An animated comic illustration of a Fortnite character looking up and to the right, while a city burns in the background. Credit:Me.Fortnite wasnt a hit when it started. It was a totally different game back then. No battle royale, no millions of dollars in prize money, no Mariah Carey frozen in an ice block for Christmas. Originally, it was a third person, tower defense game. Youd gather resources, build a base, and you and your friends would prepare to be attacked by a torrent of horrible zombies. You worked alongside others to free survivors and combat thehorde.It didnt sell well. In fact, before being inspire by PUBG, it was almost cancelled. But they pivoted from their original idea. They looked around at other game models and listened to their user base. And they made out with bookoodollares.I think that the process of making video games lends itself towards making. You have to make a game in order to show it to someone and have them play it. Then, judging by the joy or frustration on that persons face, youll make changes and tweaks to improve thegame.Lets make morethingsIn software, particularly big software companies, Ive seen a different trend. Ive seen a lot of talking, planning, and twiddling. Oftentimes, there way less making than I would expect. And, I think that it comes from a fear of judgement. Because, with the making, comes judgement.But thats a fear that we need toface.If we really want to make things that are useful for other people, the only way well be able to do that is by making something to be judged. We cant build things in avacuum.Dont get me wrong, Im not saying that we shouldnt plan. Plans are great! Lets do our research, understand the problem, and cast vision for the future. But when the rubber hits the road, we need to makestuff.Were not always going to know what the right thing to do is. Sometimes (most times) there isnt a right thing. The path is obfuscated. Maybe were trying to serve other people, but were afraid of making a mistake. What if our mistake hurts the people were trying tohelp?But, if we do nothing, were not helping at all. Were not making thingsbetter.I dont think we should let our fear keep us from at least trying to make thingsbetter.And if we make something that messes things up, we can fix it. We can talk all we want about an idea, but until we actually make something visible and tangible, they wont know what the hell were talkingabout.People need something to respondto.And when we make it? People will give us feedback! We can use it! We can make it better, more effective!!!As long as we keep iterating, well make something great.Starting withresearchHeres where I was four years ago. I had just started my role at Cisco. It was my responsibility to breath new life into their design system, Momentum. This design system was used to create consistency within the Webex App. But there were a few problems that we needed to dealwith.I didnt know anything about this system, how it was implemented, or how people usedit.It spanned five different platforms, with varying degrees of differences depending on the operating system.All the components in those platforms were custom built; no UI toolkits.At the time, I had one designer on my team and we doubled down on our curiosity. Claire and I put together a research project, interviewing designers and engineers across the Webex App to try and understand what Momentum was and how people were using it. At the time, the Webex App was undergoing a complete rebrand. The entire UI was being evolved, and the transition was pretty difficult. People were building the plane as they were flyingit.We surveyed over 30 users and conducted research interviews with 20 participants across the organization. We used the findings from this research to help solidify our mission as a design systems team and specifically target the areas that we wanted to improve with Momentum.Here are some of our key insights:Give us clarity: Participants communicated that they wanted to have a better understanding of the current state of the design system, where its going in the future, and who has ownership ofit.Build a yellow brick road. Onboarding to the design system is particularly difficult here, because it requires so much one on one time to transfer knowledge. Theres a need for better tools and processes used for onboarding, collaboration and system improvement.The system lives inside a select few. It is currently impossible to learn the design system without facetime with experts. We need more solutions to become familiar.Build the machine. Users of the design system want more tools, processes, and resources to build effective and efficient solutions.Rebalance ownership with engineering. Better collaboration and communication is needed across design and engineering so that we can be on the same page when it comes to components, process, and language.More thinking through making. We need to have methods for evolving our system. How do we approach product evolution in a systematic way? How do we incorporate conceptual thinking and cast vision for the future while still delivering producttoday?Breaking things to make thembetterWriting down our guidelines All the information of Momentum was housed inside the heads of a few designers. They were archons; gatekeepers to the halls of software consistency. They gave out their advice and guidance to others, but it was slow. It wasnt scalable, and our features were often blocked, or the design system was ignored completely.Being new to the team, I didnt know how our system worked. I was unfamiliar with our components, colors, and processes. So, I did what Ive learned to be one of the most powerful tools for organizational influence: I made friends. I got to know each and every one of these design system leaders and scheduled a regular meeting with them to discuss common design patterns used in oursystem.Oftentimes the meetings would revolve around a specific issue for a component or design pattern. A question about the dialog component would come up from a feature designer and we would discuss how to answer it with clarity, and make any necessary updates to the component in thelibrary.An example of our Grid and Layout guidelines to help designers understand the importance of spacing consistency.My team and I distilled the information that we learned in various guidelines which we then used to format all our information on our iconography system, layout, illustrations, color tokens, typography, and accessibility.Any time we got a recurring question in office hours, or received multiples of the same request, we used what we learned as an opportunity for something that might be written in our guidelines.An example from our Design Token Guidelines.A brand new process In 2021 when I started, the Momentum Design system consisted of 4 Figma libraries for each of the Platforms that Webex was on (Windows, MacOS, iOS, and Android). A decision was made that the UI of Webex should lean native, ie leverage operating system components where appropriate. This has since bit us in the butt, as a lot of these operating systems core components arent as accessible as we need, but thats another story entirely.A FigJam board with the results of our design system change process workshop.The libraries were maintained via a guild model, with quite a few designers having access and adding components whenever the need arose. This led to massive discrepancies between the libraries as well as an unclear process for new component additions. My team and I were having multiple conversations during the week, being asked to add a new component to our figma library, because its already being built in product. To top everything off with a cherry, none of the platforms had UI toolkits. Components were being built as part of feature work in a completely custom and unscalable way.We had very little control or oversight and inconsistency reigned. We needed to stop themadness.I facilitated a workshop with my team and several key designers who had been on the design system guild where we discussed and created the Design System Change Process. This took work, but was the first milestone in creating order amongst ourchaos.We ran a weekly Office Hours where designers with questions could come and ask questions about their feature work. We used it as an opportunity to share the new component creation process, as well as several teams weekly Show &Shares.We implemented a Momentum Request Form where people could submit requests to our team and they would be stored on our backlog for review and work at a laterdate.All this helped create a stop gap for the massive amounts of changes going into our component library on a dailybasis.The final Momentum Change ProcessChart.Restructuring our Figma Libraries While reviewing our four figma libraries, the obvious thing that we noticed was an inconsistency in component naming. In the Windows library, the Banner component would have its own page. But in iOS, it would be on an Alerts page with Dialogs and Toasts. These inconsistencies made navigating the libraries, and building features across platforms extremely difficult.My team and I (at this point Claire and I had another designer, Morgan) met together several times to discuss how we might approach figma component library alignment.How we used to organize our components on layers. Lots of similar components were on the samepage.Our new way of organizing components. We start with Core Components, then Native Components, and then Product Specific Components.There were three potential strategies that wesaw:Individual components; grouping individual components on their own page, listed out alphabetically.Group by usage; multiple components with similar features or applications would be grouped together on the samepage.Group by complexity; this is something that Brad Frost discusses in his atomic design model when showing the difference between Atoms and Molecules.I proposed to the team that we list out our components individually, and group them together by Core Components, Native Components, and Application Components. Because we wanted to align four different platforms, I felt it necessary to show what all the libraries had in common in the Core Component library and relegate any operating system components to the native section. The Application Components was honestly a free for all. So many strange and unique cards, widgets, or list items were placed there because they could not be used in more than one part of theproduct.This update was one of the biggest that we made. It had the greatest effect on designers daily lives. We were really worried that these new changes might impact or impede their workflows.ConclusionThroughout this process, I was sweating. As design system designers, the things we make and maintain have an immediate impact on the designers around us. I didnt know how they would respond to the huge amount of change in their libraries and processes.A year later we performed another user research project on design system usage. This time around, we were able to increase our overall scores for Momentums ease of use and understandability. Theres still a lot of work ahead of us, but were ready to both break andmake.ReferencesOriginal FortniteTrailerFortnite was nearly cancelled years before it became a global phenomenon, according to a former employee of Epic Games BusinessInsiderPrototyping: Turning Ideas into TangibleProductsMove New Ideas Forward in Your Organization IdeoUAn illustration of the author waving. Credit:Me.Hey yall! Im Trip Carroll, a design leader at Cisco and aspiring cartoonist.I write and publish a new article on design, leadership, and software development every other Monday. You can see more of my work on my website, check out my drawings on Instagram, or subscribe to my newsletter on Substack.Lets make workgreat!Theres no making without breaking was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The evolution and ultimate demise of a drinking straw design.Continue reading on UX Collective

Less than a month after Apple released its own "budget" iPhone, the iPhone 16e, Samsung is out with a new midrange Galaxy A series update for 2025. And unlike Apple's $599 phone, the Galaxy A26, an admittedly more budget-friendly device, starts at just $300. The Galaxy A56 on the other hand, a more direct iPhone 16e competitor, will be $500 when it launches later this year, yet nets you double the storage as the 16e.If you're thinking about picking up any of these phones, you might be curious about how they all compare on paper. While we'll need to wait for reviewers to get their hands on these devices before we truly know how they stack up, it's helpful to see the specs and price points side-by-side. iPhone 16e Credit: Apple What was once the iPhone SE is now called the iPhone 16e, and at a $599 starting price for the 128GB model, it's expensive for a midrange phone. But if you can stretch your budget, you do get a lot for that money.Yes, it has a notch and not a Dynamic Island, but you get a 6.1-inch screen, Apple's latest and greatest A18 chip (that's only missing one GPU core when compared to the iPhone 16 model), 8GB of RAM, Apple Intelligence, a 48MP single camera setup, and a long battery life. That said, since you're paying less than you would for the standard iPhone 16 or any of its upgrades, you do miss out on some bonuses. The screen is still only 60Hz; there's no always-on display; and you lose an ultra-wide lens, in addition to camera features like Cinematic mode and the new Photographic Styles. Apple even took out MagSafe.At its core, though, it's a solid iPhone. Apple is known for supporting its devices for years, and the fact that this has 8GB of RAM and the A18 chip means that the iPhone 16e will continue to stay fast and fresh for a good while.Samsung Galaxy A26, A36, and A56 Credit: Samsung There are three new phones to talk about here. The A26, starting at $300, the A36, starting at $400, and the A56, starting at $500. For the sake of this comparison, I will mostly focus on the A56, as it's the closest in scope to the 16e, but there are reasons to consider the other options, especially the $400 A36. All three phones run One UI 7.0, which includes new software features like the Now Bar and a redesigned interface that looks quite a bit like iOS. And while the complete Galaxy AI suite is reserved for Samsung's flagship phones, the A series devices do get Google's Circle-to-Search, Filters, Best Face, Auto Trim, and Samsung's AI Object Eraser tools. Samsung is calling this suite of features "Awesome Intelligence," which I'm sure won't be confusing to anyone. Samsung is also promising six generations of OS upgrades, and six years of security updates, which is up there with Google's seven-year updates promise for Pixel devices.As specs, go, all three phones get a 5,000 mAh battery, but the 45-watt fast wired charging is only available for the A36 and the A56. It's a similar story with the display too: the A36 and A56 both feature a 6.7-inch AMOLED display with a 120Hz refresh rate, a 1080 x 2340 resolution, and Corning Gorilla Victus+ Glass protection (not present on the iPhone 16e). The A26, though gets a smaller 6.5-inch screen, featuring the same 120Hz refresh rate, and the FHD+ display. The screen goes up to 1,200 nits when you're outside, and can push to 1,900 nits using the Vision Booster feature. The iPhone 16e, meanwhile, is locked to 800 nits.All three devices feature different processors and RAM configurations, with the best chip saved for the A56. The A26 features Samsung's Exynos 1380 chipset, 6GB RAM, and 128GB storage, while the A36 uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon Gen 3 processor, 6GB RAM, and 128GB storage. The A56 comes with the Exynos 1580 chip, 8 or 12GB RAM (depending on the configuration), and 128 or 256GB storage.When it comes to raw performance, however, the iPhone 16e easily beats out the A56. Based on early (leaked) testing data compiled by ZoneofTech, the Exynos 1580 in the Galaxy A56 scores 1353 in single-core and 3832 in multi-core performance. The A18 chip, on the other hand, scores 3317 in single-core, and a whopping 8165 in multi-core performance. That's more than double the raw performance on the 16e. Credit: ZoneofTech The body shape differs slightly between the three devices. The A26 has a plastic frame and body, compared to the more "premium" metals found on the other two devices. All three phones feature thin bezels around, but a prominent chin, so the bottom bezel is slightly thicker than the other three sides. There's a triple camera setup on every A series phone, compared to Apple's single 48 MP unit. All three Samsung units get the same 50 MP wide-angle lens. The A56 gets a 12 MP ultra-wide, and a 5 MP macro lens, while the A36 gets a 8 MP ultra-wide, and a 5 MP macro lens. The cheaper A26 gets 8MP ultra-wide and a 2 MP macro lens. All A series phones can take advantage of AI photography features like Best Take, which merges faces from different photos to create a better single image. There's also Samsung's Object Eraser tool which is better than Apple's Cleanup utility. The A56 and A36 can also record content in HDR from the main sensor.The 5,000 mAh battery in the A series devices is rated for 29 hours of video playback, while the iPhone 16e manages 26 hours on a single charge. Those might not reflect real-life battery tests, however, so we'll need to watch for reviewers before we know how these batteries really compare. In fact, that's true for a lot of features across these devices. We'll simply need to see how the A series' cameras and chips stack up against the iPhone 16e in real-world use before we can make any definitive calls here. But, for now, it's helpful to compare the specs and data we do have. The Galaxy A36 5G will be available March 26th in Black and Lavender, and an exclusive Lime color at Best Buy. While the A26 goes on sale March 27th and is only available in a Black color. But the A56 will be out in the US later this year, no details on the color options yet.

A recent outbreak of measles in West Texas has resulted in 159 cases of the disease in the state so far; 22 victims required hospitalization, and one has died. In response to the deadly outbreak, some Texas parents seem to be considering hosting "measles parties" instead of vaccinating their kids. Misinformation about measles can have deadly consequences, so here's a look at some ways people are getting measles wrong.Myth: Measles vaccines are potentially dangerousWhile a small percentage of people suffer side effects from the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, they are almost always mild. The most common is a fever that hits between 5% and 10% of those vaccinated. About 2% to 5% develop a mild rash, and about 1 in 4,000 develop something more serious. The "side effects" of contracting the disease itself, on the other hand, are much worse: Nearly 100% of people who contract the disease develop symptoms that include fever, red eyes, a sore throat, and a blotchy rash. About one in 300 people who get measles will die.Myth: The measles vaccine gives people measlesThe belief that measles outbreaks are caused by the measles vaccine is growing in certain circles, helped along by advocates like Children's Health Defense, the anti-vaccine advocacy group founded by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The measles vaccine works by introducing a weakened form of the measles virus into the body to trigger an immune response. So the theory goes, people who have been injected with the measles vaccine are infecting others with the disease. But while the measles virus can potentially be detected in people for up to four weeks after a shot, it is extremely unlikely for the virus to be be transmitted to anyone in that weakened formwhich is significant, given measles itself is among the most contagious diseases. As for the Texas outbreak specifically, to make sure, all cases have been tested, and they've all been declared to be the result of "wild" measles. No one got it from vaccine "shedding," because that doesn't really happen with the measles vaccine.Myth: The measles vaccine is linked to autismThe vaccine for measles has been around since 1963. It has prevented countless cases of the diseases and has long been proven safe and effective. But people are still hesitant to take it and/or give it to their children. The belief that the measles vaccine, or any vaccine, can cause autism is one of the reasons. A recent survey conducted by the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center, found that 24% of Americans believe there is a link between vaccines and autism, and 3% aren't sure. The supposed link between autism and vaccination is based on two flawed studies that have been thoroughly and overwhelmingly debunked. To put it simply, if you listen to the science, there's no there there. Vaccines for measles are safe and effective, and they prevent the disease and thus save lives. If enough people get vaccinated, we can eliminate measles from our country (in fact, the World Health Organization did declare it eradicated in the U.S. back in 2000, though as lower vaccination rates have recently resulted in more frequent outbreaks, that designation is at risk). It's really as simple as that. Myth: Measles can be cured or prevented with vitamin AThe idea that vitamin A can be used to treat measles has a grain of truth of it, but it's a small grain. Studies conducted in developing nations indicate vitamin A can help prevent complications in severe measles cases, and that children with low amounts of vitamin A tend to develop more severe cases of measles. But in the United States, where few children have such nutritional deficiencies, it's unclear whether there's any benefit to giving vitamin A for measles. Some doctors' position is "why not?" but vitamin A is not part of the measles treatment protocol in the U.S., let alone a recognized cure or preventative measure. It's definitely not a substitute for vaccination.To prevent measles cases in the current outbreak, public health officials are encouraging people to get vaccinated. One cool thing about the measles vaccine: As the Texas health department points out, a dose can still be given within 72 hours after you are exposed to the virus to lessen the severity of the disease if you do get sick. Myth: Measles can be prevented by "natural means"The only "natural" way you can prevent the spread of measles is by staying away from other people if you are infected with it. Measles doesn't care if you eat healthy food and work out. It's extremely contagiousaccording to the CDC, "if one person has it, up to 9 out of 10 people who are nearby will become infected if they are not protected." Being a generally healthy may result in a better outcome if you are infected, but not getting infected in the first place (by being vaccinated) is an infinitely healthier choice. Myth: Measles parties can help kids gain "natural immunity"While surviving measles will protect you from reinfection, this "natural" immunity offers no more protection from the disease than vaccination, and, again, it's much riskier: About three out of every 1,000 people who get measles die (a tally that sadly included a child in Texas amid the current outbreak) and more suffer life-changing complications. As Dr. Ron Cook, chief health officer for the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in Lubbock, put it in a press conference, "We cant predict who is going to do poorly with measles, being hospitalized, potentially get pneumonia or encephalitis, or potentially pass away. "Its a foolish thing to go have measles parties," he added, I imagine with a pained sigh.Myth: The current measles outbreak is normalDeadly measles outbreaks are unusual in the U.S. Until this year, we hadn't had a child die from measles since 2015. Heck, measles has been considered eliminated from both North and South America since 2000. Since 2000, our measles outbreaks have been small and sporadic, started by travelers who brought a case in from overseas. Quick action from the CDC and from local health authorities has usually managed to get things back under control. But low rates of measles vaccination make it easier for these small outbreaks to spread to larger areas, and we may be looking at a new and growing problem.Along with Texas, this year measles cases have been reported in Kentucky, California, New Mexico, Georgia, Alaska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, but there are less than 200 cases total, so it's unclear if the current wave is the beginning of a larger problem. But it isn't good. The fear is that the current climate of vaccine hesitancy and reduced vaccination rates will lower the percentage of immunized people enough that measles will reestablish a foothold in the U.S. According to the CDC a vaccination rate of 95% is needed for "herd immunity" but we're slipping below that magic number. Fourteen states have fallen under 90 percent.Myth: You can't get measles if you've been vaccinatedThe vaccine for measles is extremely effective (and safe) but it's not 100% effective. It's "only" 97% effective. No one knows why a small number of people get measles even though they've had shots. On the bright side, vaccinated people who suffer from "breakout" measles tend to have milder cases.Myth: There's nothing we can do about rising rates of measlesThe sudden spike in measles cases is alarming, but it's nothing compared to a measles outbreak that occurred in the early 1990s. That one was much worse, but it also provides historical evidence of how to combat a measles outbreak. Even though the vaccine was nearly 30 years old at that point, there were 27,000 cases of measles in the U.S. in 1990. Low-income communities in New York City were hit hardest, although outbreaks were also reported in Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Houston. The root cause was the same as with the current rash of the disease: Not enough people were being vaccinated. In 1990, the CDC estimated that about half of all inner-city toddlers in New York City had not been vaccinated by their second birthday, mostly because the vaccine was difficult to get or difficult to afford.The response from city, state, and federal government included wide-ranging public outreach programs, mobile immunization centers, the creation of the federal, congressionally approved Vaccines for Children Program, pro vaccine messages flashed in Times Square, and even Michelangelo from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles emerging from a sewer to encourage kids to get vaccinated. In short, we really threw everything we had at pro-vaccine, anti-measles messaging. And it worked: Vaccination rates climbed above 90% in New York. Whether a similar effort would work in today's climate of distrust and misinformation is an open question, but at least there's evidence vaccination has worked to contain an outbreak once before.

YouTube has introduced a new subscription option for viewing with reduced ads compared with its pricey but ad-free Premium plans. This Premium Lite plan is rolling out in the US starting today. It costs $8 per month, compared with $14 per month for Premium. All users in YouTube's pilot markets of Australia, Germany and Thailand will gain access to Premium Lite in the coming weeks.Most videos will be available without ads under this subscription, such as podcasts, gaming, fashion, beauty and news content. But the company is treating music content differently since its YouTube Music service is baked into the full YouTube Premium offering. There will still be ads on music and music videos, as well as on Shorts."When we talk to our users what we found is there's a whole swath of people who want an ad-free, uninterrupted streaming service but they don't necessarily want a music service. That's where we got the idea of Premium Lite," YouTube's chief product officer, Johanna Voolich, said in a video regarding the news. "It's really cool because it allows us to give these kinds of viewers more choice, but it also unlocks a new revenue stream for our creators."You'll likely see ads as you browse and search YouTube as well. Downloads and background play, two other key features of the Premium plan, won't be available to Premium Lite subscribers.YouTube began testing a lower-cost subscription plan in several markets in October 2024. Similarly, during that trial, the company offered users most content without advertisements, although it did show "video ads on music content and Shorts, and non-interruptive ads when you search and browse."The platform is still treating Premium Lite as a pilot. YouTube plans to expand the tier to more countries later this year. It will also "introduce more ways for our users to get the most from their subscriptions."This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/streaming/youtubes-new-premium-lite-offers-ad-free-viewing-on-most-videos-for-8-per-month-153142844.html?src=rss

Elon Musk discovered a simple 30-second fridge trick that can reverse diabetes, but the discovery has spooked pharmaceutical companies so much they put a $78 million bounty on his head, forcing the Tesla CEO to flee the country. At least, thats what a collection of AI-generated Facebook ads claim.Facebook ads depicting deepfakes of Elon Musk and Fox News personalities claiming that the Tesla CEO has discovered the cure for diabetes have been circulating on the platform for weeks. The ads seem to be part of a wider scam that uses the deepfakes to sell unproven supplements.Engadget has identified scores of pages running versions of these ads since early February. Though many of the ads dont stay up for very long, the same pages have repeatedly run dozens or even hundreds of versions of the videos, all of which follow a similar format. The vast majority feature Elon Musk and Fox News hosts, but there are also versions with other notable figures, including Oprah Winfrey, former Utah Senator Mitt Romney and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.Using social media to hawk sketchy supplements isnt exactly new. AFP Fact Check detailed a similar ring of scammy Facebook ads promoting supplements that purported to cure high blood pressure last year. But the addition of AI-manipulated video and deepfaked audio of Musk adds a new layer to such scams.While this particular scam has apparently gone largely undetected by Meta, the company is well aware that fraudsters often use celebrities and other public figures to lure in unsuspecting users. A Polish billionaire recently won a legal battle with the company over deepfake ads that used his likeness. Last fall, the company announced that it would bring back facial recognition technology in an effort to fight celeb bait scams.Musk, of course, is no stranger to impersonation scams. Crypto scammers have impersonated him across social media for years. His new position as a close lieutenant of President Donald Trump and head of the Department of Government Efficiency, however, makes him an even more attractive target to fraudsters hoping to capitalize on his newfound authority. Several of the ads identified by Engadget feature video clips of Musks recent public appearances and speeches. These include ads with AI-generated audio overlaid onto video from an onstage interview this month at the Conservative Political Action Conference, known as CPAC, and a photo opp in the Oval Office.There are a lot of different blood sugar support, type 2 diabetes, reverse diabetes, sort of scams out there these days, says Jordan Liles, a senior reporter at Snopes who has debunked some of these videos on his YouTube channel. It's the same sort of process you might see with other scams in that they start with an ad, they go to a long video on a website, and then they want you to order the product. And they want you to believe everything that you just saw is real.These ads seem to violate multiple policies of Meta, including its rules around medical misinformation and requirements for advertisers to disclose the use of AI-manipulated media. And many of the ads identified by Engadget appear to have been removed within a day or two. But many of the Facebook pages behind these ads, which have names like Mindful Medicine, Your health compass and The Wellbeing Spot remain active. Several pages repeatedly ran dozens of new ads with similar content shortly after the old ones were removed.Because ads that are taken down are removed from Metas Ad Library along with their associated analytics, its hard to know just how many accounts they are reaching. But the few that remain viewable offer some clues. One such ad, from a page called Healthy Style, was active on Facebook, Instagram and Messenger for three days, according to the companys Ad Library. The advertiser paid Meta between $300 and $399 for the ad, which generated 5,000 - 6,000 impressions. At one point in February, the page was running 177 versions of a similar ad. Another, from a page called Hydromeduoside also ran for two days, generating between 10,000 and 15,000 impressions across Facebook, Instagram and Messenger. It cost between $400 and $499, according to the Ad Library. Both ads were removed by Meta because they ran without the required disclaimer for ads about social and political issues, according to a notice in the Ad Library, despite likely breaking other rules and having no particular relation to politics.Meta removed the "Healthy Style" page after an inquiry from Engadget. The company said in a statement it was investigating the ads and taking action on other pages. "The ad review system reviews ads for violations of our policies," a spokesperson said. "This review process may include the specific components of an ad, such as images, video, text and targeting information, as well as an ads associated landing page or other destinations, among other information."The ads follow a similar script. They often open with deepfakes of Fox News personalities discussing how Musk recently blew up the internet with his discovery that big pharma doesnt want you to see. The ads then cut to an AI-manipulated video clip of him from a podcast or other public appearance. Many of the ads refer to the MAHA website, an apparent reference to Kennedys Make America Healthy Again movement.The ads never disclose the actual trick for reversing diabetes. In one version, Musk says all you need is a common fruit. In another, Kennedy says it requires a frozen lemon. Another suggests that all you need is a lemon and a pair of socks. The ads urge viewers to visit a linked website to find a guide before its wiped from the internet. Bizarrely, the videos end with several minutes of silence that show a still image of a random object like a clock, calculator or blood pressure cuff.Most of these ads link to websites that attempt to spoof mainstream news sites like Fox News, CNN or Yahoo (Engadgets parent company). These websites typically dont have obvious links to supplements, but feature additional lengthy videos with AI-manipulated clips of cable news personalities. These videos, which can run upward of 20 minutes, often feature old video clips with AI-generated audio of Barbra ONeill, an Australian naturopath who was permanently banned from offering health-related services in her home country after claiming that cancer could be cured with baking soda.(Theres no evidence that ONeill, who has emerged as a popular wellness influencer in the US in recent years, is actually associated with these websites. As The Guardian reported last year, O'Neill is often impersonated by scammers using AI-generated content to sell unproven remedies on Facebook and TikTok. Her official Facebook page often warns followers about scammers who impersonate her on and off Facebook. A representative for ONeill didnt respond to a request for comment.)Once you make it to the end of the video, a link appears offering a time-limited deal on a supplement called Gluco Revive. The supplement, which is also available from third-party sellers on Amazon and walmart.com, doesnt actually claim to treat any condition related to diabetes in its marketing. Instead, it suggests it offers blood support that boosts energy levels and "supports healthy weight. According to its label, it has a proprietary blend of ingredients like juniper berry powder and bitter melon extract.An example of one of the websites linked from a Facebook ad that attempts to spoof Fox News.The FDA has previously warned consumers about companies selling over the counter diabetes treatments and supplements. There are no dietary supplements that treat or cure diabetes, the agency wrote in a warning published in December. Some all-natural diabetes products contain hidden active ingredients found in approved prescription drugs used to treat diabetes these products may interact in dangerous ways with other medications.While its impossible to know just how many people have been duped by these ads, there are dozens of listings for Gluco Revive on Amazon, some of which indicate there have been thousands of sales in the last month. The reviews on Amazon, where its sold for anywhere from $22 - $70, suggest that some people may have purchased the supplements after seeing one of the ads described above. Its not working. I thought someone from the company was going to call me on what to do. Dr. ONeil [sic] said that we might feel a change in about 17 hours. Its been 7 days and I feel no difference.This does not work and in fact raised my blood sugar, another reviewer reports, noting they found the product via Facebook. When contacting the suppler [sic] they did send me a Return authorization number and address to send the unused bottles I boxed them up [and] sent priority shipping and it's being returned as no such address. I called USPS and they let me know that it was a scam and they have had 100s of returns to that address [and] that they do not exist.Though Gluco Revive appears to be the most prevalent supplement sold via this scam, some linked pages from the Facebook ads sell similar products, like Gluco Control," which purports to be a a 100% natural, safe, and effective blood sugar management product. The website says its made up of gymnema sylvestre, grape seed extract, green tea extract and African mango extract. The website features a list of scientific references and media endorsements that appear to be entirely made up. Another page promotes something called Gluco Freedom, which has a similar ingredient list, and offers a 180-day supply for $294.Liles, the Snopes reporter who identified the Gluco Revive ads on Facebook in early February, and has researched many similar scams on social media, suspects the ads are having some success. If the same product gets weeks and weeks, or months or longer of advertising, that means that it's something that they're seeing results with, he says.Have a tip? Get in touch with the author at karissa.bell [at] engadget.com or message securely on Signal: karissabe.51This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/facebook-scammers-want-you-to-think-elon-musk-can-cure-diabetes-153042842.html?src=rss

Businesses are increasingly worried about AI use in cyberattacks but they're also learning how to defend.

Hackers are engaged in a highly targeted attack, targeting individuals in UAE.

Green was tapped to lead One Medical shortly after Amazon completed its $3.9 billion acquisition of the company.

CrowdStrike shares dropped 10% after issuing weak earnings guidance and signaled ongoing pressure from its global IT outage in July.