and talent retention, OpenAI restructured and created a “capped-profit” entity in 2019 to attract investment while remaining controlled by the non-profit board and bound by its mission. This structure, OpenAI states, was announced publicly and Musk was offered equity in the new entity but declined and raised no objection at the time.    OpenAI highlights its subsequent breakthroughs – including GPT-3, ChatGPT, and GPT-4 – achieved massive public adoption and critical acclaim. These successes, OpenAI emphasises, were made after the departure of Elon Musk and allegedly spurred his antagonism. The filing details a chronology of alleged actions by Elon Musk aimed at harming OpenAI:    Founding xAI: Musk “quietly created” his competitor, xAI, in March 2023.    Moratorium call: Days later, Musk supported a call for a development moratorium on AI more advanced than GPT-4, a move OpenAI claims was intended “to stall OpenAI while all others, most notably Musk, caught up”.    Records demand: Musk allegedly made a “pretextual demand” for confidential OpenAI documents, feigning concern while secretly building xAI.    Public attacks: Using his social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Musk allegedly broadcast “press attacks” and “malicious campaigns” to his vast following, labelling OpenAI a “lie,” “evil,” and a “total scam”.    Legal actions: Musk filed lawsuits, first in state court (later withdrawn) and then the current federal action, based on what OpenAI dismisses as meritless claims of a “Founding Agreement” breach.    Regulatory pressure: Musk allegedly urged state Attorneys General to investigate OpenAI and force an asset auction.    “Sham bid”: In February 2025, a Musk-led consortium made a purported $97.375 billion offer for OpenAI, Inc.’s assets. OpenAI derides this as a “sham bid” and a “stunt” lacking evidence of financing and designed purely to disrupt OpenAI’s operations, potential restructuring, fundraising, and relationships with investors and employees, particularly as OpenAI considers evolving its capped-profit arm into a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC). One investor involved allegedly admitted the bid’s aim was to gain “discovery”.    Based on these allegations, OpenAI asserts two primary counterclaims against both Elon Musk and xAI: Unfair competition: Alleging the “sham bid” constitutes an unfair and fraudulent business practice under California law, intended to disrupt OpenAI and gain an unfair advantage for xAI.    Tortious interference with prospective economic advantage: Claiming the sham bid intentionally disrupted OpenAI’s existing and potential relationships with investors, employees, and customers.  OpenAI argues Musk’s actions have forced it to divert resources and expend funds, causing harm. They claim his campaign threatens “irreparable harm” to their mission, governance, and crucial business relationships. The filing also touches upon concerns regarding xAI’s own safety record, citing reports of its AI Grok generating harmful content and misinformation. The counterclaims mark a dramatic escalation in the legal battle between the AI pioneer and its departed co-founder. While Elon Musk initially sued OpenAI alleging a betrayal of its founding non-profit, open-source principles, OpenAI now contends Musk’s actions are a self-serving attempt to undermine a competitor he couldn’t control. With billions at stake and the future direction of AGI in the balance, this dispute is far from over. Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with other leading events including Intelligent Automation Conference, BlockX, Digital Transformation Week, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.