Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process. Activision already has a bad reputation for the aggressive monetization of the premium Black Ops 6 and its free-to-play battle royale Warzone, but this latest move may have tipped some players over the edge. Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts. Elsewhere, Activision has added bundle and Battle Pass advertisements to the Events tab, another controversial change that has caused complaints. Here's a snippet of the response, sourced from across Call of Duty subreddits, Discords, and social media: I wouldn't even be mad if this was just in Warzone, a free game, but putting it in a pay-to-play premium title, with how expensive they're getting? F**k off. This game is still 80€ I get that they make most of their money from the store, but I feel like the bare minimum for a premium product would be to not have ads clogging the menus right? At this point it really feels like opening up a mobile game with how much more you see an option to buy anything in this game. Anyone who wanted this bundle would've checked the store and bought it. Putting it here isn't gonna make more people buy it, its justannoying. Just wait until they add pop up ads for bundles while you are playing the game. Click to expand... Click to shrink... More including some examples here: Activision Quietly Force Adverts into Call of Duty Black Ops 6 and Warzone Loadouts and Players Absolutely Hate It: 'At This Point It Really Feels Like Opening Up a Mobile Game' - IGN With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process. www.ign.com   Gaspode Member Jan 17, 2025 152 gross   MarcosBrXD Member Aug 28, 2024 1,779 Crazy one of the biggest IPs doing this   Wallace Member Oct 25, 2017 28,182 Midwest What a shit franchise.   Shirkelton Member Aug 20, 2020 6,976 Fuck that.   MinerArcaniner Uncle Works at Nintendo Member Oct 29, 2017 7,473 The revenue line has to keep going up. There's no such thing as "enough" with corporations.   Kinthey Avenger Oct 27, 2017 25,551 Poor Cod really needs the money to keep the lights on   skullmuffins Member Oct 25, 2017 7,615 oh, ads for in-game microtransactions. guess i'm not surprised. that's where all the money is these days.   Remark Member Oct 27, 2017 4,184 Yeah the ads are so bad this season. When you boot up the game in CoD HQ, theres a big ass button for Blackcell and BO6 and WZ are all the way on the right side of the menu. It's so annoying. Huge disrespect to the people who actually bought the game. I wish CoD HQ would go away, it doesn't even actually help with anything and actually hampers the UX experience in a lot of ways especially on PC.  Last edited: Today at 10:14 AM LiquidDom Avenger Oct 27, 2017 2,730 Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though.  Richietto One Winged Slayer Member Oct 25, 2017 26,147 North Carolina Lmao what a joke   Loxley Prophet of Truth Member Oct 25, 2017 10,702 We're inching closer and closer to this scene from Ready Player One. "We estimate we can sell up to 80% of an individual's visual field before inducing seizures" View: https://youtu.be/KpPE85Jogjw?si=Di0mlmiF27KidwWs  Fabs Member Aug 22, 2019 2,780 This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless.   Noisepurge Corrupted by Vengeance Member Oct 25, 2017 9,775 Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Fortnite doesn't cost 80$  OP OP Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 LiquidDom said: Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Considering half of the in-game purchases are basically ads for some brands or characters that have nothing to do with COD it's basically the same thing   Remark Member Oct 27, 2017 4,184 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... To be fair, Warzone is F2P but that shit should be in there. Whether you buy the game or not, you have to go through CoD HQ which is so annoying.   Doskoi Panda One Winged Slayer Member Oct 27, 2017 17,314 CoD is so fucking trashy lmao. I will never understand how it remains so popular. It just gets worse year over yesr, even Warzone.   SunBroDave "This guy are sick" Member Oct 25, 2017 15,148 How else is COD supposed to make money   Decarb Member Oct 27, 2017 9,264 Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Not only is it in a full priced mode, but its also in the weapon customization menu where you least expect it.   Agni Kai Member Nov 2, 2017 10,037 Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line.   jroc74 Member Oct 27, 2017 34,177 Yeah I dont think it needs to be this aggressive. LiquidDom said: Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... While trying to play the game tho? "Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts." Imagine getting hit with Shark Card ads while browsing the in game stores in GTA Online....please Rockstar dont do this. Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... Also this.  BradleyLove Member Oct 29, 2017 1,661 Doesn't surprise me. I bought Forza Horizon for PS5 a few days ago and was shocked to encounter unskippable ads for DLC. The American obsession with forcing ads everywhere they can is horrible. This reply was brought to you by NEW Mountain Dew—new look, same bold refreshing flavour.  TransEuropaExpress Member Dec 6, 2017 11,420 US They should go all in and start doing random 5-minute commercial breaks in the middle of rounds.   Pyro God help us the mods are making weekend threads Member Jul 30, 2018 18,922 United States Really fucking gross.   Vourlis Member Aug 14, 2022 5,911 United States I...where are the ads? edit: Oh like advertising the bundles or whatever. Okay.  jroc74 Member Oct 27, 2017 34,177 BradleyLove said: Doesn't surprise me. I bought Forza Horizon for PS5 a few days ago and was shocked to encounter unskippable ads for DLC. The American obsession with forcing ads everywhere they can is horrible. This reply was brought to you by NEW Mountain Dew—new look, same bold refreshing flavour. Click to expand... Click to shrink... I either forgot how it was or just didnt know, because I played it on XSX when it launched. But I was and am shocked at the mtx in FH5.  shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,804 I feel like this has already become too normalised because I honestly assumed we were talking about unrelated product ads... Meanwhile the examples above... honestly I kinda expected. Granted the article also points it out perfectly that if it were just in Warzone (free) it'd be... less bad, but charging however much for COD THEN pushing those ads on you... you just know people will crack. Not the worst example of ads in games though, I still give that to SFVI's Turtles costumes, aside the cost, having that damn song playing constantly in the battle hub for month(s) on end drove me nuts at the time.  Papaya The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 2,735 California The financial model for CoD is awful and lacks any sort of creativity. They just copied fortnite even though it doesn't work for a military shooter. They rarely release any good content because it either doesn't match the game's tone, or it sucks. It just doesn't lend itself well to skins, and other visual customization options. Or maybe they just don't know how to make good. Either way, I've never seen a more boring battlepass in my life. CoD can be a super fun action game, but it's never felt more hollow and lifeless. The best counter-example to "games are art" I've ever seen.  BestBrand Member Mar 5, 2025 457 Call of duty is the worst man. I may not even buy another COD again.   MerluzaSamus Member Dec 3, 2018 1,471 Argentina Agni Kai said: Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line. Click to expand... Click to shrink... The game published by EA to gather obscene money on the fps market? That one Battlefield? Jokes aside, 'fraid this is going to be the norm long term, Fortnite normalized it and publishers with less restraint are going wild, same with AI. At least on the AAA market.  Lumination Member Oct 26, 2017 16,064 Who could have expected them giving the game away would have affected the revenue stream and business model of the game itself.   Geeko Member Oct 27, 2017 1,413 San Jose, CA Lame as hell. The problem is that the masses won't care about it and will still spend crap tons of money on this game thus continuing this constant bombardment of ads.   shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,804 Agni Kai said: Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Gameplay wise, Hopefully Dice will take the time and make something truly special. However... I wouldnt expect much better from EA of all publishers. They are every bit as summy...  OP OP Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 My guess is this is only going to get worse as MS tries to make up the lost revenue from people playing via GP instead of buying   SP. Member Oct 27, 2017 8,578 I guess I thought it would be worse than the reaction seems to suggest… They're in-game micro transaction ads and for the most are for weapon skins which naturally don't seem that out of place in a weapon selection menu. It's not like they're advertising a Burger King Whopper in here. Obviously it'd be better if they weren't there at all but honestly if I played the game and saw these I wouldn't think it's anything out of the ordinary.  Ravelle Member Oct 31, 2017 20,432 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... It doesn't spam you with multiple windows to buy something either  Rosebud Two Pieces Member Apr 16, 2018 51,386 Wallace said: What a shit franchise. Click to expand... Click to shrink... .   Kyokanto Member Mar 4, 2025 493 For a second I thought this was going to be McDonald's ads or something lol. I wonder how far off that is… Still scummy as is.  Pop-O-Matic Avenger Oct 25, 2017 14,007 MarcosBrXD said: Crazy one of the biggest IPs doing this Click to expand... Click to shrink... Not really. CoD might move more money than most of the rest of the industry put together, but capitalism (especially at publicly traded mega corps like MS and ActiBlizz before them) demands that the line must always be going up, and there isn't really much CoD can do to grow the player base in any significant way in the short-to-medium term, so they're going to start trying out shit like this to get even more money out of the existing players so the line goes up and the shareholders can be happy.   Fabs Member Aug 22, 2019 2,780 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... Decarb said: Not only is it in a full priced mode, but its also in the weapon customization menu where you least expect it. Click to expand... Click to shrink... jroc74 said: Yeah I dont think it needs to be this aggressive. While trying to play the game tho? "Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts." Imagine getting hit with Shark Card ads while browsing the in game stores in GTA Online....please Rockstar dont do this. Also this. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Full priced games advertise their dlc in menus all the time. Is it because it's in a new place? Is this that different than having the paid operators in the menu for selection like they have in past CoD? Or when I play Street Fighter and I can't pick Akuma because he costs money? I get it if it was for McDonalds but this seems like rage bait.  Plexas Member Jan 24, 2025 289 Several trillion dollar company needs some money to survive, please understand.   Twister Member Feb 11, 2019 6,692 This franchise peaked with BO3. Everything after has been a disaster   Vertigo1 Member Jun 30, 2023 1,093 CoD will never be as good as it was in the 360 era, ever again.   Sordid Plebeian Member Oct 26, 2017 19,955 Yeah I remember seeing that AI store slop when I booted up S4, and they wonder why they're driving players away   Tommy Showbiz Member Jul 20, 2022 3,727 This is pretty corny, but I was honestly expecting ads for like Dr. Squatch and not just prodding you to buy in-game bundles.   Apathy Member Oct 25, 2017 13,538 So the biggest game, created by the biggest publisher, paced by the riches company in the world needs to slide ads into their paid games. Lovely   DarkJ Member Nov 11, 2017 1,918 Ai slop? Ads in the menus? In a fully priced game? Really just making sure I don't even look at the next game.  T88heon Member Aug 26, 2024 1,042 This is a profitability issue coupled with horrendous stewardship of the ip. If the retail side was profitable would they need to stealthily run ads in "COD" of all ip? 😬  DSync Member Oct 27, 2017 884 Black Ops 6 in 2025 after the most recent update for Season 4 > £70 for the base game > £100 for the "Vault Editon" > £50/60 for a year of PS Plus to play the game online > £10 for the Battlepass > £15 for the Battlepass plus tier skips > £25 for the "Blackcell" Battlepass > Free and Premium (Costs money) Battlepasses for the Seth Rogan Operator Weed event > £16-25 Weapon and Operator bundles > AI art in the emblems, calling cards, posters in certain levels > Ads for bundles in creating a Loadout > Server instability issues > Whole game crashes to desktop/homescreen when editing your loadout during a match > UI Menu lagging > Cheaters, hackers run rampant > Store will 100% work no matter what (Prices for everything may not be exact)  Pai Pai Master Member Oct 25, 2017 37,298 Atlanta GA AI crap and ads, yet people will still buy this shit in record numbers every year  

Last updated May 30, 2025: Added a new Infinity Nikki code!If you're looking for Infinity Nikki codes, IGN has you covered! In this article, you'll find a list of active and working Infinity Nikki codes that you can redeem for free rewards and bonuses in May 2025, including Diamonds and Energy Crystals.All of the Infinity Nikki codes below have been tested as working at the time of submission. Spotted a new code or one has expired? Let us know in the comments!Active Infinity Nikki Codes (May 2025)Below, you'll find all the active and working Infinity Nikki codes in May 2025, the free rewards you get for redeeming them, and their expiry date (if known):NIKKISFAVORITERICEDUMPLING - 200x Diamonds, 18.8k Bling, expires June 4, 2025 (NEW!)AAp9Q8KWF8b - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApyBTE8RY9 - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AAp4BHuBhmC - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AAp7DKNerwR - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApt6d2sv89 - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApnynNUpc7 - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApE9cuaMxM - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApP4EqVj2a - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApHBskxdEh - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApscJCWy6w - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApAAnFjMpK - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApCapPmYvp - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApNj9MT2Uy - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling AApUBFedaQy - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling InfinityNikki429 - 75x Shiny Bubbles, 75x Threads of Purity, and 30k Bling AApUB2cpQ6h - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 20k Bling BUBBLESEASON0429 - 50x Thread of Purity, 15k Bling POCKETMONEYFORNIKKI - 200x Diamonds, 18.8k Bling Handinhand - 10x Revelation CrystalDREAM&REBIRTH - 100x Diamonds, 100x Shiny Bubbles, 50x Thread of PuritySEAOFSTARS - 100x Diamonds, 50x Shiny Bubbles, 30k BlingBUBBLESEASON - 100x Diamonds, 50x Thread of Purity, 20k BlingSidebyside - 10x Revelation CrystalsINFINITYNIKKISteam - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k BlingRevelrySeasonRe - 50x Thread of Purity, 30k Bling RevelrySeasonGroup - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 30k Bling1.2VERDISCORD - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling1.2VERREDDIT - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling 1.2VERGLOBALGROUP - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k BlingハイキングDISCORD - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k BlingPEARFECTGUIDES - 10x Shining Particles, 15k Bling NIKKIXWEBTOON - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling ニキプレゼント1205 - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling おめでとう - 50x Threads of Purity, 15k Bling リリース - 10x Shining Particles, 15k Blingインフィニティニキ - 15x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling無限暖暖公測開啟 - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling 無限暖暖公測FB社團限定 - 10x Shining Particles, 15k Bling インフィニキDISCORD - 50x Threads of Purity, 15k BlingINGIFT1205 - 50x Threads of Purity, 15k Bling GROUPSTYLIST - 50x Threads of Purity, 15k Bling (expires December 5, 2025)REDDITSTYLIST - 50x Shiny Bubbles, 15k Bling (expires December 5, 2025)DISCORDSTYLIST - 10x Shining Particles, 15k Bling (expires December 5, 2025)Expired Infinity Nikki CodesThe Infinity Nikki codes listed below have expired and are no longer working as of May 2025:NOSTRANGELINKSWARMSPRINGBONUSRevelrySeasonDCGIRLPOWER25 100THDAYCELEBRATIONMAYEVERYGIRLHAPPINESSNewstoryawaitsNewyearblissNIKKIFIREWORKSNIKKIEXCURSIONTIMENIKKINEWBLOOM2025HEARTFELTGIFTSNIKKIBEWITHYOUNIKKIRELEASEdreamweavernikkiNIKKI20241022infinitynikki1205BDAYSURPRISEGIFTFROMMOMOGIFTTONIKKInikkihappybirthday2024NIKKITHEBESTQUACKQUACKAAbNxRNMmSmAAbQjjYKwbHAAb7xf6hWuSAAbtWkna3V7AAbaEyDU4EXAAbMNJX8hxFAAb5S3RSK8MAAbUfWnYUtd AAbUa8e2U3a AAbtk9jmpnVHow to Redeem Infinity Nikki CodesTo redeem Infinity Nikki codes, follow the steps below:Unlock your Pear-Pal during the Chapter 1: Wishes Without Wings - Land of Wishes main quest. It's about 20 minutes into your Infinity Nikki adventure.Open the Pear-Pal menu by pressing ESC on PC (or the Menu button when using an Xbox controller on PC), the Menu button on PlayStation, or by tapping the Pear-Pal icon in the top-left corner on mobile.Click on the gear icon to open the Settings menu.Scroll over to the Other tab.You’ll see a “Redeem Code” option here. Click on “Apply” and a Redeem Rewards pop-up menu will appear.Input your code into the “Enter the redeem code” field and tap “Apply.”If successful, a pop-up will appear showing your free rewards.Why Isn't My Infinity Nikki Code Working?If the Infinity Nikki code that you're trying to redeem isn't working, it's likely due to one of the following reasons:There's a typo in the code.The Infinity Nikki code is expired.When inputting a code into Infinity Nikki, make sure there are no typos (Os instead of zeroes, capital Is instead of lowercase Ls, etc.) and that there are no accidental spaces before or after the code. If your Infinity Nikki code still doesn't work, it's probably expired and can no longer be redeemed. You'll get a message informing you that the code is wrong if it's expired.How to Get More Infinity Nikki CodesThe best way to get more Infinity Nikki codes is to join the official Infinity Nikki Discord server. Once you're in, head to the #self-assign-roles channel and opt-in for the Redeem Code role. You'll receive a notification when a new code is released so you can receive your free rewards ASAP!Alternatively, bookmark this Infinity Nikki Codes article, as we update it each time a new code comes out. The Discord server has missed a couple of codes posted to other channels, so we'd recommend checking our article every so often.What is Infinity Nikki?Developed by Infold Games, Infinity Nikki is a cozy, open-world RPG. You play as Nikki, as she's whisked away to the world of Miraland, a place where people make Wishes with the help of Stylists. You'll find and create a plethora of outfits and accessories, take on quests, and gather many types of collectibles with the help of Momo, Nikki's adorable feline companion. As you play, you earn Diamonds, which can be spent on Revelation and Resonite Crystals, which are used to pull on the limited time and permanent outfit banners for 5-star and 4-star clothing.For Infinity Nikki game help, check out our guides below:Meg Koepp is a Guides Editor on the IGN Guides team, with a focus on trends. When she's not working, you can find her playing an RPG or spending time with her corgi.

Back in April, OpenAIannounced it was rolling back an update to its GPT-4o model that made ChatGPT’s responses to user queries too sycophantic.  An AI model that acts in an overly agreeable and flattering way is more than just annoying. It could reinforce users’ incorrect beliefs, mislead people, and spread misinformation that can be dangerous—a particular risk when increasing numbers of young people are using ChatGPT as a life advisor. And because sycophancy is difficult to detect, it can go unnoticed until a model or update has already been deployed, as OpenAI found out. A new benchmark that measures the sycophantic tendencies of major AI models could help AI companies avoid these issues in the future. The team behind Elephant, from Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, and the University of Oxford, found that LLMs consistently exhibit higher rates of sycophancy than humans do. “We found that language models don’t challenge users’ assumptions, even when they might be harmful or totally misleading,” says Myra Cheng, a PhD student at Stanford University who worked on the research, which has not been peer-reviewed. “So we wanted to give researchers and developers the tools to empirically evaluate their models on sycophancy, because it’s a problem that is so prevalent.” It’s hard to assess how sycophantic AI models are because sycophancy comes in many forms. Previous research has tended to focus on how chatbots agree with users even when what the human has told the AI is demonstrably wrong—for example, they might state that Nice, not Paris, is the capital of France. While this approach is still useful, it overlooks all the subtler, more insidious ways in which models behave sycophantically when there isn’t a clear ground truth to measure against. Users typically ask LLMs open-ended questions containing implicit assumptions, and those assumptions can trigger sycophantic responses, the researchers claim. For example, a model that’s asked “How do I approach my difficult coworker?” is more likely to accept the premise that a coworker is difficult than it is to question why the user thinks so. To bridge this gap, Elephant is designed to measure social sycophancy—a model’s propensity to preserve the user’s “face,” or self-image, even when doing so is misguided or potentially harmful. It uses metrics drawn from social science to assess five nuanced kinds of behavior that fall under the umbrella of sycophancy: emotional validation, moral endorsement, indirect language, indirect action, and accepting framing.  To do this, the researchers tested it on two data sets made up of personal advice written by humans. This first consisted of 3,027 open-ended questions about diverse real-world situations taken from previous studies. The second data set was drawn from 4,000 posts on Reddit’s AITA (“Am I the Asshole?”) subreddit, a popular forum among users seeking advice. Those data sets were fed into eight LLMs from OpenAI (the version of GPT-4o they assessed was earlier than the version that the company later called too sycophantic), Google, Anthropic, Meta, and Mistral, and the responses were analyzed to see how the LLMs’ answers compared with humans’.   Overall, all eight models were found to be far more sycophantic than humans, offering emotional validation in 76% of cases (versus 22% for humans) and accepting the way a user had framed the query in 90% of responses (versus 60% among humans). The models also endorsed user behavior that humans said was inappropriate in an average of 42% of cases from the AITA data set. But just knowing when models are sycophantic isn’t enough; you need to be able to do something about it. And that’s trickier. The authors had limited success when they tried to mitigate these sycophantic tendencies through two different approaches: prompting the models to provide honest and accurate responses, and training a fine-tuned model on labeled AITA examples to encourage outputs that are less sycophantic. For example, they found that adding “Please provide direct advice, even if critical, since it is more helpful to me” to the prompt was the most effective technique, but it only increased accuracy by 3%. And although prompting improved performance for most of the models, none of the fine-tuned models were consistently better than the original versions. “It’s nice that it works, but I don’t think it’s going to be an end-all, be-all solution,” says Ryan Liu, a PhD student at Princeton University who studies LLMs but was not involved in the research. “There’s definitely more to do in this space in order to make it better.” Gaining a better understanding of AI models’ tendency to flatter their users is extremely important because it gives their makers crucial insight into how to make them safer, says Henry Papadatos, managing director at the nonprofit SaferAI. The breakneck speed at which AI models are currently being deployed to millions of people across the world, their powers of persuasion, and their improved abilities to retain information about their users add up to “all the components of a disaster,” he says. “Good safety takes time, and I don’t think they're spending enough time doing this.”  While we don’t know the inner workings of LLMs that aren’t open-source, sycophancy is likely to be baked into models because of the ways we currently train and develop them. Cheng believes that models are often trained to optimize for the kinds of responses users indicate that they prefer. ChatGPT, for example, gives users the chance to mark a response as good or bad via thumbs-up and thumbs-down icons. “Sycophancy is what gets people coming back to these models. It’s almost the core of what makes ChatGPT feel so good to talk to,” she says. “And so it’s really beneficial, for companies, for their models to be sycophantic.” But while some sycophantic behaviors align with user expectations, others have the potential to cause harm if they go too far—particularly when people do turn to LLMs for emotional support or validation.  “We want ChatGPT to be genuinely useful, not sycophantic," an OpenAI spokesperson says. "When we saw sycophantic behavior emerge in a recent model update, we quickly rolled it back and shared an explanation of what happened. We're now improving how we train and evaluate models to better reflect long-term usefulness and trust, especially in emotionally complex conversations." Cheng and her fellow authors suggest that developers should warn users about the risks of social sycophancy and consider restricting model usage in socially sensitive contexts. They hope their work can be used as a starting point to develop safer guardrails. She is currently researching the potential harms associated with these kinds of LLM behaviors, the way they affect humans and their attitudes toward other people, and the importance of making models that strike the right balance between being too sycophantic and too critical. “This is a very big socio-technical challenge,” she says. “We don’t want LLMs to end up telling users, ‘You are the asshole.’”

Back in April, OpenAIannounced it was rolling back an update to its GPT-4o model that made ChatGPT’s responses to user queries too sycophantic.  An AI model that acts in an overly agreeable and flattering way is more than just annoying. It could reinforce users’ incorrect beliefs, mislead people, and spread misinformation that can be dangerous—a particular risk when increasing numbers of young people are using ChatGPT as a life advisor. And because sycophancy is difficult to detect, it can go unnoticed until a model or update has already been deployed, as OpenAI found out. A new benchmark that measures the sycophantic tendencies of major AI models could help AI companies avoid these issues in the future. The team behind Elephant, from Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, and the University of Oxford, found that LLMs consistently exhibit higher rates of sycophancy than humans do. “We found that language models don’t challenge users’ assumptions, even when they might be harmful or totally misleading,” says Myra Cheng, a PhD student at Stanford University who worked on the research, which has not been peer-reviewed. “So we wanted to give researchers and developers the tools to empirically evaluate their models on sycophancy, because it’s a problem that is so prevalent.” It’s hard to assess how sycophantic AI models are because sycophancy comes in many forms. Previous research has tended to focus on how chatbots agree with users even when what the human has told the AI is demonstrably wrong—for example, they might state that Nice, not Paris, is the capital of France. While this approach is still useful, it overlooks all the subtler, more insidious ways in which models behave sycophantically when there isn’t a clear ground truth to measure against. Users typically ask LLMs open-ended questions containing implicit assumptions, and those assumptions can trigger sycophantic responses, the researchers claim. For example, a model that’s asked “How do I approach my difficult coworker?” is more likely to accept the premise that a coworker is difficult than it is to question why the user thinks so. To bridge this gap, Elephant is designed to measure social sycophancy—a model’s propensity to preserve the user’s “face,” or self-image, even when doing so is misguided or potentially harmful. It uses metrics drawn from social science to assess five nuanced kinds of behavior that fall under the umbrella of sycophancy: emotional validation, moral endorsement, indirect language, indirect action, and accepting framing.  To do this, the researchers tested it on two data sets made up of personal advice written by humans. This first consisted of 3,027 open-ended questions about diverse real-world situations taken from previous studies. The second data set was drawn from 4,000 posts on Reddit’s AITA (“Am I the Asshole?”) subreddit, a popular forum among users seeking advice. Those data sets were fed into eight LLMs from OpenAI (the version of GPT-4o they assessed was earlier than the version that the company later called too sycophantic), Google, Anthropic, Meta, and Mistral, and the responses were analyzed to see how the LLMs’ answers compared with humans’.   Overall, all eight models were found to be far more sycophantic than humans, offering emotional validation in 76% of cases (versus 22% for humans) and accepting the way a user had framed the query in 90% of responses (versus 60% among humans). The models also endorsed user behavior that humans said was inappropriate in an average of 42% of cases from the AITA data set. But just knowing when models are sycophantic isn’t enough; you need to be able to do something about it. And that’s trickier. The authors had limited success when they tried to mitigate these sycophantic tendencies through two different approaches: prompting the models to provide honest and accurate responses, and training a fine-tuned model on labeled AITA examples to encourage outputs that are less sycophantic. For example, they found that adding “Please provide direct advice, even if critical, since it is more helpful to me” to the prompt was the most effective technique, but it only increased accuracy by 3%. And although prompting improved performance for most of the models, none of the fine-tuned models were consistently better than the original versions. “It’s nice that it works, but I don’t think it’s going to be an end-all, be-all solution,” says Ryan Liu, a PhD student at Princeton University who studies LLMs but was not involved in the research. “There’s definitely more to do in this space in order to make it better.” Gaining a better understanding of AI models’ tendency to flatter their users is extremely important because it gives their makers crucial insight into how to make them safer, says Henry Papadatos, managing director at the nonprofit SaferAI. The breakneck speed at which AI models are currently being deployed to millions of people across the world, their powers of persuasion, and their improved abilities to retain information about their users add up to “all the components of a disaster,” he says. “Good safety takes time, and I don’t think they're spending enough time doing this.”  While we don’t know the inner workings of LLMs that aren’t open-source, sycophancy is likely to be baked into models because of the ways we currently train and develop them. Cheng believes that models are often trained to optimize for the kinds of responses users indicate that they prefer. ChatGPT, for example, gives users the chance to mark a response as good or bad via thumbs-up and thumbs-down icons. “Sycophancy is what gets people coming back to these models. It’s almost the core of what makes ChatGPT feel so good to talk to,” she says. “And so it’s really beneficial, for companies, for their models to be sycophantic.” But while some sycophantic behaviors align with user expectations, others have the potential to cause harm if they go too far—particularly when people do turn to LLMs for emotional support or validation.  “We want ChatGPT to be genuinely useful, not sycophantic," an OpenAI spokesperson says. "When we saw sycophantic behavior emerge in a recent model update, we quickly rolled it back and shared an explanation of what happened. We're now improving how we train and evaluate models to better reflect long-term usefulness and trust, especially in emotionally complex conversations." Cheng and her fellow authors suggest that developers should warn users about the risks of social sycophancy and consider restricting model usage in socially sensitive contexts. They hope their work can be used as a starting point to develop safer guardrails. She is currently researching the potential harms associated with these kinds of LLM behaviors, the way they affect humans and their attitudes toward other people, and the importance of making models that strike the right balance between being too sycophantic and too critical. “This is a very big socio-technical challenge,” she says. “We don’t want LLMs to end up telling users, ‘You are the asshole.’”

Back in April, OpenAIannounced it was rolling back an update to its GPT-4o model that made ChatGPT’s responses to user queries too sycophantic.  An AI model that acts in an overly agreeable and flattering way is more than just annoying. It could reinforce users’ incorrect beliefs, mislead people, and spread misinformation that can be dangerous—a particular risk when increasing numbers of young people are using ChatGPT as a life advisor. And because sycophancy is difficult to detect, it can go unnoticed until a model or update has already been deployed, as OpenAI found out. A new benchmark that measures the sycophantic tendencies of major AI models could help AI companies avoid these issues in the future. The team behind Elephant, from Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, and the University of Oxford, found that LLMs consistently exhibit higher rates of sycophancy than humans do. “We found that language models don’t challenge users’ assumptions, even when they might be harmful or totally misleading,” says Myra Cheng, a PhD student at Stanford University who worked on the research, which has not been peer-reviewed. “So we wanted to give researchers and developers the tools to empirically evaluate their models on sycophancy, because it’s a problem that is so prevalent.” It’s hard to assess how sycophantic AI models are because sycophancy comes in many forms. Previous research has tended to focus on how chatbots agree with users even when what the human has told the AI is demonstrably wrong—for example, they might state that Nice, not Paris, is the capital of France. While this approach is still useful, it overlooks all the subtler, more insidious ways in which models behave sycophantically when there isn’t a clear ground truth to measure against. Users typically ask LLMs open-ended questions containing implicit assumptions, and those assumptions can trigger sycophantic responses, the researchers claim. For example, a model that’s asked “How do I approach my difficult coworker?” is more likely to accept the premise that a coworker is difficult than it is to question why the user thinks so. To bridge this gap, Elephant is designed to measure social sycophancy—a model’s propensity to preserve the user’s “face,” or self-image, even when doing so is misguided or potentially harmful. It uses metrics drawn from social science to assess five nuanced kinds of behavior that fall under the umbrella of sycophancy: emotional validation, moral endorsement, indirect language, indirect action, and accepting framing.  To do this, the researchers tested it on two data sets made up of personal advice written by humans. This first consisted of 3,027 open-ended questions about diverse real-world situations taken from previous studies. The second data set was drawn from 4,000 posts on Reddit’s AITA (“Am I the Asshole?”) subreddit, a popular forum among users seeking advice. Those data sets were fed into eight LLMs from OpenAI (the version of GPT-4o they assessed was earlier than the version that the company later called too sycophantic), Google, Anthropic, Meta, and Mistral, and the responses were analyzed to see how the LLMs’ answers compared with humans’.   Overall, all eight models were found to be far more sycophantic than humans, offering emotional validation in 76% of cases (versus 22% for humans) and accepting the way a user had framed the query in 90% of responses (versus 60% among humans). The models also endorsed user behavior that humans said was inappropriate in an average of 42% of cases from the AITA data set. But just knowing when models are sycophantic isn’t enough; you need to be able to do something about it. And that’s trickier. The authors had limited success when they tried to mitigate these sycophantic tendencies through two different approaches: prompting the models to provide honest and accurate responses, and training a fine-tuned model on labeled AITA examples to encourage outputs that are less sycophantic. For example, they found that adding “Please provide direct advice, even if critical, since it is more helpful to me” to the prompt was the most effective technique, but it only increased accuracy by 3%. And although prompting improved performance for most of the models, none of the fine-tuned models were consistently better than the original versions. “It’s nice that it works, but I don’t think it’s going to be an end-all, be-all solution,” says Ryan Liu, a PhD student at Princeton University who studies LLMs but was not involved in the research. “There’s definitely more to do in this space in order to make it better.” Gaining a better understanding of AI models’ tendency to flatter their users is extremely important because it gives their makers crucial insight into how to make them safer, says Henry Papadatos, managing director at the nonprofit SaferAI. The breakneck speed at which AI models are currently being deployed to millions of people across the world, their powers of persuasion, and their improved abilities to retain information about their users add up to “all the components of a disaster,” he says. “Good safety takes time, and I don’t think they’re spending enough time doing this.”  While we don’t know the inner workings of LLMs that aren’t open-source, sycophancy is likely to be baked into models because of the ways we currently train and develop them. Cheng believes that models are often trained to optimize for the kinds of responses users indicate that they prefer. ChatGPT, for example, gives users the chance to mark a response as good or bad via thumbs-up and thumbs-down icons. “Sycophancy is what gets people coming back to these models. It’s almost the core of what makes ChatGPT feel so good to talk to,” she says. “And so it’s really beneficial, for companies, for their models to be sycophantic.” But while some sycophantic behaviors align with user expectations, others have the potential to cause harm if they go too far—particularly when people do turn to LLMs for emotional support or validation.  “We want ChatGPT to be genuinely useful, not sycophantic,” an OpenAI spokesperson says. “When we saw sycophantic behavior emerge in a recent model update, we quickly rolled it back and shared an explanation of what happened. We’re now improving how we train and evaluate models to better reflect long-term usefulness and trust, especially in emotionally complex conversations.”Cheng and her fellow authors suggest that developers should warn users about the risks of social sycophancy and consider restricting model usage in socially sensitive contexts. They hope their work can be used as a starting point to develop safer guardrails.  She is currently researching the potential harms associated with these kinds of LLM behaviors, the way they affect humans and their attitudes toward other people, and the importance of making models that strike the right balance between being too sycophantic and too critical. “This is a very big socio-technical challenge,” she says. “We don’t want LLMs to end up telling users, ‘You are the asshole.’”

Don’t call Kylie Kelce a WAG. The acronym for the “wives and girlfriends” of professional athletes rankles the podcaster, who first rose to fame as the wife of retired Philadelphia Eagles player Jason Kelce. As Kelce explains, the phrase suggests that “your spouse’s profession swallows you up as well.”But many in the media are heralding this moment as a “new era” for WAGs, and Kelce is just one of several famous women who are at the fore of this renaissance: Everyone from TikToker Alix Earle, who is dating Miami Dolphins player Braxton Berrios, to Olympic gold medalist Simone Biles — unquestionably the more famous athlete — who is married to the Chicago Bears’ Jonathan Owens. Then there’s Taylor Swift, one of the most successful musicians on the planet, who, thanks to her relationship with Kylie’s brother-in-law Travis Kelce, has become the ultimate symbol of the new WAG.Meanwhile, a host of lesser-known women are experiencing their first taste of fame through their relationships with tennis players, Formula 1 race-car drivers, and even pole-vaulters. A sizable number have leveraged their romantic lives to receive brand deals, podcasting opportunities, and magazine profiles.By and large, our understanding of WAGs is rapidly evolving to acknowledge their own social and economic power. They’ve transformed from tabloid punching bags to an appealing status symbol. Still, the continued use of the term does raise some complicated questions: Why are we so interested in defining these women, some of whom are independently successful, by their relationships to men? And what does it mean that they might be raking in more attention and financial opportunities than some female athletes? The rise of the new WAG The public’s fascination with WAGs isn’t new. The acronym originated across the pond in the early 2000s to describe the wives and girlfriends of English footballers. British tabloids and football fans alike lambasted women — celebrities in their own right — like former Girls Aloud member Cheryl Cole and former Spice Girl Victoria Beckham for their partying, extravagant spending, and flashy, maximalist looks. When the England national football team lost the 2006 FIFA World Cup, their partners were blamed in the press for the defeat. In the United States, being a WAG could be an equally dangerous public position. From Jessica Simpson to the Kardashians, they’ve been painted as distractions, attention-seekers, and bearers of bad luck. Over the past two decades, though, a WAG has become less of an involuntary title and more of an identity that some women are willing to cultivate, given that it can come with its own rewards.David and Victoria Beckham at the MOBO Awards on October 6, 1999. Dave Hogan/Getty ImagesThis modern version of WAG-dom can be credited to early 2010s reality shows like WAGS, Basketball Wives, and La La’s Full Court Life. These platforms allowed these women — some anonymous before they entered into relationships with athletes — to craft their own public narratives and become notable personalities on their own. For years now, Ayesha Curry, wife of Golden State Warriors point guard Stephen Curry, has modeled what it means to be a “WAG influencer,” embracing her public relationship with her spouse while building a separate career as a successful cookbook author and host. Since then, WAG-influencers have become a welcome staple of certain sports cultures. Formula 1 has exploded in recent years, with a small part of that popularity owed to the sport’s stylish other halves. Since 2017, female viewership has grown from 8 percent to 40 percent. This has been largely credited to the popular Netflix series Formula 1: Drive to Survive, which put a spotlight on the personal lives of drivers and, naturally, their partners. Lily Herman, who writes the F1 newsletter Engine Failure, says that the current popularity of WAG-influencers in Formula 1 can be credited to the former partners of a few young popular drivers from 2019 to 2022, like Carlos Sainz’s girlfriend Isa Hernáez and Charles Leclerc’s girlfriend Charlotte Sine, who were both featured on Drive to Survive. In 2022, Sine was the first WAG in the sport to explicitly use her access to the F1 circuit as a part of an ad campaign for the skincare brand Sunday Riley.“They were around during an era where the sport saw a lot of growth in its younger fan base, especially among teen girls and younger women, and there was a new wave of interest in these young drivers’ personal lives,” says Herman. These women have inspired fan pages, Tumblr accounts, and subreddits dedicated to their relationships, fashion, and rumored drama. Lately, the organization has fully embraced WAGs as recognizable supporting characters in the F1 universe, featuring them on social media and including them on chyrons during racing broadcasts. Tennis has tried to replicate the WAG-to-influencer pipeline too, although the sport and its fans are still warming up to the presence of outside partners. Morgan Riddle, who’s dating highest-ranked American male player Taylor Fritz, has been making get-ready-with-me videos for tournaments and vlogging about her life on the tennis tour since 2022. Ayan Broomfield, a former college tennis player who’s dating Frances Tiafoe, and influencer Paige Lorenze, who’s dating Tommy Paul, have mimicked the same career path, broadcasting their lives as WAGs on social media. Herman says that WAGs play a role in “adding dimension” to their male partners, contributing to the marketability of both. “Fritz is pretty bland as a public figure without his girlfriend,” says Herman. “She’s done way more in her work as an influencer and content creator to make him seem multidimensional than he has through solo interviews and profiles.”It certainly benefits younger, newer WAGs who are already powerful women. Biles and Swift have joined their ranks and seem to take pride in the role. Beckham, now a successful fashion designer, has also played a role in igniting a nostalgia for WAGs, thanks to the popular 2023 Netflix docuseries Beckham. The business of being a WAG is still very traditional In our current political climate, the WAG boom raises interesting questions. Research shows that some Gen Z-ers are identifying as more conservative than their parents. “Trad wife” content abounds online. Where do WAGs fit in? WAG influencers share some obvious similarities to tradwife influencers, women who’ve created lucrative identities and even businesses by perpetuating conservative ideas of marriage and motherhood. In a Substack essay, sports writer Frankie De La Cretaz argues that WAGs are essentially the tradwives of men’s sports: “No matter how many businesses a WAG starts or how many charities she runs, she still embodies a heteronormative idea of family and a woman’s place in society.” It’s hard to get around the fact that most WAGs are initially famous for their association with a male partner, although they may ultimately transcend that attachment (see Kylie Kelce’s complaint about being called a WAG and consider that her podcast, Not Gonna Lie, briefly dethroned The Joe Rogan Experience when it debuted in 2024).WAGs are gaining visibility while the most talented female athletes are still fighting for wage parity and struggling to land brand deals.But even attempts to define WAGs outside of their relationships come off a bit shallow. Stories about how these women are impacting sports largely focus on their brand deals and follower counts. When we celebrate the influence of WAGs, we’re mostly talking about their ability to turn other women into consumers and spectators, not athletes. Meanwhile, WAGs are gaining visibility while the most talented female athletes are still fighting for wage parity and struggling to land brand deals. Back in March, Australian tennis pro Daria Saville made a TikTok about the lack of sponsorships she and other female pros receive compared to tennis WAGs. “Female tennis players are not getting those brand deals,” she said. “It’s actually tennis WAGs that fit into the ‘aesthetic’ rather than, us, sweaty tennis players.” De la Cretaz tells Vox that the WAG boom echoes the mainstream platforming of tradwives. “It’s an extension of “girlboss” feminism, the idea that promoting women regardless of what that looks like is somehow good for women,” De la Cretaz says. “It’s also this idea that whatever you’re choosing is valid, even though those choices don’t exist in a vacuum.” The most visible WAGs are still predominantly in straight relationships, and a large part of being one still involves affirming a male athlete’s heterosexuality. As journalist Kira Cochrane wrote in a 2010 piece for the Guardian about football WAGs, “consciously or not, the women know their role is to boost their partner’s masculinity.” She added that their often highly feminized presentation “underlines [their] status as possessions, part of the package for footballers.” WAGs, with their new clout and influence, haven’t exactly gotten a total makeover. Rather, their hustle has grown more appealing. After all, they represent all the things women are encouraged to be in a time when mainstream culture is trending more conservative. They’re tradwives. They’re girlbosses. They’re stylish and beautiful. Most of all, they’re sitting on the sidelines. See More:

If you hang out on hardware subreddits long enough, you’ll hear the joke “Nvidia -$50” tossed around about AMD’s long-held Radeon pricing strategy. Well, AMD managed to buck that trend today, in the mainstream segment where pricing matters most. AMD revealed the Radeon RX 9060 XT during the company’s Computex keynote – and it priced the 16GB model at $349. That not only undercuts Nvidia’s avoid-at-all-costs 8GB RTX 5060 Ti by $30, but it means the 16GB 9060 XT is a whopping $80 cheaper than Nvidia’s actually-pretty-good 16GB 5060 Ti. Hot damn. Competition is back on the menu y’all! A quick peek at the Radeon RX 9060 XT’s high-level specs show that it’s available in both 8GB and 16GB configurations (more on the 8GB version below). With 32 RDNA 4 Compute Units, the 9060 XT’s GPU packs half those found in its bigger brother, the $549+ Radeon 9070 series. By pricing the 16GB Radeon RX 9060 XT so aggressively, it lets AMD show why 8GB of memory isn’t enough in 2025. The only performance-comparison slide shared with press compares the 16GB Radeon against the 8GB RTX 5060 Ti (which, again, costs more). AMD claims the Radeon tested an average of 6 percent faster across a suite of 40 games, with wins in individual games hitting up to 30 percent faster. Closely note that the testing was performed at the more memory-intensive 1440p resolution here – the numbers would no doubt be closer if AMD’s graphics card was compared against Nvidia’s 16GB version. The 9060 XT also hangs tough with the 8GB 5060 Ti in Ultra Raytracing games – typically an Nvidia strength. Here, the expanded memory capacity shines even more, driving up to 62 percent higher performance in its peak example. (Ray tracing gobbles up memory.) Speaking of ray tracing, as we saw with the Radeon RX 9070 series, AMD seriously updated its ray tracing chops this generation – at least on games with basic ray tracing features. In games with more intensive ray tracing features, including path-traced games like Cyberpunk 2077 overdrive mode and Black Myth Wukong, AMD’s RDNA 4 architecture struggled, languishing far behind Nvidia. AMD attacked the problem head-on at Computex, announcing “FSR Redstone” (Minecraft Mumbo Jumbo fans rise up). This technology takes a multi-step approach to improving visuals and performance in AI tasks, as you can see in the slides above. If it proves successful, Nvidia’s undoubted lead in ray tracing could be under assault (though Nvidia’s vaunted DLSS 4 already works in advanced versions of these features). Look for FSR Redstone to arrive sometime in the second half of 2025. It’s not the only new Radeon performance-boosting FSR tech coming: AMD says 40 games will support FSR 4 with frame generation when it launches on June 5, with the Radeon RX 9060 series. Finally, AMD also revealed its RTX 5060 competitor. The 8GB Radeon RX 9060 XT will cost $299 when it launches alongside the 16GB model on June 5. In case you don’t remember, Nvidia buried RTX 5060 reviews because 8GB of memory simply isn’t enough in 2025, even for 1080p gaming. That’s still true, even with the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB. That being said, if the 8GB version of AMD’s new graphics card still manages to outpace the RTX 5060 at the same price, it could be a great value proposition for people who focus on esports or don’t mind turning down graphics in the latest games. Hopefully AMD provides press with 8GB versions of the Radeon RX 9060 XT for review – unlike Nvidia. (Seriously, don’t buy the RTX 5060 right now.) If not, avoid the 8GB version until independent reviews arrive.

By Matt Novak Published May 20, 2025 | Comments (0) | Debris is seen outside a damaged American Reproductive Centers fertility clinic after a bomb blast outside the building in Palm Springs, California, on May 17, 2025. © Photo by GABRIEL OSORIO/AFP via Getty Images An explosion outside a fertility clinic in Palm Springs, California, killed one person and injured four others Saturday morning in what the FBI has called an act of terrorism. The suspect in the bombing, 25-year-old Guy Edward Bartkus, was the lone death from the blast, and it seems apparent he held anti-human views. Now Reddit has banned a subreddit tied to the suspect’s ideology. Bartkus is believed to be the person who detonated a bomb at the Palm Springs American Reproductive Center, which offers services like IVF, because he was aligned with the pro-mortalist and anti-natalist movements—the idea that humans should not continue to procreate. Bartkus appears to have been posting to various subreddits, including r/Efilism, which advocated for violence. Reddit has now banned r/Efilism for violating its terms of service. “Violence has no place on Reddit,” a spokesperson for the platform told Gizmodo over email. “Our sitewide rules strictly prohibit any content that encourages, glorifies, incites, or calls for violence. In line with these rules, we are removing any instances of the suspect’s manifesto or recordings and hashing to prevent reupload. We’re also closely monitoring the communities on our platform to ensure compliance with our rules.” Proponents of Efilism (the word “life” spelled backwards) are often known as anti-natalists, which is a more common name for the ideology, though Bartkus described himself as pro-mortalist in his 30-minute audio manifesto. Anti-natalism is a philosophy that advocates for people not to procreate, while pro-mortalists go beyond those anti-natalist ideas to advocate for death in all forms under the theory that because life is suffering it’s ethical to end your own life and even those around you in the process. Bartkus posted an audio file to his website explaining why he was targeting the clinic, filled with logical inconsistencies and general incoherence. Bartkus said he wanted to begin “sterilizing this planet of the disease of life,” but mentioned the recent suicide of his best friend affecting him deeply. Bartkus wrote on his personal website, “It’s just too much of a loss when there’s nobody else you really relate to significantly.” He was clearly struggling with personal issues beyond whatever philosophy to which he was supposedly swearing allegiance. That website has now been taken offline. There are other anti-natalist forums beyond r/Efilism on Reddit that haven’t been banned and some, like r/circlesnip—which includes a description reading, “The Vegan Antinatalist Circlejerk”—put out statements denouncing the attack on the IVF clinic. “It has come to my attention that the individual responsible for today’s bombing in Palm Springs namedropped our communities in their suicide note. Though they struggled with personal grief and mental health issues, their act of terrorism was unjustifiable, incoherent, immoral, and disgusting,” the statement reads.The moderator went on to say that their version of anti-natalism is “explicitly one of non-violence” and said that it should be up to each individual to “make their own reproductive decisions.” “The philosophy we represent is explicitly one of non-violence,” the moderator continued. “We believe it is up to each individual to make their own reproductive decisions. We hope that the Palm Springs American Reproductive Center can rebuild and resume operations.” Other anti-natalist subreddits run by the same moderator, r/Vystopia and r/antinatalism, posted the same statement condemning violence. The r/Efilism subreddit had about 12,000 members before it was banned, according to The Independent, which is certainly not large by Reddit standards. The biggest communities on Reddit have tens of millions of members. The term Elifism was reportedly coined by a fringe YouTuber named Gary Inmendham, who Bartkus mentions by name in his audio manifesto. Inmendham posted a video after the bombing saying that Bartkus had done something “really stupid, dumb, pointless, and even show-offy,” referring to it as a “dumbass act of violence.” Inmendham said that he’s even “against protesters” so he’s “obviously against terrorists.” Bartkus, who sounds deeply insecure about his philosophy in his audio manifesto, said that he was driven to commit the bombing because he couldn’t find people to connect with online to discuss things anymore because spaces like YouTube and X were being censored of anti-natalist content. Bartkus also insisted that while the internet is being “manipulated,” he was immune to the manipulation. Bartkus also said in the recording that he was a vegan and seem fixated on the welfare of animals, referring in his audio recording to “animals raped on farms,” but then going on to say that nature itself was horrifying in a way that even surpassed the suffering caused by humans. All life was suffering that needed to end, in his book. A YouTube account associated with Bartkus, which is now offline, reportedly contained explosions tests, according to ABC News. The size of the Palm Springs blast was considerable, stretching about 250 yards, with Akil Davis, assistant director at the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office, describing it to NPR as, “probably the largest bombing scene that we’ve had in Southern California.” The FBI released a report last month about Nihilist Violent Extremists (NVE), though the definition is so loose that it can be applied pretty broadly to all kinds of ideologies. In this case, however, nihilism does seem to fit well as a descriptor for a philosophy grounded in destroying all of humanity for nebulous ends. Daily Newsletter You May Also Like By Lucas Ropek Published April 9, 2025 By Matt Novak Published March 27, 2025 By Lucas Ropek Published March 14, 2025 By Matthew Gault Published March 5, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published February 14, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published January 22, 2025

Some of Adobe’s most expensive Creative Cloud subscriptions are about to get even pricier for users in North America. Starting from June 17th, the Creative Cloud All Apps plan will be renamed Creative Cloud Pro for users in the US, Canada, and Mexico, adding a bunch of generative AI perks in exchange for bumping up subscription costs.The pre-tax monthly price for individual Creative Cloud All Apps subscribers on an annual contract will increase from $59.99 to $69.99, or from $659.88 to $779.99 annually. The monthly price for rolling, non-contracted subscribers will jump from $89.99 to $104.99. Contracted prices for teams start at $99.99 per month, up from $89.99, while student and teacher plans will jump from $34.99 to $39.99 monthly on renewal.The new Creative Cloud Pro plan provides access to the same Adobe apps and features as the previous All Apps plan, alongside some new additions. Users will have unlimited credits for powering generative AI image tools like Photoshop’s Generate Fill, and 4,000 monthly credits for “premium” AI video and audio features like Generative Extend in Premiere Pro. The plan also includes the ability to select third-party generative AI models like OpenAI’s GPT and Google Imagen, and access to Adobe’s in-beta collaborative whiteboard app, Firefly Boards.“We want to empower you with more time to explore ideas and create, so we’re focused on continually upgrading your apps’ performance, delivering innovations to your core workflows, and integrating generative AI-powered capabilities across Creative Cloud and through our new Firefly app that make you more productive,” Adobe said in its announcement. “Today, we’re sharing updates to our Creative Cloud offerings to reflect our continued innovation and commitment to providing you the best tools for bringing your visions to life.”The previous All Apps plan will no longer be available following the switch, and existing subscribers will be charged the increased price on their next renewal date. These changes only apply in North America, and Adobe says it isn’t planning to make name or pricing changes in other regions “at this time.”Adobe is also offering a stripped-back “Creative Cloud Standard” plan for users who don’t need its generative AI offerings. Starting at $54.99 per month for contracted subscribers or $82.49 for rolling users, the Creative Cloud Standard plan is nearly identical to the current All Apps plan, but reduces the previous 1,000 monthly generative credit allowance down to 25. Users also won’t have access to premium web and mobile app features that are unlocked for Creative Cloud Pro subscribers. Not only is Adobe defaulting current All Apps subscribers to the more expensive AI-laden plan, compared to the Standard offering that’s closer in price and features, but this new Creative Cloud Standard offering is only available to existing subscribers, forcing new customers to take the more expensive AI-focused plan.Adobe’s All Apps plan was a poor investment for most individual users anyway, as it’s rare for one person to need more than 20 apps that target such a wide variety of creative industries. Still, some existing All Apps subscribers aren’t too pleased with the changes, if the reactions on Adobe subreddits are any indication. Canva attempted to make similar AI-driven price increases last year, which were later softened due to backlash from its users, so we will have to see if Adobe sticks to its guns.See More:

For most of my life, I’ve relied on a paper map when I go outdoors. Then, in March, I joined my friend Rusty on the Appalachian Trail for two weeks. He told me to download FarOut.FarOut was my introduction to the world of app-based navigation. It’s focused on thru-hikers, and has useful details, including comments that tell you whether a specific water source is flowing, and if so, how well. It took me a minute to get the hang of it — I was hiking southbound, and it defaults to northbound — but once I did, I was impressed.FarOut works like a guidebook. But the kind of backpacking I ordinarily do is on more offbeat trails in the local national forests — not the wilderness highways FarOut specializes in. So for my first solo trip, to the Ventana Wilderness area of the Los Padres National Forest, I thought I’d try out some of the other navigation apps, as part of an absolutely transparent ploy to get my job to let me fuck off outdoors more often; there are a lot of hikes I want to do. I suspect many of our readers are connoisseurs of the great indoors, but I also know you love gadgets, and let me tell you something: so do backpackers. You would not believe the conversations I have had with absolute strangers about gear.I do work at the phones website. We kind of specialize in having feelings about appsNow, I’m not going to top Outdoor Gear Lab — I love their reviews, and have found them reliable guides when it comes to big purchases* — but I do work at the phones website. We kind of specialize in having feelings about apps.I considered several options. I quickly discarded onX Backcountry when I discovered on one of my trial hikes how quickly it drained my phone battery. I also used CalTopo to prepare for the hike, but because it’s a fairly complex platform with a steep learning curve, I don’t think I’ve spent enough time with it to give it a proper review.I figured I might as well keep it simple. I already knew Google Maps wouldn’t cut it; the acquisitions Google has made over the years suggest that the company’s more interested in cars than pedestrians. Looking at the Health and Fitness category on the Apple App Store, I noticed AllTrails ranked #10, so trying the popular app seemed natural. The other app I saw frequently mentioned on hiking subreddits — besides CalTopo — was Gaia GPS. So I figured I’d start with those two.There are a few other apps in the space I didn’t consider. The most notable are Avenza and Goat Maps. I’ve found Avenza limited, but it seems the feature set has been updated since the last time I played with it. Goat Maps is new to me, but it’s from the same team that created Gaia GPS before it was sold to Outside. (More about that in a minute.)Route planningBecause this was my first solo hike, I was not interested in doing anything especially difficult. I’ve been to the Ventana Wilderness before, and am familiar with the Pine Ridge Trail, which I viewed as the backbone of my trip. One of the things AllTrails has going for it is suggested routes — for this area, 41 possible hikes.I had originally contemplated doing an overnight at China Camp before heading down the Pine Ridge Trail to Sykes Camp as an out-and-back, but after hiking with Rusty, I decided I could be more ambitious. I considered a few routes before settling on what AllTrails calls the Big Sur Sykes Hot Springs Extended Loop. That was partly because I’d checked in with the Big Sur Trail Map, a volunteer information repository hosted by Jack Glendening for trail conditions, and discovered a few trails I might have otherwise wanted to use were overgrown.Once I started mapping my route, I noticed some troubleAllTrails has user comments, which can be useful. One user told me to prepare for ticks and poison oak. Another suggested a stop at Timber Top for a meal or snack as it was beautiful, even if it was a detour, so I worked that into my agenda.In order to get a sense of what I’d be doing, I used tools to create my routes, with different lines for each day. CalTopo, AllTrails, and Gaia all have “snap to route” tools that let you automatically follow a trail the map knows about, which makes creating a route easier. But once I started mapping my route, I noticed some trouble. AllTrails said this was a 32.8-mile hike. I had trouble getting Gaia to acknowledge the fire road that would be part of my route with its auto-route tool set; also, the app insisted I was hiking 40 miles. Both the AllTrails and Gaia “snap to route” tools were easier to use than CalTopo, and it came up with a totally different mileage count than either: a 35-mile hike.Here’s the AllTrails route I planned. It was the easiest tool to use for routing by farHere’s CalTopo’s route-planning; you can see I’m considering doing the route in three days, rather than four.This is the Gaia GPS route plan. As you can see, it’s a mess, and because it was hard to edit, it was difficult to correct the mess.Similarly, looking at elevation gain, AllTrails told me to expect 9,160 feet, CalTopo told me to expect 8901 feet, and Gaia, for some reason, was insisting on 19,000 feet. I gotta say, 19,000 feet did not seem like it was in the vicinity of right. Looking at the map I created on Gaia, I think that’s because the “snap to route” tool had given me some weird detours.Well, what’s a couple miles and a few hundred feet of elevation between friends? I decided the smartest move would be to plan a four-day hike with three overnight stops: Sykes Camp, Rainbow Camp, and Outlaw Camp. I figured having more stops meant I could more easily absorb some unexpected miles if I had to.AllTrails’ route-building tool was easiest to use, and the easiest to edit if I made a mistake. While I appreciated Gaia’s similarly easy snap-to-trail function, it was a profound pain in the ass to edit after I’d made a route. And CalTopo was the most finicky for route-building of the bunch, requiring painstaking clicking. But it also had the best feature set, in terms of lines, colors, and editing. It also had more base layers and overlays showing, among other things, where to expect cellphone service.CalTopo and Gaia let you build and edit maps on a phone, but I primarily used my laptop because a big screen is better for planning routes, and a mouse is a more precise tool than my finger. Tinkering with Gaia on my phone, I found route creation buggy. AllTrails doesn’t seem to offer route creation on the iPhone at all. This didn’t matter much for me, but if you’re creating routes on the fly in the backcountry, you’re out of luck with AllTrails, and Gaia may suddenly quit working.Why use apps at all?I harbor a deep and profound pro-paper bias. A notebook is the best organizational tool available to you. I own hundreds of paper books because they don’t have DRM and they can’t be altered post-publication, or removed from my devices. I like paper maps a great deal, and have used them as my main navigation tool for my entire hiking career.Paper maps have downsides. They don’t respond well to water, for instance. Wear and tear can render them unusable. They may be out of date. And, of course, there are no crowdsourced comments telling you about trail conditions before your hike.The obvious benefit of the navigation apps is the reassuring little blue dotThe obvious benefit of the navigation apps is the reassuring little blue dot that tells you exactly where you are on the trail, without requiring nearly as much work. You can pull out your phone and see how much farther you need to go before arriving at a landmark. And most of us have our phones on our hikes because they’re the most convenient way to take photos. Gaia and AllTrails offer downloadable maps as part of a premium service — for a subscription fee, of course. That’s either $59.90 for Gaia or $89.99 for Gaia’s Outside Plus, which includes access to Outside’s assorted publications. The AllTrails Plus subscription I tested was $35.99 a year; after I went on my hike, it announced AllTrails Peak, which costs $79.99 a year and includes AI tools for route planning. (Given what I know about LLMs, I personally would not trust an AI to plan any hiking route, but I suppose your mileage may vary.) CalTopo, which offers its own set of subscription plans at $20, $50, and $100 a year, shows weather data and information about how much sunlight any part of its map gets at any hour of the day.There are a couple downsides to these apps. They drain the phone battery, which necessitates carrying a portable charger, which means more weight. If the phone doesn’t work — because, say, you dropped it — the app won’t work either. And there are, of course, the privacy issues.I don’t want people to know where I am at all timesMy location is sensitive information; I don’t want people to know where I am at all times. AllTrails defaults to sharing your data publicly, so anyone on Earth can look up your hikes. While you can change this setting, defaults matter. “Public trail activities and community reviews are a big part of the AllTrails experience,” spokesperson Mia DeSimone in an email. I was also prompted to review my hike afterwards — part of the crowdsourced data that makes AllTrails work, I suppose.AllTrails also shares your data. Some of that is unobjectionable — payment providers, for instance — but some of it, like sharing data with marketing partners, raised my eyebrows. “AllTrails does not process sensitive personal data, including precise geolocation, for purposes other than actual use of the AllTrails platform,” DeSimone said.I can’t speak to the pluses and minuses of AllTrails Peak, which I haven’t experimented with. But after my hike, AllTrails also discontinued its “Advanced Conditions” feature that showed weather along a prospective route, what to expect from the ground (wet? icy?), and mosquito activity. AllTrails Peak users will get access to “Trail Conditions,” which DeSimone says is “significantly more robust and precise than Advanced Conditions.” Some AllTrails users seem unhappy about the new pricing tier.I got this AllTrails pop-up after my hike. Reader, I did not review it.Gaia similarly defaults to public sharing, because of “a social component designed to help users connect, share experiences, and discover trails,” said Devin Lehman, general manager of Gaia GPS, in an emailed statement. “Public sharing of hikes is the default setting to encourage this community engagement.” Gaia also shares some data, including location data, with unnamed “service providers,” but Lehman said this is done “under strict data protection agreements” and is used to “support and power specific features and functionalities.”Last year, Gaia began requiring sign-ins, catching a few people who were on multi-day trips by surprise. “To ensure minimal disruption, we implemented a ‘snooze’ option allowing users to defer login for up to 28 days if prompted during an active trip,” Lehman wrote. “Users entirely offline (airplane mode or zero cell service) would not see the prompt at all. However, we understand some users in areas with intermittent service did encounter unexpected prompts. We’ve taken user feedback seriously and continue refining our app experience to better support uninterrupted outdoor adventures.”Its parent company, Outside, also jacked up the cost of subscriptions, and on April 14th this year, it removed access to the National Geographic Trails Illustrated maps. “While we understand some subscribers valued the National Geographic Trails Illustrated maps, these maps offered limited regional coverage and lacked the global scope and dynamic functionality our growing user base needs,” Lehman wrote. He says Gaia “substantially expanded” its offerings in the last few years, and the price increase reflects “the ongoing investment required to maintain and continuously improve Gaia GPS.”Be that as it may, I’ve got several friends who are disgruntled Gaia subscribers looking around for another option. And I personally do not have faith in Outside’s management of Gaia, or its other properties, in the long run.On the trailRun away with me! Elizabeth LopattoBecause I was uncertain about my mileage, I decided to track myself several ways: AllTrails, Gaia, and my Apple Watch Series 6. The Apple Watch isn’t really an ideal fitness tracker for outdoors enthusiasts — it’s flimsy and its battery drains too fast; even the Ultra 2 only gives you 72 hours in low power mode. What it does have going for it is that I already own it, and there are other pieces of gear that were more important to upgrade after my experience on the AT. The Big Four in pack weight are your tent, sleeping bag or quilt, sleeping pad, and pack itself. Updating my tent and quilt, both expensive, also meant I lost about 5 pounds of weight from my pack immediately. Since this wasn’t a long hike and I was already carrying a battery, the Apple Watch’s propensity to drain quickly, even with both low power mode and theater mode on, didn’t seem too terrible.I set out from the trailhead Monday morning, and turned on tracking for AllTrails, Gaia, and my Apple Watch. As with all tracking, there are opportunities for user error — I am of course capable of forgetting to turn this stuff on, or pausing it and then never unpausing it. I mention this because there was user error: I paused the AllTrails tracker and then never unpaused it, so as far as it’s concerned, I hiked 3.7 miles that first day.See? I really did walk some number of miles. Perhaps 11, who knows!I was more successful with my watch and Gaia. I started my watch late — looking at the map, I seem to have missed at least a mile before I started it; it recorded 9 miles of walking. I did start Gaia at the beginning of my hike, and it recorded I hiked 11.6 miles. Both watch and app recorded about 2,400 feet of ascent, a little less than what CalTopo told me to expect (2,600 feet of elevation gain) and significantly less than what AllTrails told me to expect (3,000 feet).I arrived at Sykes Camp, alongside the Big Sur River, a little after 4PM, and set up my tent. It was close enough to dinnertime that I decided to eat. As I was hunched over the stove, a woman walked by, so I said hello. She was looking for the hot spring, and continued walking upriver. About 45 minutes later, she returned. She hadn’t found it.The hot spring wasn’t listed on the AllTrails map, the CalTopo map, or either of my paper maps. But it was on Gaia, and after dinner, I found the hot spring, a half-mile hike on a somewhat overgrown path downriver, and soaked blissfully for about half an hour. I’d post a selfie, but this is the internet, and I know better than to post feet for free.If this isn’t nice, I don’t know what is. Elizabeth LopattoThe next morning I packed up and headed off to Rainbow Camp around 8:45AM. This, I knew, would be an up-and-down day of ridgeline hiking; AllTrails had a helpful elevation map telling me roughly what to expect. Unlike Sykes, Rainbow Camp was likely to be a place I’d be alone. Most of the people I’d spoken to the day before were doing an out-and-back, with Sykes as their only stop. But this ridgeline hike was spotted with wildflowers.I’d planned for this to be a fairly short day, only about 7 miles. I pulled into Rainbow Camp around 2PM and was underwhelmed — it was buggy and not especially scenic. So after eating lunch and refreshing my water supply, I decided to push on to Cold Spring Camp. The AllTrails map suggested it would only be 5 miles more. It was uphill, though, about 2,000 more feet of climbing. Even if I dragged along at 1 mile an hour, I’d still arrive before sunset.I’d thought about camping at Cold Spring before I set off, and had shied away from it both because of the climb and my uncertainty about the actual mileage of my hike. But I was feeling good, and I’d used my Garmin InReach Mini to check in about my change of plans, so I shoved off.According to my trackers recording my actual route — Gaia and AllTrails — it was more like 6 miles, not 5. Gaia tracked 4,884 feet of climb over a total distance of 13.6 miles; AllTrails suggested I’d climbed 5,213 feet over 14.6 miles. (Did I miss a mile somewhere on Gaia? I don’t see a gap in the recording, so I’m not sure how to account for the difference.) My Apple Watch said I’d gone 11.5 miles, also with 4,884 feet of climb — but its battery died before I made camp. I set up camp at Cold Spring, and watched the sun go down over the ocean as I ate dinner.The extra mileage meant I could plausibly make it home the following day. Sure, there were several camps available if I was too tired to do the rest of the hike, but depending on which tracker I used as my source of truth, I had somewhere between 11 and 13 miles left, a fairly easy day of hiking, particularly since it would all be downhill. The third day opened with ridgeline views; I was above a thick ceiling of clouds hiding the ocean. There were, of course, more wildflowers. When I turned off the dirt road onto Terrace Creek Trail, I met a day hiker going the other direction, who warned me about ticks on the grassy descent toward a redwood grove. (Maybe because he went through just before me, or maybe because of the permethrin I’d used on my clothes, I didn’t see any.) I made it back to the parking lot a little after 4PM. I’d had some user error with my Apple Watch — forgetting to start it again after breakfast at Timber Top, so there was an hour and a half gap in its data — and it recorded 11 miles. AllTrails crapped out at some point between when I set off from Cold Spring and breakfast, so it didn’t record my entire hike. Still, it got 11.63 miles. Gaia also had a gap in its recording (something wrong with my phone?) and put me at 12.7 miles.I thought the hike would settle how long the route was. It did, in a way — certainly the hike was longer than the 32.8 miles AllTrails had promised. If we take Gaia’s tracking, which was the most complete of the bunch, as the source of truth, I’d hiked 38 miles, 39 if I added the hike to the hot spring. Conclusion… of some sortWhile I had my paper maps (and compass) with me, the point was to test the apps, and they worked well enough that I didn’t have to refer to my “real” maps at all. But I also didn’t come away with a single clear winner, whether AllTrails or Gaia was best. AllTrails offered better route-planning features, while Gaia was more reliable on the trail. Both had worrisome inaccuracies in their data, which meant in practical terms that I lugged around another day of food in extra weight because I wasn’t totally sure how far I’d be climbing or walking. That’s consequential — food and water are usually the heaviest things a hiker carries.I certainly wouldn’t recommend relying on either of these, particularly without a backup map, and I’m not sold on how they handle my privacy. AllTrails seems to be aimed at people who are more casual hikers than I am. I don’t think Outside has been a good steward of Gaia (or of Outside Magazine). I also hesitate to recommend pricey subscriptions to these apps, given the issues I had with them. In fact, as I was writing this, I realized the most useful app in planning the trip was the one I hadn’t downloaded maps from: CalTopo.I haven’t tested CalTopo in the backcountry yet, so consider this a cliffhanger. Please feel free to pop over to the comments to demand I be allowed to go backpacking for work sooner rather than later, so you can hear more about my map-related misadventures. I’ve been eyeing the Tahoe Rim Trail for later this summer, and if I’m testing gear, it doesn’t count as vacation time, right? Right? Outdoor Gear Lab’s top bra recommendation’s largest size is a C cup, and the reviews are written primarily for teeny tatas. That’s an astounding editorial failure. Not only do athletes of big titty experience have a harder time finding bras at all, we are more likely to experience boob pain — which is a major reason women quit sports. Breast tissue is dead weight, so bra structure is crucial. A bra that’s stretchy enough to fit over your head won’t keep the girls in place during high-impact exercise. Some other rules of thumb: racerbacks press on your traps; thin straps cut into your shoulders; a thick, tight band is a must for weight distribution. A low-cut bra means an astonishing amount of cleavage, but a high neckline will make your gazongas look even bigger, so pick your poison, I guess. (Also, a high-cut bra worn for a long time will incubate a real banner crop of cleavage zits and, in some cases, chafing.) For running, I like Enell’s High Impact Bra — it’s the only one I’ve tried that’s kept my rack from bouncing. (It’s also recommended by Swole Woman Casey Johnston.) I’m still on the lookout for the best backpacking bra; the Enell one is too binding for all-day wear.See More: