After being grumpy about it at first, I'm now convinced this is a better system The post Fine, I’ll Admit It: <i>Battlefield 6</i>‘s Open Weapon System Is Good appeared first on Kotaku.

ActuGaming.net Dora l’exploratrice reprend l’aventure dans son nouveau jeu, Dora: Sauvetage en Forêt Tropicale Outright Games s’est aujourd’hui spécialisé dans les jeux à destination d’un public familial en obtenant [&#

show some love for the losers Delightfully irreverent Underdogs isn’t your parents’ nature docuseries Ryan Reynolds narrates NatGeo's new series highlighting nature's much less cool and majestic creatures Jennifer Ouellette – Jun 15, 2025 3:11 pm | 5 The indestructible honey badger is just one of nature's "benchwarmers" featured in Underdogs Credit: National Geographic/Doug Parker The indestructible honey badger is just one of nature's "benchwarmers" featured in Underdogs Credit: National Geographic/Doug Parker Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Narrator Ryan Reynolds celebrates nature's outcasts in the new NatGeo docuseries Underdogs. Most of us have seen a nature documentary or two (or three) at some point in our lives, so it's a familiar format: sweeping majestic footage of impressively regal animals accompanied by reverently high-toned narration (preferably with a tony British accent). Underdogs, a new docuseries from National Geographic, takes a decidedly different and unconventional approach. Narrated by with hilarious irreverence by Ryan Reynolds, the five-part series highlights nature's less cool and majestic creatures: the outcasts and benchwarmers, more noteworthy for their "unconventional hygiene choices" and "unsavory courtship rituals." It's like The Suicide Squad or Thunderbolts*, except these creatures actually exist. Per the official premise, "Underdogs features a range of never-before-filmed scenes, including the first time a film crew has ever entered a special cave in New Zealand—a huge cavern that glows brighter than a bachelor pad under a black light thanks to the glowing butts of millions of mucus-coated grubs. All over the world, overlooked superstars like this are out there 24/7, giving it maximum effort and keeping the natural world in working order for all those showboating polar bears, sharks and gorillas." It's rated PG-13 thanks to the odd bit of scatalogical humor and shots of Nature Sexy Time Each of the five episodes is built around a specific genre. "Superheroes" highlights the surprising superpowers of the honey badger, pistol shrimp, and the invisible glass frog, among others, augmented with comic book graphics; "Sexy Beasts" focuses on bizarre mating habits and follows the format of a romantic advice column; "Terrible Parents" highlights nature's worst practices, following the outline of a parenting guide; "Total Grossout" is exactly what it sounds like; and "The Unusual Suspects" is a heist tale, documenting the supposed efforts of a macaque to put together the ultimate team of masters of deception and disguise (an inside man, a decoy, a fall guy, etc.).  Green Day even wrote and recorded a special theme song for the opening credits. Co-creators Mark Linfield and Vanessa Berlowitz of Wildstar Films are longtime producers of award-winning wildlife films, most notably Frozen Planet, Planet Earth and David Attenborough's Life of Mammals—you know, the kind of prestige nature documentaries that have become a mainstay for National Geographic and the BBC, among others. They're justly proud of that work, but this time around the duo wanted to try something different. Madagascar's aye-aye: "as if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair" National Geographic/Eleanor Paish Madagascar's aye-aye: "as if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair" National Geographic/Eleanor Paish An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker A fireworm is hit by a cavitation bubble shot from the claw of a pistol shrimp defending its home. National Geographic/Hugh Miller As it grows and molts, the mad hatterpillar stacks old head casings on top of its head. Scientists think it is used as a decoy against would-be predators and parasites, and when needed, it can also be used as a weapon. National Geographic/Katherine Hannaford Worst parents ever? A young barnacle goose chick prepares t make the 800-foot jump from its nest to the ground. National Geographic An adult pearlfish reverses into a sea cucumber's butt to hide. National Geographic A vulture sticks its head inside an elephant carcass to eat. National Geographic A manatee releases flatulence while swimming to lose the buoyancy build up of gas inside its stomach, and descend down the water column. National Geographic/Karl Davies "There is a sense after awhile that you're playing the same animals to the same people, and the shows are starting to look the same and so is your audience," Linfield told Ars. "We thought, okay, how can we do something absolutely the opposite? We've gone through our careers collecting stories of these weird and crazy creatures that don't end up in the script because they're not big or sexy and they live under a rock. But they often have the best life histories and the craziest superpowers." Case in point: the velvet worm featured in the "Superheroes" episode, which creeps up on unsuspecting prey before squirting disgusting slime all over their food. (It's a handy defense mechanism, too, against predators like the wolf spider.) Once Linfield and Berlowitz decided to focus on nature's underdogs and to take a more humorous approach, Ryan Reynolds became their top choice for a narrator—the anti-Richard Attenborough. As luck would have it, the pair shared an agent with the mega-star. So even though they thought there was no way Reynolds would agree to the project, they put together a sizzle reel, complete with a "fake Canadian Ryan Reynolds sound-alike" doing the narration. Reynolds was on set when he received the reel, and loved it so much he recoded his own narration for the footage and sent it back. "From that moment he was in," said Linfield, and Wildstar Films worked closely with Reynolds and his company to develop the final series. "We've never worked that way on a series before, a joint collaboration from day one," Berlowitz admitted. But it worked: the end result strikes the perfect balance between scientific revelation and accurate natural history, and an edgy comic tone. That tone is quintessential Reynolds, and while he did mostly follow the script (which his team helped write), Linfield and Berlowitz admit there was also a fair amount of improvisation—not all of it PG-13.  "What we hadn't appreciated is that he's an incredible improv performer," said Berlowitz. "He can't help himself. He gets into character and starts riffing off [the footage]. There are some takes that we definitely couldn't use, that potentially would fit a slightly more Hulu audience."  Some of the ad-libs made it into the final episodes, however—like Reynolds describing an Aye-Aye as "if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair"—even though it meant going back and doing a bit of recutting to get the new lines to fit. Cinematographer Tom Beldam films a long-tailed macaque who stole his smart phone minutes later. National Geographic/Laura Pennafort Cinematographer Tom Beldam films a long-tailed macaque who stole his smart phone minutes later. National Geographic/Laura Pennafort The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic A male hippo sprays his feces at another male who is threatening to take over his patch. National Geographic A male proboscis monkey flaunts his large nose. The noses of these males are used to amplify their calls in the vast forest. National Geographic Dream girl: A blood-soaked female hyena looks across the African savanna. National Geographic A male bowerbird presents one of the finest items in his collection to a female in his bower. National Geographic The male nursery web spider presents his nuptial gift to the female. National Geographic Cue the Barry White mood music: Two leopard slugs suspend themselves on a rope of mucus as they entwine their bodies to mate with one another. National Geographic Despite their years of collective experience, Linfield and Berlowitz were initially skeptical when the crew told them about the pearl fish, which hides from predators in a sea cucumber's butt (along with many other species). "It had never been filmed so we said, 'You're going to have to prove it to us,'" said Berlowitz. "They came back with this fantastic, hilarious sequence of a pearl fish reverse parking [in a sea cucumber's anus)." The film crew experienced a few heart-pounding moments, most notably while filming the cliffside nests of barnacle geese for the "Terrible Parents" episode. A melting glacier caused a watery avalanche while the crew was filming the geese, and they had to quickly grab a few shots and run to safety. Less dramatic: cinematographer Tom Beldam had his smartphone stolen by a long-tailed macaque mere minutes after he finished capturing the animal on film. If all goes well and Underdogs finds its target audience, we may even get a follow-up. "We are slightly plowing new territory but the science is as true as it's ever been and the stories are good. That aspect of the natural history is still there," said Linfield. "I think what we really hope for is that people who don't normally watch natural history will watch it. If people have as much fun watching it as we had making it, then the metrics should be good enough for another season." Verdict: Underdogs is positively addictive; I binged all five episodes in a single day. (For his part, Reynolds said in a statement that he was thrilled to "finally watch a project of ours with my children. Technically they saw Deadpool and Wolverine but I don't think they absorbed much while covering their eyes and ears and screaming for two hours.") Underdogs premieres June 15, 2025, at 9 PM/8 PM Central on National Geographic (simulcast on ABC) and will be available for streaming on Disney+ and Hulu the following day.  You should watch it, if only to get that second season. Jennifer Ouellette Senior Writer Jennifer Ouellette Senior Writer Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban. 5 Comments

One stock recently impacted by a whirlwind of volatility is Block—the fintech powerhouse behind Square, Cash App, Tidal Music, and more. The company’s COO and CFO, Amrita Ahuja, shares how her team is using new AI tools to find opportunity amid disruption and reach customers left behind by traditional financial systems. Ahuja also shares lessons from the video game industry and discusses Gen Z’s surprising approach to money management.   This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Robert Safian, former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with today’s top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. As a leader, when you’re looking at all of this volatility—the tariffs, consumer sentiment’s been unclear, the stock market’s been all over the place. You guys had a huge one-day drop in early May, and it quickly bounced back. How do you make sense of all these external factors? Yeah, our focus is on what we can control. And ultimately, the thing that we are laser-focused on for our business is product velocity. How quickly can we start small with something, launch something for our customers, and then test and iterate and learn so that ultimately, that something that we’ve launched scales into an important product? I’ll give you an example. Cash App Borrow, which is a product where our customers can get access to a line of credit, often $100, $200, that bridges them from paycheck to paycheck. We know so many Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. That’s a product that we launched about three years ago and have now scaled to serve 9 million actives with $15 billion in credit supply to our customers in a span of a couple short years. The more we can be out testing and launching product at a pace, the more we know we are ultimately delivering value to our customers, and the right things will happen from a stock perspective. Block is a financial services provider. You have Square, the point-of-sale system; the digital wallet Cash App, which you mentioned, which competes with Venmo and Robinhood; and a bunch of others. Then you’ve got the buy-now, pay-later leader Afterpay. You chair Square Financial Services, which is Block’s chartered bank. But you’ve said that in the fintech world, Block is only a little bit fin—that comparatively, it’s more tech. Can you explain what you mean by that? What we think is unique about us is our ability as a technology company to completely change innovation in the space, such that we can help solve systemic issues across credit, payments, commerce, and banking. What that means ultimately is we use technologies like AI and machine learning and data science, and we use these technologies in a unique way, in a way that’s different from a traditional bank. We are able to underwrite those who are often frankly forgotten by the traditional financial ecosystems. Our Square Loans product has almost triple the rate of women-owned businesses that we underwrite. Fifty-eight percent of our loans go to women-owned businesses versus 20% for the industry average. For that Cash App Borrow product I was talking about, 70% of those actives, the 9 million actives that we underwrote, fell below 580 as a FICO score. That’s considered a poor FICO score, and yet 97% of repayments are made on time. And this is because we have unique access to data and these technology and tools which can help us uniquely underwrite this often forgotten customer base. Yeah. I mean, credit—sometimes it’s been blamed for financial excesses. But access to credit is also, as you say, an advantage that’s not available to everyone. Do you have a philosophy between those poles—between risk and opportunity? Or is what you’re saying is that the tech you have allows you to avoid that risk? That’s right. Let’s start with how do the current systems work? It works using inferior data, frankly. It’s more limited data. It’s outdated. Sometimes it’s inaccurate. And it ignores things like someone’s cash flows, the stability of your income, your savings rate, how money moves through your accounts, or how you use alternative forms of credit—like buy now, pay later, which we have in our ecosystem through Afterpay. We have a lot of these signals for our 57 million monthly actives on the Cash App side and for the 4 million small businesses on the Square side, and those, frankly, billions of transaction data points that we have on any given day paired with new technologies. And we intend to continue to be on the forefront of AI, machine learning, and data science to be able to empower more people into the economy. The combination of the superior data and the technologies is what we believe ultimately helps expand access. You have a financial background, but not in the financial services industry. Before Block, you were a video game developer at Activision. Are financial businesses and video games similar? Are there things that are similar about them? There are. There actually are some things that are similar, I will say. There are many things that are unique to each industry. Each industry is incredibly complex. You find that when big technology companies try to do gaming. They’ve taken over the world in many different ways, but they can’t always crack the nut on putting out a great game. Similarly, some of the largest technology companies have dabbled in fintech but haven’t been able to go as deep, so they’re both very nuanced and complex industries. I would say another similarity is that design really matters. Industrial design, the design of products, the interface of products, is absolutely mission-critical to a great game, and it’s absolutely mission-critical to the simplicity and accessibility of our products, be it on Square or Cash App. And then maybe the third thing that I would say is that when I was in gaming, at least the business models were rapidly changing from an intermediary distribution mechanism, like releasing a game once and then selling it through a retailer, to an always-on, direct-to-consumer connection. And similarly with banking, people don’t want to bank from 9 to 5, six days a week. They want 24/7 access to their money and the ability to, again, grow their financial livelihood, move their money around seamlessly. So, some similarities are there in that shift to an intermediary model or a slower model to an always-on, direct-to-consumer connection. Part of your target audience or your target customer base at Block are Gen Z folks. Did you learn things at Activision about Gen Z that has been useful? Are there things that businesses misunderstand about younger generations still? What we’ve learned is that Gen Z, millennial customers, aren’t going to do things the way their parents did. Some of our stats show that 63% of Gen Z customers have moved away from traditional credit cards, and over 80% are skeptical of them. Which means they’re not using a credit card to manage expenses; they’re using a debit card, but then layering on on a transaction-by-transaction basis. Or again, using tools like buy now, pay later, or Cash App Borrow, the means in which they’re managing their consistent cash flows. So that’s an example of how things are changing, and you’ve got to get up to speed with how the next generation of customers expects to manage their money.

8 Sage Green Color Palettes You’ve Got to Experience In this article:See more ▼Post may contain affiliate links which give us commissions at no cost to you.There’s something undeniably calming about sage green that makes it one of my absolute favorite colors to work with as a designer. This muted, earthy hue has this incredible ability to ground a space while still feeling fresh and contemporary. Whether you’re working on a branding project, designing an interior space, or creating digital content, sage green offers a versatility that few colors can match. What I love most about sage green is how it bridges the gap between trendy and timeless. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon, and honestly, I don’t think it ever should. This sophisticated color has been quietly revolutionizing design palettes across every industry, and today I’m excited to share eight of my favorite sage green color combinations that will elevate your next project. 👋 Psst... Did you know you can get unlimited downloads of 59,000+ fonts and millions of other creative assets for just $16.95/mo? Learn more »The 8 Most Inspiring Sage Green Color Palettes 1. Garden Fresh #D2E5C4 #B2C69E #95B07B #79955D #5A743C Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper This monochromatic sage palette is pure perfection for anyone wanting to create depth without complexity. I use this combination constantly in botanical-themed projects because it captures every shade of green you’d find in a thriving garden. The progression from light to dark creates natural hierarchy, making it incredibly functional for both print and digital work. 2. Misty Morning #BDC9BB #ACBAA1 #B2C1A2 #A4B1A0 #ADC3B7 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper When I need something soft and ethereal, this is my go-to palette. These gentle sage tones remind me of early morning fog rolling over hills. It’s perfect for wellness brands, spa environments, or any project that needs to evoke tranquility and peace. The subtle variations create interest without ever feeling overwhelming. 3. Harvest Moon #9AAB89 #647056 #D6C388 #F8C565 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper Get 300+ Fonts for FREEEnter your email to download our 100% free "Font Lover's Bundle". For commercial &amp; personal use. No royalties. No fees. No attribution. 100% free to use anywhere. The combination of sage green with warm golds creates magic every single time. This palette captures that perfect autumn moment when the light hits everything just right. I love using this for brands that want to feel both grounded and optimistic – it’s earthy sophistication with a sunny disposition. 4. Moody Botanical #4D5D42 #6A894B #8DA67E #9B999A #C6B5DF Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper For projects that need a bit more drama, this palette delivers beautifully. The deeper sage tones paired with that unexpected lavender create intrigue without losing the calming essence of green. I find this combination works wonderfully for upscale restaurants or luxury lifestyle brands that want to feel approachable yet refined. 5. Countryside Charm #A3AC9A #8A9A5B #93A395 #748B74 #827D67 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper This palette feels like a walk through the English countryside – all rolling hills and weathered stone walls. The mix of sage greens with those earthy undertones creates incredible depth. I use this combination for projects that need to feel established and trustworthy, like financial services or heritage brands. 6. Industrial Farmhouse Zen #CED3D2 #3F5054 #6F675E #9CAB86 #C8CAB5 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper The marriage of sage green with industrial grays might seem unexpected, but it creates this incredibly sophisticated modern aesthetic. This palette is perfect for tech companies or architectural firms that want to feel innovative yet grounded. The sage adds warmth to what could otherwise be cold, sterile colors. 7. Desert Sage #9AAB89 #B2AC88 #A06464 #8C909C #C9AD99 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper Inspired by the American Southwest, this palette combines sage with dusty terra cottas and warm beiges. There’s something so comforting about these colors together – they feel like sunset in the desert. I love using this for hospitality brands or any project that wants to evoke adventure and warmth. 8. Forest Floor #B2C69E #ACB6A6 #5B7553 #745000 #462800 Download this color palette 735×1102 Pinterest image 2160×3840 Vertical wallpaper 900×900 Square 3840×2160 4K Wallpaper This rich, earthy combination takes sage green into deeper territory with those gorgeous chocolate browns. It reminds me of walking through an old-growth forest where the light filters through layers of leaves. Perfect for organic brands, outdoor companies, or any project that wants to feel authentic and connected to nature. Why Sage Green Is Having Its Moment As someone who’s been watching color trends for years, I can tell you that sage green’s popularity isn’t just a passing fad. This color speaks to our collective desire for calm in an increasingly chaotic world. It’s the visual equivalent of taking a deep breath – immediately soothing and centering. The rise of biophilic design has also played a huge role in sage green’s dominance. As we spend more time indoors, we’re craving those connections to nature, and sage green delivers that botanical feeling without being overly literal. It’s nature-inspired design at its most sophisticated. What makes sage green particularly special is its incredible adaptability. Unlike brighter greens that can feel overwhelming or dated, sage green has this chameleon-like quality that allows it to work in virtually any context. Pair it with warm woods and it feels rustic; combine it with metallics and it becomes luxurious; add some crisp whites and suddenly it’s Scandinavian minimalism. Mastering Sage Green in Your Design Work The key to working with sage green successfully is understanding its undertones. Some sage greens lean more yellow, others more blue or gray. Recognizing these subtle differences will help you create more cohesive palettes and avoid color clashes that can make your work feel off. I always recommend testing your sage green palettes in different lighting conditions. What looks perfect on your computer screen might feel completely different in natural light or under warm artificial lighting. This is especially crucial for interior design projects or any work that will be viewed in physical spaces. When building palettes around sage green, I like to think about the mood I’m trying to create. For calm, peaceful vibes, I’ll pair it with other muted tones and plenty of white space. For something more energetic, I might add unexpected pops of coral or sunny yellow. The beauty of sage green is that it’s such a diplomatic color – it plays well with almost everything. Sage Green Across Different Design Applications Branding and Logo Design In branding work, sage green communicates reliability, growth, and environmental consciousness without hitting people over the head with it. I love using it for wellness companies, sustainable brands, and professional services that want to feel approachable. The key is pairing it with typography that reinforces your brand personality – clean sans serifs for modern feels, or elegant serifs for more traditional approaches. Interior Spaces Sage green walls have become incredibly popular, and for good reason. The color creates an instant sense of calm while still feeling current. I particularly love using darker sage greens in dining rooms or bedrooms where you want that cozy, enveloping feeling. Lighter sages work beautifully in kitchens and bathrooms where you want freshness without the sterility of pure white. Digital Design For websites and apps, sage green offers a refreshing alternative to the blues and grays that dominate digital design. It’s easy on the eyes, which makes it perfect for apps focused on wellness, meditation, or any platform where users will spend extended time. Just be mindful of accessibility – always test your sage green backgrounds with various text colors to ensure proper contrast ratios. Product Design The natural, organic feeling of sage green makes it perfect for product packaging, especially in the beauty, food, and wellness sectors. It communicates quality and naturalness without feeling overly earthy or crunchy. I’ve seen it work beautifully on everything from skincare packaging to high-end kitchen appliances. The Psychology Behind Sage Green’s Appeal Color psychology tells us that green represents growth, harmony, and balance – all things we desperately need in our modern lives. But sage green takes these positive associations and adds sophistication. It’s green without the intensity, nature without the rawness. There’s also something inherently honest about sage green. It doesn’t try too hard or demand attention the way brighter colors do. This authenticity resonates with consumers who are increasingly skeptical of brands that feel forced or overly polished. Sage green whispers where other colors shout, and sometimes that’s exactly what your message needs. Looking Forward: Sage Green’s Staying Power While I can’t predict the future, I’m confident that sage green will remain relevant for years to come. It hits all the right notes for contemporary design – it’s calming without being boring, natural without being literal, and sophisticated without being pretentious. The color also photographs beautifully, which matters more than ever in our Instagram-driven world. Whether it’s a sage green accent wall or a product shot featuring sage packaging, this color translates perfectly to social media, helping brands create that coveted “aesthetic” that drives engagement. As we continue to prioritize wellness and sustainability in design, sage green offers the perfect visual shorthand for these values. It’s a color that makes people feel good, and in a world that often doesn’t, that’s incredibly powerful. Bringing It All Together These eight sage green palettes represent just the beginning of what’s possible with this incredible color. Whether you’re drawn to the monochromatic serenity of Garden Fresh or the unexpected sophistication of Industrial Zen, there’s a sage green palette that can elevate your next project. The secret to success with sage green is trusting its natural elegance. Don’t feel like you need to overstyling or complicate things – sage green’s beauty lies in its understated sophistication. Let it be the calm, confident foundation that allows other elements of your design to shine. So go ahead and embrace the sage green revolution. Your designs (and your stress levels) will thank you for it. After all, in a world full of visual noise, sometimes the most powerful statement you can make is a quiet one. Riley Morgan Riley Morgan is a globe-trotting graphic designer with a sharp eye for color, typography, and intuitive design. They are a color lover and blend creativity with culture, drawing inspiration from cities, landscapes, and stories around the world. When they’re not designing sleek visuals for clients, they’re blogging about trends, tools, and the art of making design feel like home—wherever that may be. 8 Stunning Sunset Color PalettesThere’s something absolutely magical about watching the sun dip below the horizon, painting the sky in breathtaking hues that seem...10 Warm Color Palettes That’ll Brighten Your DayThere’s nothing quite like the embracing quality of warm colors to make a design feel inviting and alive. As someone...10 Luxurious Jewel Tone Color PalettesAs a designer who’s always searching for color combinations that exude sophistication and richness, I find myself constantly returning to...

Red Kong XIX Member Oct 11, 2020 13,560 This is assuming that the handheld can play PS4 games natively without any issues, so they are not included in the poll. Hardware leaker Kepler said it should be able to run PS5 games, even without a patch, but with a performance impact potentially.  Hero_of_the_Day Avenger Oct 27, 2017 19,958 Isn't the rumor that games don't require patches to run on it? That would imply that support isn't mandatory, but automatic.   Homura ▲ Legend ▲ Member Aug 20, 2019 7,232 As the post above said, the rumor is the PS5 portable will be able to run natively any and all PS4/PS5 games. Of course, some games might not work properly or require specific patches, but the idea is automatic compatibility.  shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 42,292 Ideally you'd want stuff to pretty much work out of the box. The more you ask devs to do, the less I imagine will want to support it... Or suddenly games get parred down so that they can run on handhelds (which considering how people hated cross gen for that reason, they'd hate it here as well). I personally would just prefer a solution where its automatic. I dont really care about a Sony handheld, dont really want devs to be forced to support the thing (considering how shit Sony is at supporting its peripherals - like the Vita or PSVR2)  Modest_Modsoul Living the Dreams Member Oct 29, 2017 28,418 🤷‍♂️   setmymindforopensky Member Apr 20, 2025 67 a lot of games have performance modes. it should run a lot of the library even without any patching. if there's multiplat im sure itll default to the PS4 ver. im not sure what theyd do for something like GTA6 but itll have a series S version so its clearly scalable enough. im guessing PSTV situation. support it or not we dont care.  reksveks Member May 17, 2022 7,628 Think Kepler is personally assuming the goal of running without patches is a goal and one that won't happen just cause it's too late to force it. It's going to be an interesting solution to an interesting problem  Servbot24 The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 47,826 Obviously not. Pretty absurd question tbh.   RivalGT Member Dec 13, 2017 7,616 This one sounds like it requires a lot of work on Sony's end, I dont think developers will need to do much for games to work. Granted moving forward Sony is likely to make it easier for devs to have a more input on this portable mode. Things working out of the box is likely the goal, and thats what Sony needs if they want this to work, but devs having more input on this mode would be a plus I think.  Callibretto Member Oct 25, 2017 10,445 Indonesia shadowman16 said: Ideally you'd want stuff to pretty much work out of the box. The more you ask devs to do, the less I imagine will want to support it... Or suddenly games get parred down so that they can run on handhelds (which considering how people hated cross gen for that reason, they'd hate it here as well). I personally would just prefer a solution where its automatic. I dont really care about a Sony handheld, dont really want devs to be forced to support the thing (considering how shit Sony is at supporting its peripherals - like the Vita or PSVR2) Click to expand... Click to shrink... depend on the game imo, asking CD Project to somehow make Witcher 4 playable on handheld might be unreasonable. but any game that can run on Switch 2 should be playable on PSPortable without much issue   Pheonix1 Member Jun 22, 2024 716 Absolutely they will. Not sure why people think it would be hard, if they hand them.the right tools most ports won't take long anyhow.   skeezx Member Oct 27, 2017 23,994 guessing there will be a "portable approved" label with the respective games going forward, regardless whether it's a PS5 or PS6 game. and when the thing is released popular past titles will be retroactively approved by sony, and up to developers if they want to patch the bigger games to be portable friendly. i guess where things could get tricky/laborious for developers is whether every game going forward is required to screen for portable performance, as it's not a PC so the portable will likely disallow for running "non-approved" games at all  AmFreak Member Oct 26, 2017 3,245 They need to give people some form of guarantee that it will get games, otherwise they greatly diminish their potential success. The best way to do this is to make it another SKU of the contemporary console. And with (close to) everything already running at 60fps and progression slowing to a crawl it's far easier than it had been in the past.  Ruck Member Oct 25, 2017 3,105 I mean, what is the handheld? PS6? Or an actual second console? If the former, then yes, if the latter then no   TitanicFall Member Nov 12, 2017 9,340 Nah. It might be incentivized though. There's not much in it for devs if it's a cross buy situation.   Callibretto Member Oct 25, 2017 10,445 Indonesia imo, PS6 will remain their main console, focusing on high fidelity visuals that Switch 2 and portable PC won't be able to run without huge compromise. PSPortable will be secondary console, something like PSPortal, but this time able to play any games that Switch2 can reasonably run. and for the high end games that it can't run, it will use streaming, either from PS6 you own, or PS+ Premium subs  bleits Member Oct 14, 2023 373 They have to if they want to be taken seriously   Vic Damone Jr. Member Oct 27, 2017 20,534 Nope Sony doesn't mandate this stuff and it's why their second product always dies.   fiendcode Member Oct 26, 2017 26,514 I think it depends on what the device really is, if it's more of a "Portal 2" or a "Series SP" or something else entirely (PSP3?). Streaming might be enough for PS6 games along with incentivized PS5/4 patches but whatever SIE does they need to make sure their inhouse teams are ALL on board this time. That was a big part of PSP/Vita's downfall, that the biggest or most important PS Studios snubbed them and the teams that did show up with support are mostly closed and gone now.   Callibretto Member Oct 25, 2017 10,445 Indonesia bleits said: They have to if they want to be taken seriously Click to expand... Click to shrink... from the last interview with PS exec about Switch 2 spec, it seems clear that PS have no plan to abandon high end console spec to switch to mobile hardware like Switch 2 and Xbox Ally. PS consider their high fidelity visual as advantage and differentiator from Nintendo. so with PS6, their top studio will eventuall make games that just won't realistically run on handheld devices. so having a mandate where all PS6 games is playable on handheld is simply unrealistic imo  danm999 Member Oct 29, 2017 19,929 Sydney Incentives, not mandates.   NSESN ▲ Legend ▲ Member Oct 25, 2017 27,729 I think people are setting themselves for disappointment in regards for how powerful this thing will be   defaltoption Plug in a controller and enter the Konami code The Fallen Oct 27, 2017 12,485 Austin Depends on what they call it. If they call it anything related to ps6, expect very bad performance, and mandates If they call it ps5 portable, expect bad performance and no mandates as it will be handled on their end If they call it a ps portable expect it to have no support from Sony and get whatever it gets just be happy it functions till they abandon it.  Metnut Member Apr 7, 2025 30 Good question OP. I voted the middle one. I think anything that ships for PS5 will need to work for the handheld. Question is whether that works automatically or will need patches.  mute ▲ Legend ▲ Member Oct 25, 2017 29,807 I think that would require a level of commitment to a secondary piece of hardware that Sony hasn't shown in a long time.   Patison Member Oct 27, 2017 761 It's difficult to say without knowing what they're planning with this device exactly. If they're fully going Switch route (or PS Vita/PS TV route) or more like a Steam Deck, which will run launch games perfectly and then, as time goes on, some titles might start looking less than ideal or be unplayable at all. Or Series S/X, just the Series S being portable — that would be preferable but also limiting but also diminishing returns between generations so might be worth it etc. And if that device happens at all and its development won't be dropped soon is another question. Lots of unknowns, but I'm interested to see what Sony comes up with, as long as they'll have games to support it this time around.  Jammerz Member Apr 29, 2023 1,579 I think it will be optional support. However sony needs to support it with their first parties to set an example and making it as easy as possible for other devs to scale down. For sony first party games maybe use nixxes to scale down so their studios aren't bogged down.  Hamchan The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 6,000 I think 99.9% of games will be crossgen between PS5 and PS6 for the entire generation, just based on how this industry is going, so it might not be much of an issue for Sony to mandate.   Advance.Wars.Sgt. Member Jun 10, 2018 10,456 Honestly, I'd worry more about Sony's 1st party teams than 3rd party developers since they were notoriously adverse making software with a handheld power profile in mind.   overthewaves Member Sep 30, 2020 1,203 Wouldn't that hamstring the games for ps6? That's PlayStation players biggest fear they don't want a series S type situation right? They treat series S like a punching bag.   Neonvisions Member Oct 27, 2017 707 overthewaves said: Wouldn't that hamstring the games for ps6? That's PlayStation players biggest fear they don't want a series S type situation right? They treat series S like a punching bag. Click to expand... Click to shrink... How would that effect PS6? Are you suggesting that the Series S hamstrings games for the X?  Gwarm Member Nov 13, 2017 2,902 I'd be shocked if Sony released a device that let's you play games that haven't been patched or confirmed to run acceptably. Imagine if certain games just hard crashed the console? This is the company that wouldn't let you play certain Vita games on the PSTV even if they actually worked.   bloopland33 Member Mar 4, 2020 3,845 I wonder if they'll just do the Steam Deck thing and do a compatibility badge. You can boot whatever software you want, but it might run at 5 fps and drain your battery. This would be in addition to whatever efforts they're doing to make things work out of the box, of course. But it's hard to imagine them mandating developers ship a PS6 profile and a PS6P profile for those heavier games 5-7 years from now… ….but it's also hard to imagine them shipping this PS6-gen device that doesn't play everything (depending on how they position it). So maybe they Steam Deck it  vivftp Member Oct 29, 2017 23,016 My guess, every PS6 game will be mandated to support it. PS5 games will support it natively for the simpler games and will require a patch as has been rumored to run on lesser specs I think next gen we get PS3 and Vita emulation so the PS6 and portable will be able to play games from PSN from every past PlayStation  Mocha Joe Member Jun 2, 2021 13,636 Really need to take the Steam Deck approach and don't make it a requirement. Just make it a complementary device where it is possible to play majority of the games available on PSN.   overthewaves Member Sep 30, 2020 1,203 Neonvisions said: How would that effect PS6? Are you suggesting that the Series S hamstrings games for the X? Click to expand... Click to shrink... I mean did you see the reaction here to the series S announcement lol. Everyone was saying it's gonna "hold back the generation".   reksveks Member May 17, 2022 7,628 Neonvisions said: How would that effect PS6? Are you suggesting that the Series S hamstrings games for the X? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Or the perception is that it does but the truth is that there is a lot of factors   Fabs Member Aug 22, 2019 2,827 I can't see the forcing handheld and pro support next gen.   level Member May 25, 2023 1,427 Definitely not Games already take too long to make. Extra time isn't something they'll want to reinforce to their developers.  gofreak Member Oct 26, 2017 8,411 I don't think support will be mandatory. I think they're bringing it into a reality where a growing portion of games can, or could, run without much change or effort on the developer's part on a next gen handheld. They'll lean on that natural trend rather than a policy - anything that is outside of that will just be streamable as now with the Portal.   Caiusto Member Oct 25, 2017 7,086 If they don't want to end up with another Vita yes they will.   mute ▲ Legend ▲ Member Oct 25, 2017 29,807 Advance.Wars.Sgt. said: Honestly, I'd worry more about Sony's 1st party teams than 3rd party developers since they were notoriously adverse making software with a handheld power profile in mind. Click to expand... Click to shrink... It does seem kinda unthinkable that Intergalactic would be made with a handheld in mind, for example.   AmFreak Member Oct 26, 2017 3,245 mute said: It does seem kinda unthinkable that Intergalactic would be made with a handheld in mind, for example. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Ratchet, Returnal, Cyberpunk, etc. also weren't made "with a handheld in mind".   Spoit Member Oct 28, 2017 5,599 Given how much of a pain the series S mandate has been, I don't see them binding even first party studios to it, especially ones that are trying to go for the cutting edge of tech. Since given AMDs timelines, is not going to be anywhere near a base PS5. I'm also skeptical of the claim that'll be able to play ps5 games without extensive patching.  Jawmuncher Crisis Dino Moderator Oct 25, 2017 45,166 Ibis Island No, I think the portable will handle portable stuff "automatically" for what it converts   knightmawk Member Dec 12, 2018 8,900 I expect they'll do everything they can to make sure no one has to think about it and it's as automatic as possible. It'll technically still be part of cert, but the goal will be for it to be rare that a game fails that part of cert and has to be sent back. That being said, I imagine there will be some games that still don't work and developers will be able to submit for that exception.  RivalGT Member Dec 13, 2017 7,616 I think the concept here is similar to how PS4 games play on PS5, the ones with patches I mean, the game will run with a different graphics preset then it would on PS4/ PS4 Pro, so in some cases this means higher resolution or higher frame rate cap. What Sony needs to work on their end is getting this to work without any patches from developers. Its the only way this can work.  Vexii Member Oct 31, 2017 3,103 UK if they don't mandate support, it'll just be a death knell for the format. I don't think they could get away with a dedicated handheld platform now when the Switch and Steam Deck exists   Mobius and Pet Octopus Member Oct 25, 2017 17,065 Just because a game can run on a handheld, doesn't mean that's all required for support. The UI alone likely requires changes for an optimal experience, sometimes necessary to be "playable". Small screen sizes usually needs changes.   SeanMN Member Oct 28, 2017 2,437 If PS6 games support is optional, that will create fragmentation of the platform and uncertain software support. If it's part of the PS6 family and support is mandatory, I can see there being concern that if would hold the generation back with a low capability sku. My thoughts are this should be a PS6 and support the same as the primary console. 

Transcript [MUSIC]      [BOOK PASSAGE]   PETER LEE: “In ‘The Little Black Bag,’ a classic science fiction story, a high-tech doctor’s kit of the future is accidentally transported back to the 1950s, into the shaky hands of a washed-up, alcoholic doctor. The ultimate medical tool, it redeems the doctor wielding it, allowing him to practice gratifyingly heroic medicine. … The tale ends badly for the doctor and his treacherous assistant, but it offered a picture of how advanced technology could transform medicine—powerful when it was written nearly 75 years ago and still so today. What would be the Al equivalent of that little black bag? At this moment when new capabilities are emerging, how do we imagine them into medicine?”   [END OF BOOK PASSAGE]     [THEME MUSIC]     This is The AI Revolution in Medicine, Revisited. I’m your host, Peter Lee.    Shortly after OpenAI’s GPT-4 was publicly released, Carey Goldberg, Dr. Zak Kohane, and I published The AI Revolution in Medicine to help educate the world of healthcare and medical research about the transformative impact this new generative AI technology could have. But because we wrote the book when GPT-4 was still a secret, we had to speculate. Now, two years later, what did we get right, and what did we get wrong?     In this series, we’ll talk to clinicians, patients, hospital administrators, and others to understand the reality of AI in the field and where we go from here.   [THEME MUSIC FADES] The book passage I read at the top is from “Chapter 10: The Big Black Bag.”  In imagining AI in medicine, Carey, Zak, and I included in our book two fictional accounts. In the first, a medical resident consults GPT-4 on her personal phone as the patient in front of her crashes. Within seconds, it offers an alternate response based on recent literature. In the second account, a 90-year-old woman with several chronic conditions is living independently and receiving near-constant medical support from an AI aide.    In our conversations with the guests we’ve spoken to so far, we’ve caught a glimpse of these predicted futures, seeing how clinicians and patients are actually using AI today and how developers are leveraging the technology in the healthcare products and services they’re creating. In fact, that first fictional account isn’t so fictional after all, as most of the doctors in the real world actually appear to be using AI at least occasionally—and sometimes much more than occasionally—to help in their daily clinical work. And as for the second fictional account, which is more of a science fiction account, it seems we are indeed on the verge of a new way of delivering and receiving healthcare, though the future is still very much open.  As we continue to examine the current state of AI in healthcare and its potential to transform the field, I’m pleased to welcome Bill Gates and Sébastien Bubeck.   Bill may be best known as the co-founder of Microsoft, having created the company with his childhood friend Paul Allen in 1975. He’s now the founder of Breakthrough Energy, which aims to advance clean energy innovation, and TerraPower, a company developing groundbreaking nuclear energy and science technologies. He also chairs the world’s largest philanthropic organization, the Gates Foundation, and focuses on solving a variety of health challenges around the globe and here at home.  Sébastien is a research lead at OpenAI. He was previously a distinguished scientist, vice president of AI, and a colleague of mine here at Microsoft, where his work included spearheading the development of the family of small language models known as Phi. While at Microsoft, he also coauthored the discussion-provoking 2023 paper “Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence,” which presented the results of early experiments with GPT-4 conducted by a small team from Microsoft Research.    [TRANSITION MUSIC]   Here’s my conversation with Bill Gates and Sébastien Bubeck.  LEE: Bill, welcome.  BILL GATES: Thank you.  LEE: Seb …  SÉBASTIEN BUBECK: Yeah. Hi, hi, Peter. Nice to be here.  LEE: You know, one of the things that I’ve been doing just to get the conversation warmed up is to talk about origin stories, and what I mean about origin stories is, you know, what was the first contact that you had with large language models or the concept of generative AI that convinced you or made you think that something really important was happening?  And so, Bill, I think I’ve heard the story about, you know, the time when the OpenAI folks—Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and others—showed you something, but could we hear from you what those early encounters were like and what was going through your mind?   GATES: Well, I’d been visiting OpenAI soon after it was created to see things like GPT-2 and to see the little arm they had that was trying to match human manipulation and, you know, looking at their games like Dota that they were trying to get as good as human play. And honestly, I didn’t think the language model stuff they were doing, even when they got to GPT-3, would show the ability to learn, you know, in the same sense that a human reads a biology book and is able to take that knowledge and access it not only to pass a test but also to create new medicines.  And so my challenge to them was that if their LLM could get a five on the advanced placement biology test, then I would say, OK, it took biologic knowledge and encoded it in an accessible way and that I didn’t expect them to do that very quickly but it would be profound.   And it was only about six months after I challenged them to do that, that an early version of GPT-4 they brought up to a dinner at my house, and in fact, it answered most of the questions that night very well. The one it got totally wrong, we were … because it was so good, we kept thinking, Oh, we must be wrong. It turned out it was a math weakness [LAUGHTER] that, you know, we later understood that that was an area of, weirdly, of incredible weakness of those early models. But, you know, that was when I realized, OK, the age of cheap intelligence was at its beginning.  LEE: Yeah. So I guess it seems like you had something similar to me in that my first encounters, I actually harbored some skepticism. Is it fair to say you were skeptical before that?  GATES: Well, the idea that we’ve figured out how to encode and access knowledge in this very deep sense without even understanding the nature of the encoding, …  LEE: Right.   GATES: … that is a bit weird.   LEE: Yeah.  GATES: We have an algorithm that creates the computation, but even say, OK, where is the president’s birthday stored in there? Where is this fact stored in there? The fact that even now when we’re playing around, getting a little bit more sense of it, it’s opaque to us what the semantic encoding is, it’s, kind of, amazing to me. I thought the invention of knowledge storage would be an explicit way of encoding knowledge, not an implicit statistical training.  LEE: Yeah, yeah. All right. So, Seb, you know, on this same topic, you know, I got—as we say at Microsoft—I got pulled into the tent. [LAUGHS]  BUBECK: Yes.   LEE: Because this was a very secret project. And then, um, I had the opportunity to select a small number of researchers in MSR [Microsoft Research] to join and start investigating this thing seriously. And the first person I pulled in was you.  BUBECK: Yeah.  LEE: And so what were your first encounters? Because I actually don’t remember what happened then.  BUBECK: Oh, I remember it very well. [LAUGHS] My first encounter with GPT-4 was in a meeting with the two of you, actually. But my kind of first contact, the first moment where I realized that something was happening with generative AI, was before that. And I agree with Bill that I also wasn’t too impressed by GPT-3.  I though that it was kind of, you know, very naturally mimicking the web, sort of parroting what was written there in a nice way. Still in a way which seemed very impressive. But it wasn’t really intelligent in any way. But shortly after GPT-3, there was a model before GPT-4 that really shocked me, and this was the first image generation model, DALL-E 1.  So that was in 2021. And I will forever remember the press release of OpenAI where they had this prompt of an avocado chair and then you had this image of the avocado chair. [LAUGHTER] And what really shocked me is that clearly the model kind of “understood” what is a chair, what is an avocado, and was able to merge those concepts.  So this was really, to me, the first moment where I saw some understanding in those models.   LEE: So this was, just to get the timing right, that was before I pulled you into the tent.  BUBECK: That was before. That was like a year before.  LEE: Right.   BUBECK: And now I will tell you how, you know, we went from that moment to the meeting with the two of you and GPT-4.  So once I saw this kind of understanding, I thought, OK, fine. It understands concept, but it’s still not able to reason. It cannot—as, you know, Bill was saying—it cannot learn from your document. It cannot reason.   So I set out to try to prove that. You know, this is what I was in the business of at the time, trying to prove things in mathematics. So I was trying to prove that basically autoregressive transformers could never reason. So I was trying to prove this. And after a year of work, I had something reasonable to show. And so I had the meeting with the two of you, and I had this example where I wanted to say, there is no way that an LLM is going to be able to do x.  And then as soon as I … I don’t know if you remember, Bill. But as soon as I said that, you said, oh, but wait a second. I had, you know, the OpenAI crew at my house recently, and they showed me a new model. Why don’t we ask this new model this question?   LEE: Yeah. BUBECK: And we did, and it solved it on the spot. And that really, honestly, just changed my life. Like, you know, I had been working for a year trying to say that this was impossible. And just right there, it was shown to be possible.   LEE: [LAUGHS] One of the very first things I got interested in—because I was really thinking a lot about healthcare—was healthcare and medicine.  And I don’t know if the two of you remember, but I ended up doing a lot of tests. I ran through, you know, step one and step two of the US Medical Licensing Exam. Did a whole bunch of other things. I wrote this big report. It was, you know, I can’t remember … a couple hundred pages.   And I needed to share this with someone. I didn’t … there weren’t too many people I could share it with. So I sent, I think, a copy to you, Bill. Sent a copy to you, Seb.   I hardly slept for about a week putting that report together. And, yeah, and I kept working on it. But I was far from alone. I think everyone who was in the tent, so to speak, in those early days was going through something pretty similar. All right. So I think … of course, a lot of what I put in the report also ended up being examples that made it into the book.  But the main purpose of this conversation isn’t to reminisce about [LAUGHS] or indulge in those reminiscences but to talk about what’s happening in healthcare and medicine. And, you know, as I said, we wrote this book. We did it very, very quickly. Seb, you helped. Bill, you know, you provided a review and some endorsements.  But, you know, honestly, we didn’t know what we were talking about because no one had access to this thing. And so we just made a bunch of guesses. So really, the whole thing I wanted to probe with the two of you is, now with two years of experience out in the world, what, you know, what do we think is happening today?  You know, is AI actually having an impact, positive or negative, on healthcare and medicine? And what do we now think is going to happen in the next two years, five years, or 10 years? And so I realize it’s a little bit too abstract to just ask it that way. So let me just try to narrow the discussion and guide us a little bit.   Um, the kind of administrative and clerical work, paperwork, around healthcare—and we made a lot of guesses about that—that appears to be going well, but, you know, Bill, I know we’ve discussed that sometimes that you think there ought to be a lot more going on. Do you have a viewpoint on how AI is actually finding its way into reducing paperwork?  GATES: Well, I’m stunned … I don’t think there should be a patient-doctor meeting where the AI is not sitting in and both transcribing, offering to help with the paperwork, and even making suggestions, although the doctor will be the one, you know, who makes the final decision about the diagnosis and whatever prescription gets done.   It’s so helpful. You know, when that patient goes home and their, you know, son who wants to understand what happened has some questions, that AI should be available to continue that conversation. And the way you can improve that experience and streamline things and, you know, involve the people who advise you. I don’t understand why that’s not more adopted, because there you still have the human in the loop making that final decision.  But even for, like, follow-up calls to make sure the patient did things, to understand if they have concerns and knowing when to escalate back to the doctor, the benefit is incredible. And, you know, that thing is ready for prime time. That paradigm is ready for prime time, in my view.  LEE: Yeah, there are some good products, but it seems like the number one use right now—and we kind of got this from some of the previous guests in previous episodes—is the use of AI just to respond to emails from patients. [LAUGHTER] Does that make sense to you?  BUBECK: Yeah. So maybe I want to second what Bill was saying but maybe take a step back first. You know, two years ago, like, the concept of clinical scribes, which is one of the things that we’re talking about right now, it would have sounded, in fact, it sounded two years ago, borderline dangerous. Because everybody was worried about hallucinations. What happened if you have this AI listening in and then it transcribes, you know, something wrong?  Now, two years later, I think it’s mostly working. And in fact, it is not yet, you know, fully adopted. You’re right. But it is in production. It is used, you know, in many, many places. So this rate of progress is astounding because it wasn’t obvious that we would be able to overcome those obstacles of hallucination. It’s not to say that hallucinations are fully solved. In the case of the closed system, they are.   Now, I think more generally what’s going on in the background is that there is something that we, that certainly I, underestimated, which is this management overhead. So I think the reason why this is not adopted everywhere is really a training and teaching aspect. People need to be taught, like, those systems, how to interact with them.  And one example that I really like, a study that recently appeared where they tried to use ChatGPT for diagnosis and they were comparing doctors without and with ChatGPT (opens in new tab). And the amazing thing … so this was a set of cases where the accuracy of the doctors alone was around 75%. ChatGPT alone was 90%. So that’s already kind of mind blowing. But then the kicker is that doctors with ChatGPT was 80%.   Intelligence alone is not enough. It’s also how it’s presented, how you interact with it. And ChatGPT, it’s an amazing tool. Obviously, I absolutely love it. But it’s not … you don’t want a doctor to have to type in, you know, prompts and use it that way.  It should be, as Bill was saying, kind of running continuously in the background, sending you notifications. And you have to be really careful of the rate at which those notifications are being sent. Because if they are too frequent, then the doctor will learn to ignore them. So you have to … all of those things matter, in fact, at least as much as the level of intelligence of the machine.  LEE: One of the things I think about, Bill, in that scenario that you described, doctors do some thinking about the patient when they write the note. So, you know, I’m always a little uncertain whether it’s actually … you know, you wouldn’t necessarily want to fully automate this, I don’t think. Or at least there needs to be some prompt to the doctor to make sure that the doctor puts some thought into what happened in the encounter with the patient. Does that make sense to you at all?  GATES: At this stage, you know, I’d still put the onus on the doctor to write the conclusions and the summary and not delegate that.  The tradeoffs you make a little bit are somewhat dependent on the situation you’re in. If you’re in Africa, So, yes, the doctor’s still going to have to do a lot of work, but just the quality of letting the patient and the people around them interact and ask questions and have things explained, that alone is such a quality improvement. It’s mind blowing.   LEE: So since you mentioned, you know, Africa—and, of course, this touches on the mission and some of the priorities of the Gates Foundation and this idea of democratization of access to expert medical care—what’s the most interesting stuff going on right now? Are there people and organizations or technologies that are impressing you or that you’re tracking?  GATES: Yeah. So the Gates Foundation has given out a lot of grants to people in Africa doing education, agriculture but more healthcare examples than anything. And the way these things start off, they often start out either being patient-centric in a narrow situation, like, OK, I’m a pregnant woman; talk to me. Or, I have infectious disease symptoms; talk to me. Or they’re connected to a health worker where they’re helping that worker get their job done. And we have lots of pilots out, you know, in both of those cases.   The dream would be eventually to have the thing the patient consults be so broad that it’s like having a doctor available who understands the local things.   LEE: Right.   GATES: We’re not there yet. But over the next two or three years, you know, particularly given the worsening financial constraints against African health systems, where the withdrawal of money has been dramatic, you know, figuring out how to take this—what I sometimes call “free intelligence”—and build a quality health system around that, we will have to be more radical in low-income countries than any rich country is ever going to be.   LEE: Also, there’s maybe a different regulatory environment, so some of those things maybe are easier? Because right now, I think the world hasn’t figured out how to and whether to regulate, let’s say, an AI that might give a medical diagnosis or write a prescription for a medication.  BUBECK: Yeah. I think one issue with this, and it’s also slowing down the deployment of AI in healthcare more generally, is a lack of proper benchmark. Because, you know, you were mentioning the USMLE [United States Medical Licensing Examination], for example. That’s a great test to test human beings and their knowledge of healthcare and medicine. But it’s not a great test to give to an AI.  It’s not asking the right questions. So finding what are the right questions to test whether an AI system is ready to give diagnosis in a constrained setting, that’s a very, very important direction, which to my surprise, is not yet accelerating at the rate that I was hoping for.  LEE: OK, so that gives me an excuse to get more now into the core AI tech because something I’ve discussed with both of you is this issue of what are the right tests. And you both know the very first test I give to any new spin of an LLM is I present a patient, the results—a mythical patient—the results of my physical exam, my mythical physical exam. Maybe some results of some initial labs. And then I present or propose a differential diagnosis. And if you’re not in medicine, a differential diagnosis you can just think of as a prioritized list of the possible diagnoses that fit with all that data. And in that proposed differential, I always intentionally make two mistakes.  I make a textbook technical error in one of the possible elements of the differential diagnosis, and I have an error of omission. And, you know, I just want to know, does the LLM understand what I’m talking about? And all the good ones out there do now. But then I want to know, can it spot the errors? And then most importantly, is it willing to tell me I’m wrong, that I’ve made a mistake?   That last piece seems really hard for AI today. And so let me ask you first, Seb, because at the time of this taping, of course, there was a new spin of GPT-4o last week that became overly sycophantic. In other words, it was actually prone in that test of mine not only to not tell me I’m wrong, but it actually praised me for the creativity of my differential. [LAUGHTER] What’s up with that?  BUBECK: Yeah, I guess it’s a testament to the fact that training those models is still more of an art than a science. So it’s a difficult job. Just to be clear with the audience, we have rolled back that [LAUGHS] version of GPT-4o, so now we don’t have the sycophant version out there.  Yeah, no, it’s a really difficult question. It has to do … as you said, it’s very technical. It has to do with the post-training and how, like, where do you nudge the model? So, you know, there is this very classical by now technique called RLHF [reinforcement learning from human feedback], where you push the model in the direction of a certain reward model. So the reward model is just telling the model, you know, what behavior is good, what behavior is bad.  But this reward model is itself an LLM, and, you know, Bill was saying at the very beginning of the conversation that we don’t really understand how those LLMs deal with concepts like, you know, where is the capital of France located? Things like that. It is the same thing for this reward model. We don’t know why it says that it prefers one output to another, and whether this is correlated with some sycophancy is, you know, something that we discovered basically just now. That if you push too hard in optimization on this reward model, you will get a sycophant model.  So it’s kind of … what I’m trying to say is we became too good at what we were doing, and we ended up, in fact, in a trap of the reward model.  LEE: I mean, you do want … it’s a difficult balance because you do want models to follow your desires and …  BUBECK: It’s a very difficult, very difficult balance.  LEE: So this brings up then the following question for me, which is the extent to which we think we’ll need to have specially trained models for things. So let me start with you, Bill. Do you have a point of view on whether we will need to, you know, quote-unquote take AI models to med school? Have them specially trained? Like, if you were going to deploy something to give medical care in underserved parts of the world, do we need to do something special to create those models?  GATES: We certainly need to teach them the African languages and the unique dialects so that the multimedia interactions are very high quality. We certainly need to teach them the disease prevalence and unique disease patterns like, you know, neglected tropical diseases and malaria. So we need to gather a set of facts that somebody trying to go for a US customer base, you know, wouldn’t necessarily have that in there.  Those two things are actually very straightforward because the additional training time is small. I’d say for the next few years, we’ll also need to do reinforcement learning about the context of being a doctor and how important certain behaviors are. Humans learn over the course of their life to some degree that, I’m in a different context and the way I behave in terms of being willing to criticize or be nice, you know, how important is it? Who’s here? What’s my relationship to them?   Right now, these machines don’t have that broad social experience. And so if you know it’s going to be used for health things, a lot of reinforcement learning of the very best humans in that context would still be valuable. Eventually, the models will, having read all the literature of the world about good doctors, bad doctors, it’ll understand as soon as you say, “I want you to be a doctor diagnosing somebody.” All of the implicit reinforcement that fits that situation, you know, will be there. LEE: Yeah. GATES: And so I hope three years from now, we don’t have to do that reinforcement learning. But today, for any medical context, you would want a lot of data to reinforce tone, willingness to say things when, you know, there might be something significant at stake.  LEE: Yeah. So, you know, something Bill said, kind of, reminds me of another thing that I think we missed, which is, the context also … and the specialization also pertains to different, I guess, what we still call “modes,” although I don’t know if the idea of multimodal is the same as it was two years ago. But, you know, what do you make of all of the hubbub around—in fact, within Microsoft Research, this is a big deal, but I think we’re far from alone—you know, medical images and vision, video, proteins and molecules, cell, you know, cellular data and so on.  BUBECK: Yeah. OK. So there is a lot to say to everything … to the last, you know, couple of minutes. Maybe on the specialization aspect, you know, I think there is, hiding behind this, a really fundamental scientific question of whether eventually we have a singular AGI [artificial general intelligence] that kind of knows everything and you can just put, you know, explain your own context and it will just get it and understand everything.  That’s one vision. I have to say, I don’t particularly believe in this vision. In fact, we humans are not like that at all. I think, hopefully, we are general intelligences, yet we have to specialize a lot. And, you know, I did myself a lot of RL, reinforcement learning, on mathematics. Like, that’s what I did, you know, spent a lot of time doing that. And I didn’t improve on other aspects. You know, in fact, I probably degraded in other aspects. [LAUGHTER] So it’s … I think it’s an important example to have in mind.  LEE: I think I might disagree with you on that, though, because, like, doesn’t a model have to see both good science and bad science in order to be able to gain the ability to discern between the two?  BUBECK: Yeah, no, that absolutely. I think there is value in seeing the generality, in having a very broad base. But then you, kind of, specialize on verticals. And this is where also, you know, open-weights model, which we haven’t talked about yet, are really important because they allow you to provide this broad base to everyone. And then you can specialize on top of it.  LEE: So we have about three hours of stuff to talk about, but our time is actually running low. BUBECK: Yes, yes, yes.   LEE: So I think I want … there’s a more provocative question. It’s almost a silly question, but I need to ask it of the two of you, which is, is there a future, you know, where AI replaces doctors or replaces, you know, medical specialties that we have today? So what does the world look like, say, five years from now?  GATES: Well, it’s important to distinguish healthcare discovery activity from healthcare delivery activity. We focused mostly on delivery. I think it’s very much within the realm of possibility that the AI is not only accelerating healthcare discovery but substituting for a lot of the roles of, you know, I’m an organic chemist, or I run various types of assays. I can see those, which are, you know, testable-output-type jobs but with still very high value, I can see, you know, some replacement in those areas before the doctor.   The doctor, still understanding the human condition and long-term dialogues, you know, they’ve had a lifetime of reinforcement of that, particularly when you get into areas like mental health. So I wouldn’t say in five years, either people will choose to adopt it, but it will be profound that there’ll be this nearly free intelligence that can do follow-up, that can help you, you know, make sure you went through different possibilities.  And so I’d say, yes, we’ll have doctors, but I’d say healthcare will be massively transformed in its quality and in efficiency by AI in that time period.  LEE: Is there a comparison, useful comparison, say, between doctors and, say, programmers, computer programmers, or doctors and, I don’t know, lawyers?  GATES: Programming is another one that has, kind of, a mathematical correctness to it, you know, and so the objective function that you’re trying to reinforce to, as soon as you can understand the state machines, you can have something that’s “checkable”; that’s correct. So I think programming, you know, which is weird to say, that the machine will beat us at most programming tasks before we let it take over roles that have deep empathy, you know, physical presence and social understanding in them.  LEE: Yeah. By the way, you know, I fully expect in five years that AI will produce mathematical proofs that are checkable for validity, easily checkable, because they’ll be written in a proof-checking language like Lean or something but will be so complex that no human mathematician can understand them. I expect that to happen.   I can imagine in some fields, like cellular biology, we could have the same situation in the future because the molecular pathways, the chemistry, biochemistry of human cells or living cells is as complex as any mathematics, and so it seems possible that we may be in a state where in wet lab, we see, Oh yeah, this actually works, but no one can understand why.  BUBECK: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think I really agree with Bill’s distinction of the discovery and the delivery, and indeed, the discovery’s when you can check things, and at the end, there is an artifact that you can verify. You know, you can run the protocol in the wet lab and see [if you have] produced what you wanted. So I absolutely agree with that.   And in fact, you know, we don’t have to talk five years from now. I don’t know if you know, but just recently, there was a paper that was published on a scientific discovery using o3- mini (opens in new tab). So this is really amazing. And, you know, just very quickly, just so people know, it was about this statistical physics model, the frustrated Potts model, which has to do with coloring, and basically, the case of three colors, like, more than two colors was open for a long time, and o3 was able to reduce the case of three colors to two colors.   LEE: Yeah.  BUBECK: Which is just, like, astounding. And this is not … this is now. This is happening right now. So this is something that I personally didn’t expect it would happen so quickly, and it’s due to those reasoning models.   Now, on the delivery side, I would add something more to it for the reason why doctors and, in fact, lawyers and coders will remain for a long time, and it’s because we still don’t understand how those models generalize. Like, at the end of the day, we are not able to tell you when they are confronted with a really new, novel situation, whether they will work or not.  Nobody is able to give you that guarantee. And I think until we understand this generalization better, we’re not going to be willing to just let the system in the wild without human supervision.  LEE: But don’t human doctors, human specialists … so, for example, a cardiologist sees a patient in a certain way that a nephrologist …  BUBECK: Yeah. LEE: … or an endocrinologist might not. BUBECK: That’s right. But another cardiologist will understand and, kind of, expect a certain level of generalization from their peer. And this, we just don’t have it with AI models. Now, of course, you’re exactly right. That generalization is also hard for humans. Like, if you have a human trained for one task and you put them into another task, then you don’t … you often don’t know. LEE: OK. You know, the podcast is focused on what’s happened over the last two years. But now, I’d like one provocative prediction about what you think the world of AI and medicine is going to be at some point in the future. You pick your timeframe. I don’t care if it’s two years or 20 years from now, but, you know, what do you think will be different about AI in medicine in that future than today?  BUBECK: Yeah, I think the deployment is going to accelerate soon. Like, we’re really not missing very much. There is this enormous capability overhang. Like, even if progress completely stopped, with current systems, we can do a lot more than what we’re doing right now. So I think this will … this has to be realized, you know, sooner rather than later.  And I think it’s probably dependent on these benchmarks and proper evaluation and tying this with regulation. So these are things that take time in human society and for good reason. But now we already are at two years; you know, give it another two years and it should be really …   LEE: Will AI prescribe your medicines? Write your prescriptions?  BUBECK: I think yes. I think yes.  LEE: OK. Bill?  GATES: Well, I think the next two years, we’ll have massive pilots, and so the amount of use of the AI, still in a copilot-type mode, you know, we should get millions of patient visits, you know, both in general medicine and in the mental health side, as well. And I think that’s going to build up both the data and the confidence to give the AI some additional autonomy. You know, are you going to let it talk to you at night when you’re panicked about your mental health with some ability to escalate? And, you know, I’ve gone so far as to tell politicians with national health systems that if they deploy AI appropriately, that the quality of care, the overload of the doctors, the improvement in the economics will be enough that their voters will be stunned because they just don’t expect this, and, you know, they could be reelected [LAUGHTER] just on this one thing of fixing what is a very overloaded and economically challenged health system in these rich countries.  You know, my personal role is going to be to make sure that in the poorer countries, there isn’t some lag; in fact, in many cases, that we’ll be more aggressive because, you know, we’re comparing to having no access to doctors at all. And, you know, so I think whether it’s India or Africa, there’ll be lessons that are globally valuable because we need medical intelligence. And, you know, thank god AI is going to provide a lot of that.  LEE: Well, on that optimistic note, I think that’s a good way to end. Bill, Seb, really appreciate all of this.   I think the most fundamental prediction we made in the book is that AI would actually find its way into the practice of medicine, and I think that that at least has come true, maybe in different ways than we expected, but it’s come true, and I think it’ll only accelerate from here. So thanks again, both of you.  [TRANSITION MUSIC]  GATES: Yeah. Thanks, you guys.  BUBECK: Thank you, Peter. Thanks, Bill.  LEE: I just always feel such a sense of privilege to have a chance to interact and actually work with people like Bill and Sébastien.    With Bill, I’m always amazed at how practically minded he is. He’s really thinking about the nuts and bolts of what AI might be able to do for people, and his thoughts about underserved parts of the world, the idea that we might actually be able to empower people with access to expert medical knowledge, I think is both inspiring and amazing.   And then, Seb, Sébastien Bubeck, he’s just absolutely a brilliant mind. He has a really firm grip on the deep mathematics of artificial intelligence and brings that to bear in his research and development work. And where that mathematics takes him isn’t just into the nuts and bolts of algorithms but into philosophical questions about the nature of intelligence.   One of the things that Sébastien brought up was the state of evaluation of AI systems. And indeed, he was fairly critical in our conversation. But of course, the world of AI research and development is just moving so fast, and indeed, since we recorded our conversation, OpenAI, in fact, released a new evaluation metric that is directly relevant to medical applications, and that is something called HealthBench. And Microsoft Research also released a new evaluation approach or process called ADeLe.   HealthBench and ADeLe are examples of new approaches to evaluating AI models that are less about testing their knowledge and ability to pass multiple-choice exams and instead are evaluation approaches designed to assess how well AI models are able to complete tasks that actually arise every day in typical healthcare or biomedical research settings. These are examples of really important good work that speak to how well AI models work in the real world of healthcare and biomedical research and how well they can collaborate with human beings in those settings.  You know, I asked Bill and Seb to make some predictions about the future. You know, my own answer, I expect that we’re going to be able to use AI to change how we diagnose patients, change how we decide treatment options.   If you’re a doctor or a nurse and you encounter a patient, you’ll ask questions, do a physical exam, you know, call out for labs just like you do today, but then you’ll be able to engage with AI based on all of that data and just ask, you know, based on all the other people who have gone through the same experience, who have similar data, how were they diagnosed? How were they treated? What were their outcomes? And what does that mean for the patient I have right now? Some people call it the “patients like me” paradigm. And I think that’s going to become real because of AI within our lifetimes. That idea of really grounding the delivery in healthcare and medical practice through data and intelligence, I actually now don’t see any barriers to that future becoming real.  [THEME MUSIC]  I’d like to extend another big thank you to Bill and Sébastien for their time. And to our listeners, as always, it’s a pleasure to have you along for the ride. I hope you’ll join us for our remaining conversations, as well as a second coauthor roundtable with Carey and Zak.   Until next time.   [MUSIC FADES]

Things are warming up as Remedy’s FBC: Firebreak approaches its June 17 launch on PlayStation 5 as part of the PlayStation Plus Game Catalog. We chatted with Communications Director Thomas Puha, Lead Level Designer Teemu Huhtiniemi, Lead Designer/Lead Technical Designer Anssi Hyytiainen, and Game Director/Lead Writer Mike Kayatta about some of the fascinating and often hilarious development secrets behind the first-person shooter. PlayStation Blog: First, what PS5 and PS5 Pro features did you utilize? Thomas Puha: We’ll support 3D Audio, and we’re prioritising 60 FPS on both formats. We’re aiming for FSR2 with an output resolution of 2560 x 1440 (1440p) on PS, and PSSR with an output resolution of 3840×2160 (4K) on PS5 Pro. Some of the DualSense wireless controller’s features are still a work in progress, but we’re looking to use haptic feedback in a similar way to our previous titles, such as Control and Alan Wake 2. For example, we want to differentiate the weapons to feel unique from each other using the adaptive triggers. Going into the game itself, were there any other influences on its creation outside of Control? Mike Kayatta: We looked at different TV shows that had lots of tools for going into a place and dealing with a crisis. One was a reality show called Dirty Jobs, where the host Mike Rowe finds these terrible, dangerous, or unexpected jobs that you don’t know exist, like cleaning out the inside of a water tower. We also looked at PowerWash Simulator. Cleaning dirt is oddly meditative and really fulfilling. It made me wish a zombie attacked me to break the Zen, and then I’d go right back to cleaning. And we were like, that would be pretty fun in the game. Play Video Were there specific challenges you faced given it’s your first multiplayer game and first-person shooter? Anssi Hyytiainen: It’s radically different from a workflow point of view. You can’t really test it alone, necessarily, which is quite a different experience. And then there are times when one player is missing things on their screen that others are seeing. It was like, “What are you shooting at?” What’s been your favorite moments developing the game so far? Teemu Huhtiniemi: There were so many. But I like when we started seeing all of these overlapping systems kind of click, because there’s a long time in the development where you talk about things on paper and have some prototypes, but you don’t really see it all come together until a point. Then you start seeing the interaction between the systems and all the fun that comes out of that. Kayatta: I imagine there’s a lot of people who probably are a little skeptical about Remedy making something so different. Even internally, when the project was starting. And once we got the trailer out there, everyone was so nervous, but it got a pretty positive reaction. Exposing it to the public is very motivating, because with games, for a very long time, there is nothing, or it is janky and it’s ugly and you don’t find the fun immediately. Were there any specific ideals you followed while you worked on the game? Kayatta: Early on we were constantly asking ourselves, “Could this only happen in Control or at Remedy?” Because the first thing you hear is, “Okay, this is just another co-op multiplayer shooter” – there’s thousands of them, and they’re all good. So what can we do to make it worth playing our game? We were always saying we’ve got this super weird universe and really interesting studio, so we’re always looking at what we could do that nobody else can. Huhtiniemi: I think for me it was when we chose to just embrace the chaos. Like, that’s the whole point of the game. It’s supposed to feel overwhelming and busy at times, so that was great to say it out loud. Kayatta: Yeah, originally we had a prototype where there were only two Hiss in the level, but it just didn’t work, it wasn’t fun. Then everything just accidentally went in the opposite direction, where it was super chaos. At some point we actually started looking at Overcooked quite a bit, and saying, “Look, just embrace it. It’s gonna be nuts.” How did you finally decide on the name FBC: Firebreak, and were there any rejected, alternate, or working titles? Kayatta: So Firebreak is named after real world firebreaks, where you deforest an area to prevent a fire from spreading, but firebreaks are also topographical features of the Oldest House. And so we leaned into the term being a first responder who stops fires from spreading. The FBC part came from not wanting to put ‘Control’ in the title, so Control players wouldn’t feel like they had to detour to this before Control 2, but we didn’t want to totally detach from it either as that felt insincere. An external partner pitched a title. They were very serious about talking up the game being in the Oldest House, and then dramatically revealed the name: Housekeepers. I got what they were going for, but I was like, we cannot call it this. It was like you were playing as a maid!   FBC: Firebreak launches on PS5 June 17 as a day on PlayStation Plus Game Catalog title.