Reddit is not the first name that pops up in conversations when it comes to UX design or smooth functionality. Theres a reason why so many third-party Reddit clients such as Apollo prospered, before the platform came for them with rules that shut such apps for good.Roughly two years later, Reddit is now making some long overdue course correction, though the design remains unchanged. The platform is adding new features that will make posting content a tad easier, especially for people who are not well-versed with all the rules and moderator guidelines.Recommended VideosOn the composer page, theres a new check tool that will automatically go through the posts content and the community rules. If there is any conflict, it will inform users why their ideas are not fit for posting and could be removed.RedditReddit will also show the rules up front, such as Karma requirements or content violation before a post goes live. In case users have had their content removed by moderators, they will now see a new Post to a different community option that will let them share it in another sub-Reddit.Please enable Javascript to view this contentSome of Reddits best communities with a massive user base have rather tight rules, and posting by new contributors isnt usually allowed. Only after meeting a certain engagement criteria, such as earning Karma from other users, are they allowed to make original contributions.Posts are often removed as soon as they go live by moderators, leaving new users with no other option, especially when they are not aware of other similar communities. Reddit will lend a helping hand with that conundrum, as well.RedditWhen users are composing their post, they will see a recommendation button at the top, which gives them a list of all communities where they can share it. Reddit says these recommendations are made based on the content and finding the right fit for it.The final change is an insights dashboard, where users can view the engagement on their content, such as upvotes and shares. All these features are now rolling out to Reddit users on desktop and mobile. The proactive rule check system, on the other hand, will begin testing on mobile platforms soon.Editors Recommendations

I did it and I dont deny it, said Laura Fair of killing a California politician. Her crime offers a lens on 19th-century San Francisco.

John Lithgow and Geoffrey Rush face off in James Ashcrofts thriller about a man who menaces his fellow elderly residents with a hand puppet.

What comes around No one asked for this: Google is testing round keys in Gboard A lot of Gboard beta users are suddenly remembering they joined the beta. Ryan Whitwam Mar 6, 2025 3:32 pm | 0 Credit: Google Credit: Google Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreMost Android phones ship with Google's Gboard as the default input option. It's a reliable, feature-rich on-screen keyboard, so most folks just keep using it instead of installing a third-party option. Depending on how you feel about circles, it might be time to check out some of those alternatives. Google has quietly released an update that changes the shape and position of the keys, and users are not pleased.In the latest build of Gboard (v15.1.05.726012951-beta-arm64-v8a), Google has changed the key shape from the long-running squares to circle shapes. If you're using the four-row layout, the keys are like little pills. In five-row mode with the exposed number row, the keys are collapsed further into circles. The reactions seem split between those annoyed by this change and those annoyed that everyone else is so annoyed.Change can be hard sometimes, so certainly some of the discontent is just a function of having the phone interface changed without warning. If you find it particularly distasteful, you can head into the Gboard settings and open the Themes menu. From there, you can tap on a theme and then turn off the key borders. Thus, you won't be distracted by the horror of rounded edges. That's not the only problem with the silent update, though.The wave of objections aren't just about aestheticsthis update also moves the keys around a bit. After years of tapping away on keys with a particular layout, people develop muscle memory. Big texters can sometimes type out messages on their phone without even looking at it, but moving the keys around even slightly, as Google has done here, can cause you to miss more keys than you did before the update. Left: the traditional square keys. Right: The new rounded keys. Credit: Google Left: the traditional square keys. Right: The new rounded keys. Credit: Google Importantly, this update is being released for beta usersthose are people who signed up to get the latest features first. In that instance, you can't be entirely surprised when parts of your software change overnight. If you're the type to get up in arms about unexpected updates, the beta channel is not for you. The problem, however, is that Google makes it very easy to join betas and very hard to leave themthe current version of the Play Store doesn't even include a list of all your beta app subscriptions. People may join the beta for a Google app and continue getting beta updates for years without realizing it until suddenly, one day, Gboard has rounded keys.If your phone has been visited by the round key fairy, you can go back to the old look at least temporarily. You'll just need to leave the Gboard beta in the Play Store listing. After opting out of the beta, you must then uninstall Gboard and reinstall it to get the latest stable build. However, you may have no choice in key shape soon. Barring a change in course, this design change will eventually make its way to the stable version of the app. Anyone who is particularly stubborn or allergic to circles can disable automatic Gboard updates and just never install new versions. That's a rather extreme reaction to more rounded shapes, though.Ryan WhitwamSenior Technology ReporterRyan WhitwamSenior Technology Reporter Ryan Whitwam is a senior technology reporter at Ars Technica, covering the ways Google, AI, and mobile technology continue to change the world. Over his 20-year career, he's written for Android Police, ExtremeTech, Wirecutter, NY Times, and more. He has reviewed more phones than most people will ever own. You can follow him on Bluesky, where you will see photos of his dozens of mechanical keyboards. 0 Comments

Changing the rules Starlink benefits as Trump admin rewrites rules for $42B grant program Trump admin decides fiber Internet won't be prioritized in BEAD grant program. Jon Brodkin Mar 6, 2025 2:47 pm | 57 Starlink satellite dish. Credit: Starlink Starlink satellite dish. Credit: Starlink Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreThe Trump administration is eliminating a preference for fiber Internet in a $42.45 billion broadband deployment program, a change that is expected to reduce spending on the most advanced wired networks while directing more money to Elon Musk's Starlink and other non-fiber Internet service providers. One report suggests Starlink could obtain $10 billion to $20 billion under the new rules.Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick criticized the Biden administration's handling of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program in a statement yesterday. Lutnick said that "because of the prior Administration's woke mandates, favoritism towards certain technologies, and burdensome regulations, the program has not connected a single person to the Internet and is in dire need of a readjustment."The BEAD program was authorized by Congress in November 2021, and the US was finalizing plans to distribute funding before Trump's inauguration. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), part of the Commerce Department, developed rules for the program in the Biden era and approved initial funding plans submitted by every state and territory.The program has been on hold since the change in administration, with Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and other Republicans seeking rule changes. In addition to demanding an end to the fiber preference, Cruz wants to kill a requirement that ISPs receiving network-construction subsidies provide cheap broadband to people with low incomes. Cruz also criticized "unionized workforce and DEI labor requirements; climate change assessments; excessive per-location costs; and other central planning mandates."Lutnick's statement yesterday confirmed that the Trump administration will end the fiber preference and replace it with a "tech-neutral" set of rules, and explore additional changes. He said:Under my leadership, the Commerce Department has launched a rigorous review of the BEAD program. The Department is ripping out the Biden Administration's pointless requirements. It is revamping the BEAD program to take a tech-neutral approach that is rigorously driven by outcomes, so states can provide Internet access for the lowest cost. Additionally, the Department is exploring ways to cut government red tape that slows down infrastructure construction. We will work with states and territories to quickly get rid of the delays and the waste. Thereafter we will move quickly to implementation in order to get households connected.Lutnick said the department's goal is to "deliver high-speed Internet access... efficiently and effectively at the lowest cost to taxpayers."Democrat: Musk is a grifterPlans to direct money to Starlink were criticized yesterday by House Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.). "Musk is a grifter, and Republicans are going to just stand by and watch," Pallone said. Pallone also criticized Republicans for delaying BEAD after the Biden-era NTIA "rose to the occasion to build and implement the largest and most sophisticated broadband program in our nation's history... with independent planning and decision-making taking place in every single state and territory.""Committee Republicans have done nothing but undermine our efforts to deploy more reliable and affordable broadband," and "the Trump Administration has not moved one state forward in the process" since taking over six weeks ago, he said.The Biden NTIA decided that fiber architecture is the only technology that achieves the BEAD law's goal of building future-proof networks. "End-to-end fiber networks can be updated by replacing equipment attached to the ends of the fiber-optic facilities, allowing for quick and relatively inexpensive network scaling as compared to other technologies. Moreover, new fiber deployments will facilitate the deployment and growth of 5G and other advanced wireless services, which rely extensively on fiber for essential backhaul," the Biden NTIA said.House Republicans yesterday held a hearing titled, "Fixing Biden's Broadband Blunder." A hearing memo said that BEAD should support fixed wireless and satellite broadband "in areas that are more remote or have terrain that makes deploying fiber or cable more difficult."The Biden NTIA's rules did not prohibit the use of fixed wireless and satellite technologies, but defined "priority broadband projects" as those that use end-to-end fiber-optic architecture. The rules said states could choose a non-fiber provider if the cost of running fiber to a particular location is above the state's "extremely high cost per location threshold," or "for other valid reasons subject to approval" by the NTIA.Dont be technology-blind, broadband group saysThe Benton Institute for Broadband & Society criticized what it called "Trump's BEAD meddling," saying it would "leave millions of Americans with broadband that is slower, less reliable, and more expensive." The shift to a "technology-neutral" approach should not be "technology-blind," the advocacy group said."Fiber broadband is widely understood to be better than other Internet optionslike Starlink's satellitesbecause it delivers significantly faster speeds, is more reliable due to its resistance to interference (from weather, foliage, terrain, etc), has higher bandwidth capacity, and offers symmetrical upload and download speeds, making it ideal for activities like telehealth, online learning, streaming, and gaming that require consistent high performance," the group said.It's ultimately up to individual states to distribute funds to ISPs after getting their allocations from the US government, though the states have to follow rules issued by federal officials. No one knows exactly how much each Internet provider will receive, but a Wall Street Journal report this week said the new rules could help Starlink get nearly half of the available funding."Under the BEAD program's original rules, Starlink was expected to get up to $4.1 billion, said people familiar with the matter. With Lutnick's overhaul, Starlink, a unit of Musk's SpaceX, could receive $10 billion to $20 billion, they said," according to the WSJ report.The end of BEAD's fiber preference would also help cable and fixed wireless providers access grant funding. Lobby groups for those industries have been calling for rule changes to help their members obtain grants.While the Commerce Department is moving ahead with BEAD changes on its own, Republicans are also proposing a rewrite of the law. House Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) yesterday announced legislation that his office said would eliminate "burdensome conditions imposed by the Biden-Harris Administration, including those related to labor, climate change, and rate regulation, that made deployment more expensive and participation less attractive."Musk to benefit while DOGE cuts fundingGiven Musk's role in the Trump administration, he's been expected to get more government money for SpaceX's Starlink division even while his "Department of Government Efficiency" works on canceling contracts in order to reduce other federal spending. Recent reports suggest that Starlink could take over a $2 billion contract that Verizon has with the Federal Aviation Administration, though SpaceX has said it is not trying to take over an existing contract.In a Bloomberg opinion piece on Musk's conflicts of interest, columnist Thomas Black said that a "conflict too blatant to ignore has surfaced" with the FAA, which regulates SpaceX."Musk is pushing SpaceX's satellite broadband product, Starlink, as a quick solution to the FAA's antiquated air-traffic-control systems and is muscling in on a $2.4 billion contract already awarded to Verizon Communications Inc. to upgrade FAA's operations," Black wrote. "The move undercuts the whole argument that Musk has no need nor interest in taking advantage of his position as Trump's right-hand man to further his business interests, and even fans of DOGE should urge Musk to back off."There are additional paths for Starlink to get federal broadband funding. The Federal Communications Commission isn't involved in BEAD but could direct money to Starlink through universal service programs.Near the end of Trump's first term, the Ajit Pai-led FCC tentatively awarded Starlink $885.51 million in broadband funding from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF). But the Biden-era FCC decided not to distribute the funding in a ruling that said Starlink has "recognized capacity constraints" and may not be able to consistently provide low-latency service with the required download speeds of 100Mbps and upload speeds of 20Mbps.The newly appointed FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, said in 2023 that Starlink's canceled grant "fits the Biden Administration's pattern of regulatory harassment." Carr said the FCC was part of a "growing list of administrative agencies that are taking action against Elon Musk's businesses," and that the Biden administration was "choosing to prioritize its political and ideological goals at the expense of connecting Americans." Now that he is chairman, Carr could ensure that Starlink obtains future grant awards.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. 57 Comments

2025-03-06T20:37:04Z Read in app Militaries around the world are increasingly looking to AI and autonomous systems for future warfare, but there are ethical considerations that industry figures say can't be overlooked. US Army This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Military leaders argue AI has an important role in future warfare.There's been a shift in industry collaboration with the Department of Defense on AI and autonomy.AI in military tech must adhere to ethical frameworks, Snowpoint Ventures' Doug Philippone said.Nobody wants "killer robots," so making sure artificial intelligence systems don't go rogue is the "cost of doing business" in military tech, the founder of a venture capital firm said during a Wednesday discussion of AI technology on the battlefield."You have to be able to make AI that can work within an ethical framework, period," Doug Philippone, co-founder of Snowpoint Ventures, a venture capital firm that merges tech talent with defense issues, said during the Reagan Institute's National Security Innovation Base Summit."I don't think anybody is, you know, trying to have killer robots that are just running around by themselves," he said.Philippone explained that companies working in the military technology space that are worth making an investment in must have "thought through those problems and work in that ethical environment." He said these aren't limitations on development. Instead, they're requirements.Autonomous machines tend to cause a certain degree of apprehension, especially when such tech is applied to the DoD's "kill chain." While military leaders maintain that the systems are critical for future warfare, they also pose ethical concerns about what machine autonomy might ultimately mean.Times are changingThe defense-technology space appears to be experiencing a major shift in perspective. Last month, Google reversed course on a previous pledge against developing AI weapons, prompting criticism from some employees. The move seemed to reflect a greater willingness among more tech companies to work with the Defense Department on these technologies.Throughout Silicon Valley, "there's been a massive cultural shift from 'no way we're thinking about defending America' to 'let's get in the fight,'" said Thomas Robinson, the Chief Operating Officer of Domino Data Lab, a London-based AI solutions company.He said at Wednesday's event that "it is just a palpable difference between even a few years ago."There has been a sharp rise in smaller, more agile defense technology firms, such as Anduril, breaking into areas like uncrewed systems and autonomy, spurring a view among some defense tech leaders that the new Trump administration could create new DoD contract opportunities potentially worth hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars.Part of that cultural shift has spurred concerns around "revolving doors" of military officials heading to the venture capital tech realm after retirement, creating possible conflicts of interest. Former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall has emphasized AI and, during his tenure, flew in the X-62 VISTA piloted by artificial intelligence. Air Force photo by Richard Gonzales US military leaders have increasingly prioritized the development of AI capabilities in recent years, with some arguing that whichever side dominates this tech space will be the winner in future conflicts.Last year, then-Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said the US is locked in a technological arms race with China. AI is crucial, he said, and "China is moving forward aggressively."The Air Force has been experimenting with AI-piloted fighter aircraft, among other AI-enabled tools, as have other elements of the US military and American allies. "We're going to be in a world where decisions will not be made at human speed," Kendall said in January. "They're going to be made at machine speed."Certain areas of armed conflict, including cyber warfare and electronic warfare, are likely to be dominated by AI technologies that assess events happening at unimaginably fast speeds and unimaginably small dimensions.AI with guardrailsThat makes AI a top investment. During Wednesday's discussion, US congressional representative Ro Khanna of California expressed support for a proposal from 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, which called for shifting 15% of the massive Pentagon budget to advanced and emerging tech.As the nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth committed to prioritizing new technology, writing that "the Department of Defense budget must focus on lethality and innovation." He said that "technology is changing the battlefield."But ethical considerations remain key. Last year, senior Pentagon officials, for instance, discussed guardrails put in place to calm fears that it was "building killer robots in the basement."Understanding exactly how an AI tool's algorithms work will be important for ethical battlefield implementation, Philippone noted, and so will understanding the quality of data being absorbed otherwise, it's "garbage in, garbage out.""Whether it's Tyson's Chicken or it's the Department of the Navy, you want to be able to say 'this problem is important," he explained. "What is the data going in?""You understand how it flows through the algorithms, and then you understand the output in a way that is auditable, so you can understand how we got there," he said. "And then you codify those rules."Philippone said the opacity of some AI companies' proprietary knowledge is "BS" and a "black box approach" to technology. He said that companies should instead aim for a more transparent approach to artificial intelligence."I call it the glass box," he said. Understanding how the inner workings of a system work can help avoid hacks, he said, "this is really important from an ethics perspective and really understanding the process of your decision in your organization.""If you can't audit it," he said, "that leaves you susceptible."

2025-03-06T20:34:15Z Read in app A foldable iPhone would compete with offerings from Samsung, Huawei, and more. VCG/VCG via Getty Images This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Notable Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicts Apple's foldable iPhone could launch in late 2026 and cost over $2000.The first foldable iPhone would likely be a luxury offering, balancing Apple's lower-priced models.CEO Tim Cook has said "there's a lot of innovation left on the smartphone."Chatter around the long-rumored foldable iPhone is picking up.If it turns out to be true, the device sounds expensive and impressively high-end.To be clear, Apple hasn't confirmed plans to build a foldable iPhone. However, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of TF International Securities published a note on Wednesday with more details on a foldable iPhone design that he had previously heard about.Kuo, known for his Apple predictions and supply-chain sourcing, described the mysterious project as a "top-tier iPhone" with a "crease-free inner display" and an expected retail price of over $2000. The device could begin mass production in the last quarter of 2026, Kuo said.Such a price tag would make it more expensive than any of its predecessors and many MacBook models, but Kuo said the iPhone's "must-have" status would attract a strong demand for a premium device if the quality is up to par. The iPhone 16 Pro Max is currently the priciest smartphone Apple offers starting at $1199."A phone with such a high price point affords Apple a true higher-end luxury offering to balance out the push on lower-priced alternatives like the iPhone 16e," Dipanjan Chatterjee, a Forrester analyst, told Business Insider.Apple is currently facing fierce competition in the smartphone market as Chinese competitors offer lower-cost phones and high-end models with novel form factors. Huawei's tri-fold smartphone, the Mate XT. CFOTO/Future Publishing via Getty Images However, it's important to note that Apple could always change course and not release such a device. It's not unusual for Apple to put significant resources behind big projects and ultimately scrap them. The tech industry buzzed with talks of an Apple Car for years until the tech giant reportedly scrapped the project."I definitely believe it's under development. I'm less sure it'll ever see the light of day," Morningstar analyst William Kerwin told BI of the foldable iPhone.Kuo said the foldable iPhone would bring back Touch ID to potentially replace Face ID, but this time the button would be on the side of the device. It'd have a "book-style design" and a 7.8-inch inner display, he added. Apple is also pursuing a "crease-free" display, according to Kuo something other phone makers like Samsung are also chasing.Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.While both Bloomberg and The Information have reported that Apple is planning foldable screen devices, Kuo's predicted timeline should be taken with a grain of salt. A Kuo note in 2023 said that foldable iPads would hit shelves in 2024, for example, which has yet to materialize.A bet like a foldable iPhone, in an area where competitors like Samsung and Huawei have already ventured, is a "significant gamble" that could result in a device with low demand, similar to the $3500 Vision Pro, said Jacob Bourne, an analyst at BI sister company EMARKETER."Apple's better bet might be to focus on other emerging technologies rather than chasing a form factor that may not maintain its appeal long-term," Bourne told BI.Rumors of smart glasses, AI-powered home devices, and robotics swirled around Apple in 2024. Apple was late to the artificial intelligence race last year with Apple Intelligence launching months, or years, after competitors' similar software.CEO Tim Cook told investors that he felt "optimistic" about Apple's product pipeline during its fiscal first-quarter 2025 earnings call.When asked about the future of the iPhone's form factor and where Apple sees opportunities to innovate, Cook didn't go into detail but hinted that there's more to come."I think there's a lot of innovation left on the smartphone," Cook said.

What to do with Meghan Markle? Or, sorry Meghan Sussex, as in the Duchess of, which she informs Mindy Kaling she prefers to be called on her new Netflix lifestyle show, With Love, Meghan. It can be difficult to know what to think of Meghan Markle/Sussex from day to day. Meghan (lets keep things simple and stick to first names, shall we?) has been caught in such a bizarre public trap for so long that its hard to get an objective look at her. A lot of the criticism of her is rooted in racism and misogyny, levied in such bad faith that its easy to brush aside: the fury, for instance, over her decision to step down as an active member of the royal family in 2020. On the other hand, theres also criticism that is more worrisome if true, like all those disconcertingly consistent rumors that shes cruel to her employees.In the midst of this good faith/bad faith slurry a word Meghan apparently learns for the first time on With Love, Meghan theres more questionable stuff thats hard to evaluate, the criticism based on the sense that Meghans vibes are just kind of unpleasant. People think that she acts too perfect, that shes boring, that she relies too much on peoples goodwill from her time as a punching bag for the royal family without producing anything new to justify her and Prince Harrys multimillion-dollar media deals. Anyone is within their rights to say that a public figure rubs them the wrong way. All the same, the whole country just watched savvy crisis management firms bend public opinion against first Amber Heard and then Blake Lively, each time working with little more than a sense that both women were sometimes rude in public. Does someone like Meghan Markle (shoot, Sussex), who has had the British tabloids writing nonstop hate propaganda about her for eight years, really stand a chance?And yet: I see her tell guest Mindy Kaling that her name is Meghan Sussex now, and I cringe. I cringed my way through a lot of With Love, Meghan. I dont know if Meghan Sussex is a bad person, or an annoying one. Thats frankly not my business and probably not yours either. But right now, she is not doing a good job of being a good celebrity, and the show she hosts is boring. Since thats the capacity in which she is asking for our time and attention, thats all of our business.With Love, Meghan could use some Martha Stewart stylePart of the problem is that as a celebrity, Meghan has two clear antecedents: Princess Diana and Martha Stewart. Within the showcase of With Love, Meghan, she fails to invoke the spirit of either one with any particular skill.With Love, Meghan lends itself to Martha comparisons, since it is, like Marthas oeuvre before it, dedicated to elevated living. In each of the eight episodes, Meghan invites a friend or two over to the lush rented estate that serves as the shows set. She prepares a handmade hostess gift to welcome the friend in question bath salts, lavender towels, a lavish flower arrangement and then collaborates with her friends on cooking and serving a pleasant California-casual meal of home-grown garden ingredients. Sometimes she brings in an expert to help with the cooking (chefs Roy Choi and Alice Waters both make appearances), although they are not invited to stay for dinner. Should you be so moved, you can generally order a version of the craft Meghan does onscreen through her new lifestyle brand, As Ever. (Or, at any rate, see a preview the actual products dont yet appear to be available for sale.)Meghan is charming and breezy in front of the camera. Its soothing to fall into the trance of watching her capably harvest her own honey and then melt the beeswax into candles scented with essential oils, or cut caprese tea sandwiches into cunning little ladybug shapes.Yet over time, a sort of black hole in the center of the show begins to assert itself. There is no central expertise governing the elevated living that we are shown. In its place, there is only nonspecific pablum about the power of community.With respect, if the only thing Meghan is an expert on is crudits, then why are we watching her host a whole lifestyle show?When Meghan makes candles on camera, she is doing it for the first time, following directions she printed off the internet. She keeps sprinkling edible flowers on everything, even as she admits that they are tasteless. At one point Meghan laughingly protests that she is no professional chef, just comfortable in the kitchen. Shes right: she doesnt have the culinary range to anchor a true cooking show, and yet the entire show is built around watching her cook. Thats the thing that takes up the bulk of each episode which means, in practice, we watch her make the same very pretty and doubtless delicious crudit board at least five times over the course of eight half-hour-ish episodes. With respect, if the only thing Meghan is an expert on is crudits, then why are we watching her host a whole lifestyle show?Its here that the Martha Stewart comparisons are most unflattering. Martha brought a steely, neurotic perfectionism to everything she ever did, a kind of fanatical commitment to the belief that there was a correct way to do everything in ones home, and that only Martha could show you how. This was the quality that made people dislike her in the 90s, but its also the quality that made her so compelling on television. And it was grounded in true expertise. Martha really did renovate a house by hand and run her own catering company for years. She really did have exceptional skills that were both versatile and wide-ranging. Meghan has the skill set of being a beautiful and charming rich woman who probably hosts a very nice dinner party. As the premise for a TV show, the returns diminish.The problem with Princess Diana as a referenceMeghan does not invoke Princess Diana once over the course of With Love, Meghan. Which is surprising in a way, because Diana used to be a central part of Meghan and Harrys narrative. When Harry and Meghan stepped down from their positions as senior members of the royal family in 2020, they explained that they had to leave for the same reason Diana had to leave because it was impossible to stay, because no one with a free spirit could survive in the British royal family. The story Meghan and Harry were telling was that they were the redemption of Dianas legacy. Unlike Diana, though, they would survive, because Diana had been alone when she left, and Harry and Meghan had each other and the redemptive force of their love. It was a powerful story, and one that they told well. It has now been five years since Meghan and Harry stepped back from the royal family, and the story they have been telling about themselves needs to evolve and grow. By the time Diana left the royal family after her 1996 divorce from then-Prince Charles, she had found an impressive way to handle that problem.Dianas story is tragic and compelling for a lot of reasons: because she died so young and so pointlessly, because her marriage was so public and so unhappy, because she was so beautiful and her fairy-tale princess dreams went so wrong so fast. But what gave Dianas story its heft and gravitas, what makes her such a memorable figure in addition to a tragic one, is that she was able to harness her ability to provoke public attention to genuinely productive ends.Princess Diana shaking hands with a resident of an AIDS hospice house in Toronto, Canada. Tim Graham Photo Library via Getty ImagesDiana was photographed shaking ungloved hands with AIDS patients in 1987, at the height of the epidemic when lots of people believed you could catch AIDS through touch. She walked through a field of live land mines in Angola to campaign for a ban on land mines. She understood how to put herself at the center of a publicity stunt, and how to make that stunt pay dividends for overlooked human rights problems. Thats how she made her undeniable glamour matter, which in turn is why she is remembered as a martyr. Its almost impossible to tell what is her being inept, what is her being malicious, and what is the result of eight years of misogyny and racism poisoning the well for her.Meghan and Harry are both actively involved in important philanthropic causes. In 2022, they won the NAACP Presidents Award for their work on causes related to social justice and equity. They have campaigned for vaccine equity, for mental health, for women in the workplace. Yet aside from the choice to devote one of their Netflix shows to the Invictus Games, the sports competition for wounded veterans that is Harrys signature accomplishment, they have not tied philanthropic work to their public storytelling.Its little wonder that Meghan in particular has struggled there. So many people are waiting with bated breath to criticize her slightest move that she cant even publicly send gifts to victims of the LA fires without being accused of making it all about her. This is the problem we always run into, dealing with Meghan: its almost impossible to tell what is her being inept, what is her being malicious, and what is the result of eight years of misogyny and racism poisoning the well for her. In the end, it leaves Meghan in the same place: in front of the camera to hawk her new line of edible flower sprinkles, which you cant even order yet. Meghan is not Princess Diana or Martha Stewart. Shes not even Meghan Markle anymore. Yet after all those years of relentless tabloid criticism, all those media deals that never amounted to anything all that exciting, the fumbled business launches, she appears to be blocked when it comes to showing us exactly who Meghan Sussex is and why we should care about her. She does appear to make a lovely crudit platter, though.See More:

You cant rent a copy of Astro Bot though (Sony)Sony has brought its PlayStation 5 rental service to the UK, which offers temporary leases on consoles and other accessories like the PSVR2.Theres no denying that the PlayStation 5, and consoles in general, are an expensive piece of hardware. Even at its cheapest, it costs 389.99 and thats the version that comes without a disc drive, so youre sacrificing the ability to play physical games.The more powerful PS5 Pro is even costlier, at a whopping 700, which didnt seem to hurt its launch but could be a contributing factor to its dwindling sales in the US.Now Sony appears to be recognising that not everyone is able or willing to purchase a PlayStation 5, as it has established a new service here in the UK one that lets you temporarily rent out the console.How to rent a PlayStation 5 in the UKThe new rental service only went live this week on the PlayStation Direct website and applies to all models of the PlayStation 5, including the PS5 Pro.The cheapest option is for the digital-only PlayStation 5, which comes with a single controller and, if you commit to a 36-month rental, is 10.99 a month. At a grand total of 395.64, thats only slightly more expensive than buying the console outright.There are options for a 24-month rental at 11.99 a month and a 12-month rental at 16.49 a month. Otherwise, a single month on its own costs 21.95.More TrendingAside from all three PlayStation 5 models, the service is also offering leases on the PlayStation Portal handheld and PlayStation VR2 headset. Although both of these are clearly meant for established PlayStation 5 owners, since neither of them work without the console.How much is the new PlayStation rental service in the UK?The following items are whats available for rental on the PlayStation service. For simplicitys sake, we have listed how much they cost for a 36 month period, according to Sonys website:PlayStation 5 Pro console 18.95 per monthPlayStation 5 digital edition console 10.99 per monthPlayStation 5 console 11.99 per monthPlayStation 5 digital edition console with two DualSense controllers 13.49 per monthPlayStation 5 console with two DualSense controllers 15.49 per monthPlayStation Portal 6.49 per monthPlayStation VR2 Horizon Call Of The Mountain bundle 19.99 per monthPlayStation VR2 18.49 per monthDualSense Edge controller 7.49 per monthThe service launched in Japan last week and has quickly proven very successful. According to Automaton, its currently fully booked across the whole country, thanks to the launch of Monster Hunter Wilds where the series is exceedingly popular.Its a smart move by Sony, since even if the service doesnt convince customers to fully invest in a PlayStation 5, it can still make extra money from more casual gamers. Well have to wait and see if this is has any major effect on console sales, for better or worse.The one downside is that customers obviously have to purchase the games themselves. But its an ideal service for those who arent interested in long term commitments, like live service games, but are content to play through single-player titles like Spider-Man 2 or God Of War Ragnark only once. Are you tempted to rent a PlayStation 5? (Sony)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

A key federal watchdog is being stripped of its power to oversee potential fraud and abuse in online payment platforms just as Elon Musks site, X, attempts to become one. Late last year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureauwhich is tasked with rooting out financial malfeasanceissued a rule that expanded its purview to include digital payment apps like Venmo, PayPal, and Zelle. Just as the CFPB is responsible for overseeing traditional financial institutions, the agency had also sought to exert oversight over the increasingly popular peer-to-peer payment sites. Digital payments have gone from novelty to necessity and our oversight must reflect this reality, the CFPBs then-director Rohit Chopra said. The rule will help to protect consumer privacy, guard against fraud, and prevent illegal account closures. Since then, Trump has fired Chopra, and, amidst a broader rampage throughout the federal government, Musks DOGE has sought to shut down the CFPB. RIP CFPB, Musk posted in February, after having ransacked the agency. That same month, the newly installed CFPB chief, Russell Vought, enacted several policies that slowed the agencys operations to a crawl before telling all of the agencys staff members that they did not need to come in to work. The attack on CFPB has since run into legal roadblocks, but the effort to destroy the agency comes at an interesting juncture, given that Musks platform, X, recently entered into an arrangement with Visa to create a peer-to-peer digital payments system. The new feature, which is still in the works, would allow the sites users to transfer money and make payments in a Venmo-like fashion. Now, Republican lawmakers have sought to cut off the CFPB from monitoring such online payments. On Wednesday, the U.S. Senate voted on a resolution that would roll back the previously introduced CFPB rule that gave it the power to monitor online payment platforms. The resolution still needs to be approved by the House, but the House is also currently controlled by Republicans.Congressional acquiescence to policies that would benefit Musks companies is particularly worrying, given the fact that Musk has threatened to use his gargantuan fortune to primary (or, rather, unseat) any lawmaker that does not go along with his and President Trumps agenda. Given the immense power and influence Musk has over the current administration, its also exceedingly difficult to disentangle what is Trumps agenda and what is Musks agenda. The Verge reports that a number of Democrats have attempted to push back on the GOP-led gutting of the CFPB. On Wednesday, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), and Senator Adam Schiff (D-California) wrote to Doug Collins, the Acting Director of the Office of Government Ethics, demanding to know whether the conflicts of interest inherent to Musks role in government were being probed.Notably, the CFPB has taken steps in recent years to protect consumers from fraud on digital payment apps and collects proprietary information from the digital payment industry, Warren and Schiff wrote. Mr. Musk is also the founder and CEO of Tesla, which offers customers the option of working with Tesla to finance their auto purchases. The CFPB plays a critical role in supervising the auto lending industry and protecting consumers from corporate malfeasance and scams. Therefore, actions by Mr. Musk and DOGE at the CFPB have the potential to directly benefit X, Visa, and Teslaand by extension, Mr. Musk. Weirdly enough, the effort to destroy CFPB has also inspired outrage across the aisle, specifically from rightwing influencer Laura Loomer. Loomer, who is best known for spouting conspiracy theories online, recently took to social media to bash the GOPs attack on the regulatory agency which, she correctly pointed out, is responsible for stopping debankingthe supposedly discriminatory phenomenon in which a financial institution can decide to blacklist certain individuals or businesses. The crypto community, in particular, has claimed that debanking is a huge problem for them. Every Senate Republican with the exception of Senator Josh Hawley @HawleyMO just voted to LEGALIZE DEBANKING, Loomer recently wrote on X. Now apps like PayPal can get away with banning you for your political views thanks to Senate Republicans who just voted to repeal a rule that made that illegal in Dec 2024. Donald Trumps First Buddy Elon Musk replied to Loomer with a single word: Really?