Bryan from Tech Yes City tested Ryzen 7000/9000 processors on a few motherboards, revealing a difference in how ASRock motherboards supply SoC voltage in contrast to others. YouTuber Tech Yes City Demonstrates the Difference Between Motherboards from ASRock and Other Vendors; Analysis Indicates Both CPUs and ASRock Boards Cause Physical Damage If you are aware of the reports of dead Ryzen 9000 CPUs, particularly the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, nothing conclusive has been found regarding the issues that are causing these deaths. Perhaps this is one of the first investigations that shed some light on the issue and might help users understand what is actually causing CPU deaths. A few days ago, a popular tech YouTuber, Tech Yes City, reported his first dead Ryzen 9 9950X CPU on an ASRock X870 Steel Legend motherboard. This isn't the first time we have seen a Ryzen 9000 CPU dying on an ASRock motherboard, but there are actually nearly 200 such reports, most of them on Reddit. Bryan tried to find out what actually causes this, more on the ASRock motherboards than on boards from other vendors, and as per his investigation, there is a difference in how the ASRock motherboards handle the SoC voltage request from the CPU. SoC voltage is basically what the SoC section of the CPU needs for operation, and in most cases, it is static. It may fluctuate occasionally, but in the case of ASRock motherboards such as the ASRock X870E Taichi Lite with Ryzen 9800X3D installed, the SoC voltage kept fluctuating all the time. Even though the fluctuation isn't that significant, the upper limit is somewhat higher than what is considered the maximum limit. We can see that the SoC voltage in both cases (Ryzen 7 7700 and Ryzen 9800X3D installed) exceeds 1.250V and comes close to 1.270V. This is higher than what motherboards from other vendors could supply to the SoC of the CPU, and remains mostly near 1.20V, except for the ASUS X870E Crosshair Hero, which has by default added another 50 mV to add more stability. Nonetheless, it doesn't budge and remains constant all the time while the ASRock motherboard keeps fluctuating, which may result in permanent CPU damage, as we have seen before. Nonetheless, it should be kept in mind that it is the CPU that "dictates" how much SoC voltage is needed, and the deaths appear to be the result of how both CPU and motherboard handle the SoC request. Surely, this needs even deeper investigation as it isn't necessarily the only cause of CPU damage. Till then, ASRock might need to fix this through a BIOS update, but in case you want to mitigate the risk yourself, you will have to "enable" the Uncore Voltage from the BIOS. Deal of the Day

Check Out Jupiter’s Stunning Auroras, Which Are Hundreds of Times Brighter Than Earth’s, in the James Webb Telescope’s Latest Images The infrared views, captured in 2023, shed light on the giant planet’s atmosphere and magnetosphere—but they also reveal something unexpected These observations of Jupiter’s auroras (shown on the left of the above image) were captured with NASA's James Webb Space Telescope’s Near-Infrared Camera on December 25, 2023. NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, Ricardo Hueso (UPV), Imke de Pater (UC Berkeley), Thierry Fouchet (Observatory of Paris), Leigh Fletcher (University of Leicester), Michael H. Wong (UC Berkeley), Joseph DePasquale (STScI), Jonathan Nichols (University of Leicester) In May 2024, powerful solar activity triggered jaw-dropping northern lights much farther south than usual, turning the sky mesmerizing shades of pink, green and purple over wide areas of the planet. But on Jupiter, auroras are hundreds of times brighter. Now, almost exactly a year since one of Earth’s most impressive light shows, researchers have released brilliant new images of Jupiter’s auroras, captured by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) on December 25, 2023. As detailed in a study published Monday in the journal Nature Communications, the images literally shed new light on the magnetosphere and atmosphere of our solar system’s largest planet. “What a Christmas present it was—it just blew me away!” study lead author Jonathan Nichols, a space physicist from the University of Leicester in England, says in a NASA statement. “We wanted to see how quickly the auroras change, expecting them to fade in and out ponderously, perhaps over a quarter of an hour or so. Instead, we observed the whole auroral region fizzing and popping with light, sometimes varying by the second.” Webb Captures Jupiter's Aurora Watch on On Earth, auroras occur when the sun pelts our planet with charged particles ejected in solar storms. These particles interact with gases in our upper atmosphere, making them glow in different colors. Earth’s magnetic sphere actually deflects these charged particles toward the planet’s poles—that’s why the resulting auroras are called the northern or southern lights. While solar storms contribute to auroras on Jupiter, the giant planet’s magnetic field also captures additional charged particles, such as those ejected by volcanoes on its moon Io, according to the statement. These particles get accelerated toward the poles at extreme speeds, then crash into the atmosphere, causing its gases to glow. “Think northern lights, but way bigger!” reads an X post from NASA. The JWST previously documented Jupiter’s auroras in 2022. Nichols and his colleagues analyzed infrared light emitted by a positively charged molecule called the trihydrogen cation (H3+), which can form in auroras. They revealed that the molecule’s emission fluctuates more than they’d previously theorized—an observation that, with more research, will provide insight into how Jupiter’s upper atmosphere heats up and cools down. NASA's James Webb Space Telescope's recent images of the auroras on Jupiter NASA, ESA, CSA, Jonathan Nichols (University of Leicester), Mahdi Zamani (ESA / Webb) The team also found something else unexpected: When they captured images at the same time in ultraviolet light with the Hubble Space Telescope, they realized the brightest infrared light imaged by JWST didn’t correspond with Hubble’s ultraviolet version. They thought the Hubble telescope would show evidence of the aurora-creating, high-energy cosmic particles slamming into Jupiter’s atmosphere—but it didn’t. “What we’re seeing is an incredibly bright afterglow with not much evidence of the original impact,” Nichols tells Mashable’s Elisha Sauers. “The explanation currently eludes us.” This suggests Jupiter had auroras without an onslaught of high-energy particles. Instead, its auroras seen by JWST might have come from a high number of very low-energy particles raining down on the atmosphere, “which was previously thought to be impossible,” Nichols adds in the statement. If that’s not the explanation, it suggests Jupiter’s atmosphere may have some dynamics that aren’t fully understood yet. Moving forward, the team plans to continue investigating this conundrum with more JWST observations and comparisons to data from NASA’s Juno spacecraft. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Illustration of norovirus particlesJ Marshall/Tribaleye Images/Alamy A norovirus vaccine pill that cuts the risk of infection could be available in a few years, after it showed promise in a trial where people were intentionally exposed to the virus. The highly contagious virus infects the stomach and intestines, causing vomiting and diarrhoea that typically resolve within a few days. “Billions are lost from the economy globally every year because of the lost days of work and hospitalisation,” says Sarah Caddy at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. Advertisement Sean Tucker at biotech company Vaxart in San Francisco and his colleagues previously developed an oral vaccine that boosted levels of IgA antibodies that can block norovirus from entering cells, suggesting it could prevent infections. Now, the researchers have tested this on 141 people aged between 18 and 49, about half of whom took the pill, while the others took a placebo. A month later, all the participants intentionally swallowed a high dose of the GI.1 strain of norovirus in liquid form, while in quarantine. “In the real-world setting, you need 10 to 100 viral particles to be infected, and we use 1 million particles,” says Tucker. This helped to ensure enough people got infected, he says. In the following week, 82 per cent of those in the placebo group became infected, but only 57 per cent of vaccinated participants did. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday. Sign up to newsletter “I think most individuals would be interested in taking [the vaccine] if you can reduce your risk by around [25 percentage points] and avoid getting really debilitating symptoms,” says Caddy, who wasn’t involved in the study. The team also found that vaccinated participants shed substantially less virus in their stool and vomit than those who took the placebo. This suggests the vaccine could slow the spread of the virus, although that needs to be directly tested, says Caddy. In another analysis, the scientists confirmed that the vaccine probably works by boosting levels of protective IgA antibodies in saliva and in the gut, blood and nose. However, it is unclear how long this protection would last. Further work is also needed to verify the findings in young children and older adults, who are especially at risk of being hospitalised, says Caddy. Most noroviruses that infect humans belong to two groups, known as GI and GII. Based on unpublished work by his team, the GI.1 vaccine would probably protect against other closely related GI variants, says Tucker. The team is also developing a vaccine that can protect against GI and GII viruses. If all goes well, Tucker hopes the GI.1 vaccine could be rolled out in two to three years. Journal reference:Science Translational Medicine DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.adh9906 Topics:

We’re happy to announce that we’ve launched a new technical e-book, Create modular game architecture in Unity with ScriptableObjects, which provides best practices from professional developers for deploying ScriptableObjects in production.Along with the e-book, you can download a demo project from GitHub inspired by classic ball and paddle arcade game mechanics. The demo shows how ScriptableObjects can help you create components that are testable and scalable, while also being designer-friendly. Although a game like this could be built with far fewer lines of code, this demo shows ScriptableObjects in action.This post explains the benefits of ScriptableObjects, but doesn’t cover the basics or general coding in Unity. If you’re new to programming in Unity, head over to Unity Learn, which offers helpful introductory tutorials. The first chapter in the e-book also offers a solid primer.Let’s look at six ways you can benefit from using ScriptableObjects in your projects. Want to know more? All of these examples are explored further in the e-book and demo project.Although many of the techniques shared here can also be achieved using C# classes, one of the main benefits of ScriptableObjects is the accessibility to artists and designers. They can use ScriptableObjects to configure and apply game logic in a project without having to edit the code.The Editor makes it convenient to view and edit ScriptableObjects, enabling designers to set up gameplay data without heavy support from the developer team. This also applies to game logic, such as applying behavior to an NPC by adding a ScriptableObject (explained in the patterns below).Storing data and logic on a single MonoBehaviour can result in time-consuming merge conflicts if two people change different parts of the same Prefab or scene. By breaking up shared data into smaller files and assets with ScriptableObjects, designers can build gameplay in parallel with developers, instead of having to wait for the latter to finish setting up the gameplay in code before testing it.Issues can arise when colleagues with different roles access the game code and assets at the same time. With ScriptableObjects, the programmer can control what part of the project is editable in the Editor. Additionally, using ScriptableObjects to organize your code leads naturally to a codebase that’s more modular and efficient to test.Christo Nobbs, a senior technical game designer who specializes in systems game design and Unity (C#), contributed to The Unity game designer playbook, and is the main author of a blog post series on designing game systems in Unity. His posts, “Systems that create ecosystems: Emergent game design” and “Unpredictably fun: The value of randomization in game design” provide interesting examples of how designers can use ScriptableObjects.Modularity is a general software principle which can be implemented in C# without using ScriptableObjects. But, as mentioned above, ScriptableObjects help promote clean coding practices by separating data from logic, which is a first step toward modular game code. This separation means it’s easier to make changes without causing unintended side effects, and improves testability.ScriptableObjects excel at storing static data, making them handy for configuring static gameplay values like items or NPC stats, character dialogue, and much more. Because ScriptableObjects are saved as an asset, they persist outside of game mode, making it possible to use them for loading in a static configuration that dynamically changes at runtime.While changes to ScriptableObject data do persist in the Editor, it’s important to note that they are not designed for saving game data. In that case, it’s better to use a serialization system, such as JSON, XML, or a binary solution if performance is critical.MonoBehaviours carry extra overhead since they require a GameObject – and by default a Transform – to act as a host. This means you need to create a lot of unused data before storing a single value. A ScriptableObject slims down this memory footprint and drops the GameObject and Transform. It also stores data at the project level, which is helpful if you need to access the same data from multiple scenes.It’s common to have many GameObjects which rely on duplicate data that does not need to change at runtime. Rather than having this duplicate local data on each GameObject, you can funnel it into a ScriptableObject. Each of the objects stores a reference to the shared data asset, rather than copying the data itself. This can provide significant performance improvements in projects with thousands of objects.In software design, this is an optimization known as the flyweight pattern. Restructuring your code in this way using ScriptableObjects avoids copying values and reduces your memory footprint. Check out our e-book, Level up your code with game programming patterns to learn more about using design patterns in Unity.A good example of how ScriptableObjects can simplify your code is to use them as enums for comparison operations. The ScriptableObject can represent a category or item type, such as a special damage effect – cold, heat, electrical, magic, etc.If your application requires an inventory system to equip gameplay items, ScriptableObjects can represent item types or weapon slots. The fields in the Inspector then function as a drag-and-drop interface for setting them up.Using ScriptableObjects as enums becomes more interesting when you want to extend them and add more data. Unlike normal enums, ScriptableObjects can have extra fields and methods. There’s no need to have a separate lookup table or correlate with a new array of data.While traditional enums have a fixed set of values, ScriptableObject enums can be created and modified at runtime, allowing you to add or remove values as needed.If you have a long list of enum values without explicit numbering, inserting or removing an enum can change their order. This reordering can introduce subtle bugs or unintended behavior. ScriptableObject-based enums don’t have these issues. You can delete or add to your project without having to change the code every time.Suppose you want to make an item equippable in an RPG. You could append an extra boolean field to the ScriptableObject to do that. Are certain characters not allowed to hold certain items? Are some items magical or do they have special abilities? ScriptableObject-based enums can do that.Because you can create methods on a ScriptableObject, they are as useful for containing logic or actions as they are for holding data. Moving logic from your MonoBehaviour into a ScriptableObject enables you to use the latter as a delegate object, making the behavior more modular.If you need to perform specific tasks, you can encapsulate their algorithms into their own objects. The original Gang of Four refers to this general design as the strategy pattern. The example below shows how to make the strategy pattern more useful by using an abstract class to implement EnemyAI. The result is several derived ScriptableObjects with different behavior, which then becomes a pluggable behavior since each asset is interchangeable. You just drag and drop the ScriptableObject of choice into the MonoBehaviour.For a detailed example showing how to use ScriptableObjects to drive behavior, watch the video series Pluggable AI with ScriptableObjects. These sessions demonstrate a finite state machine-based AI system that can be configured using ScriptableObjects for states, actions, and transitions between those states.A common challenge in larger projects is when multiple GameObjects need to share data or states by avoiding direct references between these objects. Managing these dependencies at scale can require significant effort and is often a source of bugs. Many developers use singletons – one global instance of a class that survives scene loading. However, singletons introduce global states and make unit testing difficult. If you’re working with a Prefab that references a singleton, you’ll end up importing all of its dependencies just to test an isolated function. This makes your code less modular and efficient to debug.One solution is to use ScriptableObject-based events to help your GameObjects communicate. In this case, you are using ScriptableObjects to implement a form of the observer design pattern, where a subject broadcasts a message to one or more loosely decoupled observers. Each observing object can react independently from the subject but is unaware of the other observers. The subject can also be referred to as the “publisher” or “broadcaster” and the observers as “subscribers” or “listeners.”You can implement the observer pattern with MonoBehaviours or C# objects. While this is already common practice in Unity development, a script-only approach means your designers will rely on the programming team for every event needed during gameplay.At first glance, it appears that you’ve added a layer of overhead to the observer pattern, but this structure offers some advantages. Since ScriptableObjects are assets, they are accessible to all objects in your hierarchy and don’t disappear on scene loading.Easy, persistent access to certain resources is why many developers use singletons. ScriptableObjects can often provide the same benefits without introducing as many unnecessary dependencies.In ScriptableObject-based events, any object can serve as publisher (which broadcasts the event), and any object can serve as a subscriber (which listens for the event). The ScriptableObject sits in the middle and helps relay the signal, acting like a centralized intermediary between the two.One way to think about this is as an “event channel.” Imagine the ScriptableObject as a radio tower that has any number of objects listening for its signals. An interested MonoBehaviour can subscribe to the event channel and respond when something happens.The demo shows how the observer pattern helps you set up game events for UI, sounds, and scoring.At runtime, you’ll often need to track a list of GameObjects or components in your scene. For example, a list of enemies is something you’d need to frequently access, but it’s also a dynamic list that changes as more enemies are spawned or defeated. The singleton offers easy global access, but it has several drawbacks. Instead of using a singleton, consider storing data on a ScriptableObject as a “Runtime Set.” The ScriptableObject instance appears at the project level, which means it can store data that’s available to any object from any scene, offering similar global access. Since the data is located on an asset, its public list of items is accessible at any time.In this use case, you get a specialized data container that maintains a public collection of elements but also provides basic methods to add to and remove from the collection. This can reduce the need for singletons and improve testability and modularity.Reading data directly from a ScriptableObject is also more optimal than searching the Scene Hierarchy with a find operation like Object.FindObjectOfType or GameObject.FindWithTag. Depending on your use case and the size of your hierarchy, these are relatively expensive methods that can be inefficient for per-frame updates.There are several ScriptableObjects frameworks which offer more use cases than these six scenarios. Some teams decide to use ScriptableObjects extensively, while others limit their use to loading in static data and separating logic from data. Ultimately, the needs of your project will determine how you use them.Create modular game architecture in Unity with ScriptableObjects is the third guide in our series for intermediate to advanced Unity programmers. Each guide, authored by experienced programmers, provides best practices for topics that are important to development teams.Create a C# style guide: Write cleaner code that scales assists you with developing a style guide to help unify your approach to creating a more cohesive codebase.Level up your code with game programming patternshighlights best practices for using the SOLID principles and common programming patterns to create scalable game code architecture in your Unity project.We created this series to provide actionable tips and inspiration to our experienced creators, but they aren’t rule books. There are many ways to structure your Unity project and what might seem like a natural fit for one application may not be for another. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of each recommendation, tip, and pattern with your colleagues before deploying it.Find more advanced guides and articles on the Unity best practices hub.

The Department of Commerce (DOC) has slammed the brakes on the sweeping “AI Diffusion Rule,” yanking it just a day before it was due to bite. Meanwhile, officials have laid down the gauntlet with stricter measures to control semiconductor exports.The AI Diffusion Rule, a piece of regulation cooked up under the Biden administration, was staring down a compliance deadline of May 15th. According to the folks at the DOC, letting this rule roll out would have been like throwing a spanner in the works of American innovation.DOC officials argue the rule would have saddled tech firms with “burdensome new regulatory requirements” and, perhaps more surprisingly, risked souring America’s relationships on the world stage by effectively “downgrading” dozens of countries “to second-tier status.”The nuts and bolts of this reversal will see the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), part of the DOC, publishing a notice in the Federal Register to make the rescission official. While this particular rule is heading for the shredder, the official line is that a replacement isn’t off the table; one will be cooked up and served “in the future.”Jeffery Kessler, the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security, has told BIS enforcement teams to stand down on anything concerning the now-canned AI Diffusion Rule.“The Trump Administration will pursue a bold, inclusive strategy to American AI technology with trusted foreign countries around the world, while keeping the technology out of the hands of our adversaries,” said Kessler.“At the same time, we reject the Biden Administration’s attempt to impose its own ill-conceived and counterproductive AI policies on the American people.”What was this ‘AI Diffusion Rule’ anyway?You might be wondering what this “AI Diffusion Rule” actually was, and why it’s causing such a stir. The rule wasn’t just a minor tweak; it was the Biden administration’s bid to get a tight grip on how advanced American tech – everything from the AI chips themselves to cloud computing access and even the crucial AI ‘model weights’ – flowed out of the US to the rest of the world.The idea, at least on paper, was to walk a tightrope: keep the US at the front of the AI pack, protect national security, and still champion American tech exports.But how did it plan to do this? The rule laid out a fairly complex playbook:A tiered system for nations: Imagine a global league table for AI access. Countries were split into three groups. Tier 1 nations, America’s closest allies like Japan and South Korea, would have seen hardly any new restrictions. Tier 3, unsurprisingly, included countries already under arms embargoes – like China and Russia – who were already largely banned from getting US chips and would face the toughest controls imaginable.The squeezed middle: This is where things got sticky. A large swathe of countries, including nations like Mexico, Portugal, India, and even Switzerland, found themselves in Tier 2. For them, the rule meant new limits on how many advanced AI chips they could import, especially if they were looking to build those super-powerful, large computing clusters essential for AI development.Caps and close scrutiny: Beyond the tiers, the rule introduced actual caps on the quantity of high-performance AI chips most countries could get their hands on. If anyone wanted to bring in chips above certain levels, particularly for building massive AI data centres, they’d have faced incredibly strict security checks and reporting duties.Controlling the ‘brains’: It wasn’t just about the hardware. The rule also aimed to regulate the storage and export of advanced AI model weights – essentially the core programming and learned knowledge of an AI system. There were strict rules about not storing these in arms-embargoed countries and only allowing their export to favoured allies, and even then, only under tight conditions.Tech as a bargaining chip: Underneath it all, the framework was also a bit of a power play. The US aimed to use access to its coveted AI technology as a carrot, encouraging other nations to sign up to American standards and safeguards if they wanted to keep the American chips and software flowing.The Biden administration had a clear rationale for these moves. They wanted to stop adversaries, with China being the primary concern, from getting their hands on advanced AI that could be turned against US interests or used for military purposes. It was also about cementing US leadership in AI, making sure the most potent AI systems and the infrastructure to run them stayed within the US and its closest circle of allies, all while trying to keep US tech exports competitive.However, the AI Diffusion Rule and broader plan didn’t exactly get a standing ovation. Far from it.Major US tech players – including giants like Nvidia, Microsoft, and Oracle – voiced strong concerns. They argued that the rule, instead of protecting US interests, would stifle innovation, bog businesses down in red tape, and ultimately hurt the competitiveness of American companies on the global stage. Crucially, they also doubted it would effectively stop China from accessing advanced AI chips through other means.And it wasn’t just industry. Many countries weren’t thrilled about being labelled “second-tier,” a status they felt was not only insulting but also risked undermining diplomatic ties. There was a real fear it could push them to look for AI technology elsewhere, potentially even from China, which was hardly the intended outcome.This widespread pushback and the concerns about hampering innovation and international relations are exactly what the current Department of Commerce is pointing to as reasons for today’s decisive action to scrap the rule.Fresh clampdown on AI chip exportsIt wasn’t just about scrapping old rules, though. The BIS also rolled out a new playbook to tighten America’s grip on AI chip exports, showing they’re serious about guarding the nation’s tech crown jewels. The latest clampdown includes:A spotlight on Huawei Ascend chips: New guidance makes it crystal clear: using Huawei Ascend chips anywhere on the planet is now a no-go under US export controls. This takes direct aim at one of China’s big players in the AI hardware game.Heads-up on Chinese AI model training: A stark warning has gone out to the public and the industry about the serious consequences if US AI chips are used to train or run Chinese AI models. The worry? That American tech could inadvertently supercharge AI systems that might not have US interests at heart.Guidance on shoring up supply chains: US firms are getting a fresh batch of advice on how to batten down the hatches on their supply chains to stop controlled tech from being siphoned off to unapproved destinations or users.The Department of Commerce is selling today’s double-whammy – axing the rule and beefing up export controls – as essential to “ensure that the United States will remain at the forefront of AI innovation and maintain global AI dominance.” It’s a strategy that looks to clear the runway for domestic tech growth while building higher fences around critical AI technologies, especially advanced semiconductors.This policy pivot will likely get a thumbs-up from some quarters in the US tech scene, particularly those who were getting sweaty palms about the AI Diffusion Rule and the red tape it threatened. On the flip side, the even tougher export controls – especially those zeroing in on China and firms like Huawei – show that trade policy is still very much a frontline tool in the high-stakes global chess game over who leads in tech.The whisper of a “replacement rule” down the line means this isn’t the final chapter in the saga of how to manage the AI revolution. For now, it seems the game plan is to clear the path for homegrown innovation and be much more careful about who gets to play with America’s latest breakthroughs.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.

As long as you keep up with regular cleaning and follow the recommended maintenance tips we’ve rounded up here, you shouldn’t have any issues.Is it expensive to maintain quartz countertops?According to Booth, not in the slightest. “Quartz is nonporous,” she says. “So there is no need to routinely seal the surface.” In comparison, countertops such as quartzite, granite, and marble do need to be routinely sealed to maintain their appearance. That being said, you may face some hefty costs if you don’t follow the general recommendations for preventing long-term damage to your countertops, like avoiding extreme heat or scratching them with knives or other sharp objects.Can you use Clorox wipes on quartz countertops?The short answer? Probably not. The long answer? Right this way. Many Clorox wipes are actually bleach-free. You can use them occasionally for deep cleaning, but they shouldn’t be the first thing you grab. You shouldn’t be using Clorox wipes daily, or even often, on quartz countertops because they have citric acid, which can be very harsh on your counter. Long-term use could lead to discoloration of your quartz surface.Can I use Windex on quartz countertops?Windex is considered a base and has a pretty high pH level, which means it could be damaging to quartz. Some professionals say it’s okay to use in small quantities, while others warn against it. For the safest and most sure option to keeping your quartz clean, skip Windex and opt for a mild cleaner like dish soap.In general you should be very careful when using this cleaner. Some Windex formulas rely on the cleaning agent ammonia, which can create very harmful mixtures when combined with bleach—like sodium hypochlorite. This combo can create chloramine vapor, a noxious fume that can irritate your eyes, nose, throat, and airway. In some cases, large quantities can even be fatal.What should you not clean quartz countertops with?In addition to avoiding Clorox and Windex, you shouldn’t use anything with abrasive or harsh chemicals to clean your stone countertops. That means skipping bleach, degreaser, oven cleaner, scouring pads, or other alkaline cleaning solutions or disinfecting formulas with high pH levels. These highly acidic cleaners will damage the countertop and ruin its integrity. If you‘re using them on other items, make sure the spray doesn’t land on the stone surface.To prevent stubborn gunk from building up, it’s best to stick to mild detergents, soapy water and gentle cleaning products. Keep up with a daily maintenance routine rather than trying to address the dirt with a deep cleaning method or harsh cleaners later on. If you happen to have accidents involving nail polish or permanent marker stains, try DIY methods, like using watered-down lemon juice or a dose of rubbing alcohol in a spray bottle.It’s also important to keep quartz surfaces safe from hot pans because they are sensitive to extreme heat. You can use trivets and hot pads to protect granite countertops (which have quartz) from off-the-stove dishes. For food prep that uses sharp objects, especially knives for chopping, cutting boards protect the surface from scratches and divots. And it’s always best to keep coasters around for hot mugs.How to remove stubborn stains from quartz countertopsTo prevent stubborn gunk from building up on quartz countertops, it’s best to stick to mild detergents, soapy water, and gentle cleaning products. Keep up with a daily maintenance routine rather than trying to go back in with a deep cleaning method or harsh cleaners later on. As a general rule of thumb for any stains you come across, Booth recommends first trying mild cleaning solutions before reaching for the stronger, harsher options; it’s better to start slow than risk causing irreversible damage. “I suggest starting with mild dish soap and a microfiber cloth,” she says. “Rub the stain in circular motion and then rinse with clean water.”

A new global phishing threat called "Meta Mirage" has been uncovered, targeting businesses using Meta's Business Suite. This campaign specifically aims at hijacking high-value accounts, including those managing advertising and official brand pages. Cybersecurity researchers at CTM360 revealed that attackers behind Meta Mirage impersonate official Meta communications, tricking users into handing over sensitive details like passwords and security codes (OTP). The scale of this operation is alarming. Researchers have already identified over 14,000 malicious URLs, a concerning majority of which—nearly 78%—were not blocked by browsers at the time the report was published. Cybercriminals cleverly hosted fake pages leveraging trusted cloud platforms like GitHub, Firebase, and Vercel, making it harder to spot the scams. This method aligns closely with recent findings from Microsoft, which highlighted similar abuse of cloud hosting services to compromise Kubernetes applications, emphasizing how attackers frequently leverage trusted platforms to evade detection. The attackers deploy fake alerts about policy violations, account suspensions, or urgent verification notices. These messages, sent via email and direct messages, look convincing because they mimic official communications from Meta, often appearing urgent and authoritative. This tactic mirrors techniques observed in the recent Google Sites phishing campaign, which used authentic-looking Google-hosted pages to deceive users. Two main methods are being used: Credential Theft: Victims enter passwords and OTPs into realistic-looking fake websites. The attackers deliberately trigger fake error messages, causing users to re-enter their details, ensuring accurate and usable stolen information. Cookie Theft: Scammers also steal browser cookies, allowing them continued access to compromised accounts even without passwords. These compromised accounts don't just affect individual businesses—they're often exploited to run malicious advertising campaigns, further amplifying damage, similar to tactics observed in the PlayPraetor malware campaign that hijacked social media accounts for fraudulent ad distribution. CTM360's report also outlines a structured and calculated approach used by the attackers to maximize effectiveness. Victims are initially contacted with mild, non-alarming notifications that progressively escalate in urgency and severity. Initial notices might mention generic policy violations, while subsequent messages warn of immediate suspensions or permanent deletion of accounts. This incremental escalation induces anxiety and urgency, driving users to act quickly without thoroughly verifying the authenticity of these messages. To protect against this threat, CTM360 recommends: Only use official devices to manage business social media accounts. Use separate business-only email addresses. Enable Two-Factor Authentication (2FA). Regularly review account security settings and active sessions. Train staff to recognize and report suspicious messages. This widespread phishing campaign underscores the importance of vigilance and proactive security measures to protect valuable online assets. Found this article interesting? This article is a contributed piece from one of our valued partners. Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post.

Trump’s tariffs are causing Sony to consider raising prices for its hardware products, including the PlayStation 5. In an earnings presentation, the company warned of potential price hikes since Sony expects to face 100 billion yen ($683 million) in costs from Trump’s tariffs for the next fiscal year. “We may pass [the tariffs] on to the price," Sony Group CFO Lin Tao said in translated remarks. The disc edition of the PS5 Slim currently starts at $499 while the PS5 Pro goes for $699. (Credit: Sony)The company was already stockpiling "strategic inventory" in the US prior to the tariffs taking effect. But eventually, Sony will run out of stock, forcing it to potentially import more tariff-laden PS5 units from China, where the company manufactures the console. Recommended by Our EditorsThat said, Sony executives noted that Trump may lower his tariffs on China even more. The US had placed a cumulative 145% duty on Chinese imports, including video game consoles. But over the weekend, the White House reached an agreement to de-escalate the trade conflict and temporarily bring the tariff rate down to 30%.   Still, Trump’s trade policy is forcing Sony to consider manufacturing PS5 hardware in the US to avoid paying tariffs down the line. “Gaming like consoles, these hardwares of course can be produced locally,” said Sony Group CEO Hiroki Totoki. “I think that would be an efficient strategy.”“Whether it’s going to be manufactured in the US or not, it needs to be considered going forward,” he added. This comes after Microsoft hikes Xbox prices globally. Without naming Trump, Microsoft blamed the price increase on market conditions and the rising cost of game development. But analysts suspect the company rolled out the price increase internationally to cushion the blow of the tariff impact for the US market.

It comes as no surprise that online scraper bots are scouring the web looking for content to train generative AI (genAI) models, causing massive bandwidth charges to enterprises who told them not to crawl their sites. What is surprising is the world of large language model (LLM) makers’ use of unattributed browsers and other means of escaping responsibility. As bad as that situation is, something worse lies below it. And it’s an inequity that’s been around for decades, starting in the earliest days of the web. The problem is simple, but the answer is not: enterprises have had business reasons to ignore the issue for years.  Since the earliest days of the web, hosting companies have charged enterprises for bandwidth based on usage. That seems fair enough. The problem is that those same companies have limited control over their bandwidth use — and limited finite budgets.  In other words, corporate budgets for bandwidth are based on typical activity. But then someone says something on social media that post goes viral, readers flock to a site in a massive way, and bandwidth costs soar. Are enterprises really now on the hook for an infinite amount of money? Here’s where things get complicated. Businesses of all types tolerated this situation with the expectation that a big jump in traffic would generate big jump in revenue. So, they didn’t object to bandwidth cost increases. Then came search engine spiders. (Note: Spiders, browsers and crawlers are interchangeable. They are also all bots.) Sure, they ate up bandwidth, but again, the assumption was that search traffic would be beneficial — it brought in customers and new prospects.  For the most part, search spiders respected robots.txt instructions about which sites they could visit and which pages on those sites they could crawl. Because search providers knew most sites welcomed their visits, they more or less respected the restrictions.  That brings us to today, when we find that the companies behind LLMs — through various sneaky mechanisms — do not respect those do not enter signs. And their crawlers don’t deliver the perceived value of human visitors or even search engine spiders. Instead of bringing with them new prospects to an enterprise site, they steal data, use it for their own apps and then sell it to others.  Website owners get no meaningful benefit and higher costs from increased bandwidth use. Most of the major model makers deny they do this, but that’s because they are using undeclared crawlers to do most of their dirty work. And, we detailed recently, they’re done in a way designed to cleverly avoid legal consequences.  There have been some efforts to address the problem. Cloudflare makes a popular one that essentially creates an attractive honey pot to keep unauthorized crawlers at bay. But, to reiterate, the real problem is that companies generally have agreed to pay an infinite amount of money for bandwidth they can’t control. So, it’s hard now to fight something you’ve knowingly tolerated for decades. If unauthorized crawlers were forced to pay those costs, the situation would likely resolve itself quickly. Or perhaps cloud vendors could charge for the bandwidth. Conveniently, many of the large cloud companies — think Amazon, Google and Microsoft — also happen to own the operations sending out cowboy crawlers. Isn’t that special?  More importantly, doesn’t that create a massive conflict of interest? The problem will be difficult to fix. Most of the obvious mechanisms are untenable. A site could, for example, say they are willing to spend X number of dollars on bandwidth and no more. But what happens when a site hits that number? Would Walmart or Chase Bank really say, “Turn off the bandwidth hose until next month?”  Of course not. That brings us to an attribution problem. An enterprise knows that its bandwidth numbers are soaring by a certain percent above normal. But during that time, they were visited by millions of humans and a greater number of bots from all kinds of companies, including search and genAI crawlers.  Most sites’ analytics struggle to attribute specific bandwidth increases to specific visitors. And even for those that do, the biggest violators are going to be undeclared bots, or bots not easily identified with a specific company. Sometimes the bots come from countries such as China, Russia and North Korea that rarely play nice with US laws. Still, enterprise IT needs to have some serious conversations with hosting vendors — or with business partners that handle those arrangements — about getting unauthorized bandwidth charges under control. Given various reports that bots represent more traffic than humans today, that conversation needs to happen soon.