Telecom companies last year spent nearly $295 billion in capital expenditures and over $1 trillion in operating expenditures. These large expenses are due in part to laborious manual processes that telcos face when operating networks that require continuous optimizations. For example, telcos must constantly tune network parameters for tasks — such as transferring calls from one network to another or distributing network traffic across multiple servers — based on the time of day, user behavior, mobility and traffic type. These factors directly affect network performance, user experience and energy consumption. To automate these optimization processes and save costs for telcos across the globe, NVIDIA today unveiled at GTC Paris its first AI Blueprint for telco network configuration. At the blueprint’s core are customized large language models trained specifically on telco network data — as well as the full technical and operational architecture for turning the LLMs into an autonomous, goal-driven AI agent for telcos. Automate Network Configuration With the AI Blueprint NVIDIA AI Blueprints — available on build.nvidia.com — are customizable AI workflow examples. They include reference code, documentation and deployment tools that show enterprise developers how to deliver business value with NVIDIA NIM microservices. The AI Blueprint for telco network configuration — built with BubbleRAN 5G solutions and datasets — enables developers, network engineers and telecom providers to automatically optimize the configuration of network parameters using agentic AI. This can streamline operations, reduce costs and significantly improve service quality by embedding continuous learning and adaptability directly into network infrastructures. Traditionally, network configurations required manual intervention or followed rigid rules to adapt to dynamic network conditions. These approaches limited adaptability and increased operational complexities, costs and inefficiencies. The new blueprint helps shift telco operations from relying on static, rules-based systems to operations based on dynamic, AI-driven automation. It enables developers to build advanced, telco-specific AI agents that make real-time, intelligent decisions and autonomously balance trade-offs — such as network speed versus interference, or energy savings versus utilization — without human input. Powered and Deployed by Industry Leaders Trained on 5G data generated by BubbleRAN, and deployed on the BubbleRAN 5G O-RAN platform, the blueprint provides telcos with insight on how to set various parameters to reach performance goals, like achieving a certain bitrate while choosing an acceptable signal-to-noise ratio — a measure that impacts voice quality and thus user experience. With the new AI Blueprint, network engineers can confidently set initial parameter values and update them as demanded by continuous network changes. Norway-based Telenor Group, which serves over 200 million customers globally, is the first telco to integrate the AI Blueprint for telco network configuration as part of its initiative to deploy intelligent, autonomous networks that meet the performance and agility demands of 5G and beyond. “The blueprint is helping us address configuration challenges and enhance quality of service during network installation,” said Knut Fjellheim, chief technology innovation officer at Telenor Maritime. “Implementing it is part of our push toward network automation and follows the successful deployment of agentic AI for real-time network slicing in a private 5G maritime use case.” Industry Partners Deploy Other NVIDIA-Powered Autonomous Network Technologies The AI Blueprint for telco network configuration is just one of many announcements at NVIDIA GTC Paris showcasing how the telecom industry is using agentic AI to make autonomous networks a reality. Beyond the blueprint, leading telecom companies and solutions providers are tapping into NVIDIA accelerated computing, software and microservices to provide breakthrough innovations poised to vastly improve networks and communications services — accelerating the progress to autonomous networks and improving customer experiences. NTT DATA is powering its agentic platform for telcos with NVIDIA accelerated compute and the NVIDIA AI Enterprise software platform. Its first agentic use case is focused on network alarms management, where NVIDIA NIM microservices help automate and power observability, troubleshooting, anomaly detection and resolution with closed loop ticketing. Tata Consultancy Services is delivering agentic AI solutions for telcos built on NVIDIA DGX Cloud and using NVIDIA AI Enterprise to develop, fine-tune and integrate large telco models into AI agent workflows. These range from billing and revenue assurance, autonomous network management to hybrid edge-cloud distributed inference. For example, the company’s anomaly management agentic AI model includes real-time detection and resolution of network anomalies and service performance optimization. This increases business agility and improves operational efficiencies by up to 40% by eliminating human intensive toils, overheads and cross-departmental silos. Prodapt has introduced an autonomous operations workflow for networks, powered by NVIDIA AI Enterprise, that offers agentic AI capabilities to support autonomous telecom networks. AI agents can autonomously monitor networks, detect anomalies in real time, initiate diagnostics, analyze root causes of issues using historical data and correlation techniques, automatically execute corrective actions, and generate, enrich and assign incident tickets through integrated ticketing systems. Accenture announced its new portfolio of agentic AI solutions for telecommunications through its AI Refinery platform, built on NVIDIA AI Enterprise software and accelerated computing. The first available solution, the NOC Agentic App, boosts network operations center tasks by using a generative AI-driven, nonlinear agentic framework to automate processes such as incident and fault management, root cause analysis and configuration planning. Using the Llama 3.1 70B NVIDIA NIM microservice and the AI Refinery Distiller Framework, the NOC Agentic App orchestrates networks of intelligent agents for faster, more efficient decision-making. Infosys is announcing its agentic autonomous operations platform, called Infosys Smart Network Assurance (ISNA), designed to accelerate telecom operators’ journeys toward fully autonomous network operations. ISNA helps address long-standing operational challenges for telcos — such as limited automation and high average time to repair — with an integrated, AI-driven platform that reduces operational costs by up to 40% and shortens fault resolution times by up to 30%. NVIDIA NIM and NeMo microservices enhance the platform’s reasoning and hallucination-detection capabilities, reduce latency and increase accuracy. Get started with the new blueprint today. Learn more about the latest AI advancements for telecom and other industries at NVIDIA GTC Paris, running through Thursday, June 12, at VivaTech, including a keynote from NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang and a special address from Ronnie Vasishta, senior vice president of telecom at NVIDIA. Plus, hear from industry leaders in a panel session with Orange, Swisscom, Telenor and NVIDIA.

Fewer food crops Biofuels policy has been a failure for the climate, new report claims Report: An expansion of biofuels policy under Trump would lead to more greenhouse gas emissions. Georgina Gustin, Inside Climate News – Jun 14, 2025 7:10 am | 24 An ethanol production plant on March 20, 2024 near Ravenna, Nebraska. Credit: David Madison/Getty Images An ethanol production plant on March 20, 2024 near Ravenna, Nebraska. Credit: David Madison/Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here. The American Midwest is home to some of the richest, most productive farmland in the world, enabling its transformation into a vast corn- and soy-producing machine—a conversion spurred largely by decades-long policies that support the production of biofuels. But a new report takes a big swing at the ethanol orthodoxy of American agriculture, criticizing the industry for causing economic and social imbalances across rural communities and saying that the expansion of biofuels will increase greenhouse gas emissions, despite their purported climate benefits. The report, from the World Resources Institute, which has been critical of US biofuel policy in the past, draws from 100 academic studies on biofuel impacts. It concludes that ethanol policy has been largely a failure and ought to be reconsidered, especially as the world needs more land to produce food to meet growing demand. “Multiple studies show that US biofuel policies have reshaped crop production, displacing food crops and driving up emissions from land conversion, tillage, and fertilizer use,” said the report’s lead author, Haley Leslie-Bole. “Corn-based ethanol, in particular, has contributed to nutrient runoff, degraded water quality and harmed wildlife habitat. As climate pressures grow, increasing irrigation and refining for first-gen biofuels could deepen water scarcity in already drought-prone parts of the Midwest.” The conversion of Midwestern agricultural land has been sweeping. Between 2004 and 2024, ethanol production increased by nearly 500 percent. Corn and soybeans are now grown on 92 and 86 million acres of land respectively—and roughly a third of those crops go to produce ethanol. That means about 30 million acres of land that could be used to grow food crops are instead being used to produce ethanol, despite ethanol only accounting for 6 percent of the country’s transportation fuel. The biofuels industry—which includes refiners, corn and soy growers and the influential agriculture lobby writ large—has long insisted that corn- and soy-based biofuels provide an energy-efficient alternative to fossil-based fuels. Congress and the US Department of Agriculture have agreed. The country’s primary biofuels policy, the Renewable Fuel Standard, requires that biofuels provide a greenhouse gas reduction over fossil fuels: The law says that ethanol from new plants must deliver a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline. In addition to greenhouse gas reductions, the industry and its allies in Congress have also continued to say that ethanol is a primary mainstay of the rural economy, benefiting communities across the Midwest. But a growing body of research—much of which the industry has tried to debunk and deride—suggests that ethanol actually may not provide the benefits that policies require. It may, in fact, produce more greenhouse gases than the fossil fuels it was intended to replace. Recent research says that biofuel refiners also emit significant amounts of carcinogenic and dangerous substances, including hexane and formaldehyde, in greater amounts than petroleum refineries. The new report points to research saying that increased production of biofuels from corn and soy could actually raise greenhouse gas emissions, largely from carbon emissions linked to clearing land in other countries to compensate for the use of land in the Midwest. On top of that, corn is an especially fertilizer-hungry crop requiring large amounts of nitrogen-based fertilizer, which releases huge amounts of nitrous oxide when it interacts with the soil. American farming is, by far, the largest source of domestic nitrous oxide emissions already—about 50 percent. If biofuel policies lead to expanded production, emissions of this enormously powerful greenhouse gas will likely increase, too. The new report concludes that not only will the expansion of ethanol increase greenhouse gas emissions, but it has also failed to provide the social and financial benefits to Midwestern communities that lawmakers and the industry say it has. (The report defines the Midwest as Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.) “The benefits from biofuels remain concentrated in the hands of a few,” Leslie-Bole said. “As subsidies flow, so may the trend of farmland consolidation, increasing inaccessibility of farmland in the Midwest, and locking out emerging or low-resource farmers. This means the benefits of biofuels production are flowing to fewer people, while more are left bearing the costs.” New policies being considered in state legislatures and Congress, including additional tax credits and support for biofuel-based aviation fuel, could expand production, potentially causing more land conversion and greenhouse gas emissions, widening the gap between the rural communities and rich agribusinesses at a time when food demand is climbing and, critics say, land should be used to grow food instead. President Donald Trump’s tax cut bill, passed by the House and currently being negotiated in the Senate, would not only extend tax credits for biofuels producers, it specifically excludes calculations of emissions from land conversion when determining what qualifies as a low-emission fuel. The primary biofuels industry trade groups, including Growth Energy and the Renewable Fuels Association, did not respond to Inside Climate News requests for comment or interviews. An employee with the Clean Fuels Alliance America, which represents biodiesel and sustainable aviation fuel producers, not ethanol, said the report vastly overstates the carbon emissions from crop-based fuels by comparing the farmed land to natural landscapes, which no longer exist. They also noted that the impact of soy-based fuels in 2024 was more than $42 billion, providing over 100,000 jobs. “Ten percent of the value of every bushel of soybeans is linked to biomass-based fuel,” they said. Georgina Gustin, Inside Climate News 24 Comments

As AI faces court challenges from Disney and Universal, legal battles are shaping the industry's future | Opinion Silicon advances and design innovations do still push us forward – but the future landscape of the industry is also being sculpted in courtrooms and parliaments Image credit: Disney / Epic Games Opinion by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on June 13, 2025 In some regards, the past couple of weeks have felt rather reassuring. We've just seen a hugely successful launch for a new Nintendo console, replete with long queues for midnight sales events. Over the next few days, the various summer events and showcases that have sprouted amongst the scattered bones of E3 generated waves of interest and hype for a host of new games. It all feels like old times. It's enough to make you imagine that while change is the only constant, at least it's we're facing change that's fairly well understood, change in the form of faster, cheaper silicon, or bigger, more ambitious games. If only the winds that blow through this industry all came from such well-defined points on the compass. Nestled in amongst the week's headlines, though, was something that's likely to have profound but much harder to understand impacts on this industry and many others over the coming years – a lawsuit being brought by Disney and NBC Universal against Midjourney, operators of the eponymous generative AI image creation tool. In some regards, the lawsuit looks fairly straightforward; the arguments made and considered in reaching its outcome, though, may have a profound impact on both the ability of creatives and media companies (including game studios and publishers) to protect their IP rights from a very new kind of threat, and the ways in which a promising but highly controversial and risky new set of development and creative tools can be used commercially. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool I say the lawsuit looks straightforward from some angles, but honestly overall it looks fairly open and shut – the media giants accuse Midjourney of replicating their copyrighted characters and material, and of essentially building a machine for churning out limitless copyright violations. The evidence submitted includes screenshot after screenshot of Midjourney generating pages of images of famous copyrighted and trademarked characters ranging from Yoda to Homer Simpson, so "no we didn't" isn't going to be much of a defence strategy here. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool – you don't sue the manufacturers of oil paints or canvases when artists use them to paint something copyright-infringing, nor does Microsoft get sued when someone writes something libellous in Word, and Midjourney may try to argue that their software belongs in that tool category, with users alone being ultimately responsible for how they use them. If that argument prevails and survives appeals and challenges, it would be a major triumph for the nascent generative AI industry and a hugely damaging blow to IP holders and creatives, since it would seriously undermine their argument that AI companies shouldn't be able to include copyrighted material into training data sets without licensing or compensation. The reason Disney and NBCU are going after Midjourney specifically seems to be partially down to Midjourney being especially reticent to negotiate with them about licensing fees and prompt restrictions; other generative AI firms have started talking, at least, about paying for content licenses for training data, and have imposed various limitations on their software to prevent the most egregious and obvious forms of copyright violation (at least for famous characters belonging to rich companies; if you're an individual or a smaller company, it's entirely the Wild West out there as regards your IP rights). In the process, though, they're essentially risking a court showdown over a set of not-quite-clear legal questions at the heart of this dispute, and if Midjourney were to prevail in that argument, other AI companies would likely back off from engaging with IP holders on this topic. To be clear, though, it seems highly unlikely that Midjourney will win that argument, at least not in the medium to long term. Yet depending on how this case moves forward, losing the argument could have equally dramatic consequences – especially if the courts find themselves compelled to consider the question of how, exactly, a generative AI system reproduces a copyrighted character with such precision without storing copyright-infringing data in some manner. The 2020s are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once AI advocates have been trying to handwave around this notion from the outset, but at some point a court is going to have to sit down and confront the fact that the precision with which these systems can replicate copyrighted characters, scenes, and other materials requires that they must have stored that infringing material in some form. That it's stored as a scattered mesh of probabilities across the vertices of a high-dimensional vector array, rather than a straightforward, monolithic media file, is clearly important but may ultimately be considered moot. If the data is in the system and can be replicated on request, how that differs from Napster or The Pirate Bay is arguably just a matter of technical obfuscation. Not having to defend that technical argument in court thus far has been a huge boon to the generative AI field; if it is knocked over in that venue, it will have knock-on effects on every company in the sector and on every business that uses their products. Nobody can be quite sure which of the various rocks and pebbles being kicked on this slope is going to set off the landslide, but there seems to be an increasing consensus that a legal and regulatory reckoning is coming for generative AI. Consequently, a lot of what's happening in that market right now has the feel of companies desperately trying to establish products and lock in revenue streams before that happens, because it'll be harder to regulate a technology that's genuinely integrated into the world's economic systems than it is to impose limits on one that's currently only clocking up relatively paltry sales and revenues. Keeping an eye on this is crucial for any industry that's started experimenting with AI in its workflows – none more than a creative industry like video games, where various forms of AI usage have been posited, although the enthusiasm and buzz so far massively outweighs any tangible benefits from the technology. Regardless of what happens in legal and regulatory contexts, AI is already a double-edged sword for any creative industry. Used judiciously, it might help to speed up development processes and reduce overheads. Applied in a slapdash or thoughtless manner, it can and will end up wreaking havoc on development timelines, filling up storefronts with endless waves of vaguely-copyright-infringing slop, and potentially make creative firms, from the industry's biggest companies to its smallest indie developers, into victims of impossibly large-scale copyright infringement rather than beneficiaries of a new wave of technology-fuelled productivity. The legal threat now hanging over the sector isn't new, merely amplified. We've known for a long time that AI generated artwork, code, and text has significant problems from the perspective of intellectual property rights (you can infringe someone else's copyright with it, but generally can't impose your own copyright on its creations – opening careless companies up to a risk of having key assets in their game being technically public domain and impossible to protect). Even if you're not using AI yourself, however – even if you're vehemently opposed to it on moral and ethical grounds (which is entirely valid given the highly dubious land-grab these companies have done for their training data), the Midjourney judgement and its fallout may well impact the creative work you produce yourself and how it ends up being used and abused by these products in future. This all has huge ramifications for the games business and will shape everything from how games are created to how IP can be protected for many years to come – a wind of change that's very different and vastly more unpredictable than those we're accustomed to. It's a reminder of just how much of the industry's future is currently being shaped not in development studios and semiconductor labs, but rather in courtrooms and parliamentary committees. The ways in which generative AI can be used and how copyright can persist in the face of it will be fundamentally shaped in courts and parliaments, but it's far from the only crucially important topic being hashed out in those venues. The ongoing legal turmoil over the opening up of mobile app ecosystems, too, will have huge impacts on the games industry. Meanwhile, the debates over loot boxes, gambling, and various consumer protection aspects related to free-to-play models continue to rumble on in the background. Because the industry moves fast while governments move slow, it's easy to forget that that's still an active topic for as far as governments are concerned, and hammers may come down at any time. Regulation by governments, whether through the passage of new legislation or the interpretation of existing laws in the courts, has always loomed in the background of any major industry, especially one with strong cultural relevance. The games industry is no stranger to that being part of the background heartbeat of the business. The 2020s, however, are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once, whether it's AI and copyright, app stores and walled gardens, or loot boxes and IAP-based business models. Rulings on those topics in various different global markets will create a complex new landscape that will shape the winds that blow through the business, and how things look in the 2030s and beyond will be fundamentally impacted by those decisions.

TL;DR: Canberra authorities are embracing a tough approach to ransomware threats. A new law will require certain organizations to disclose when and how much they have paid to cybercriminals following a data breach. However, experts remain unconvinced that this is the most effective way to tackle the problem. Companies operating in Australia must now report any payments made to cybercriminals after experiencing a ransomware incident. Government officials hope the new mandate will help them gain a deeper understanding of the issue, as many enterprises continue to pay ransoms whenever they fall victim to file-encrypting malware. Originally proposed last year, the law applies only to companies with an annual turnover exceeding $1.93 million. This threshold targets the top 6.5 percent of Australia's registered businesses – representing roughly half of the country's total economic output. Under the new law, affected companies must report ransomware incidents to the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD). Failure to properly disclose an attack will result in fines under the country's civil penalty system. Authorities are allegedly planning to follow a two-stage approach, initially prioritizing major violations while fostering a "constructive" dialogue with victims. Starting next year, regulators will adopt a much stricter stance toward noncompliant organizations. The Australian government has implemented this mandatory reporting requirement after concluding that voluntary disclosures were insufficient. In 2024, officials noted that ransomware and cyber extortion incidents were vastly underreported, with only one in five victims coming forward. Ransomware remains a highly complex and growing phenomenon, with attacks reaching record levels despite increased law enforcement actions against notorious cyber gangs. Although several governments have proposed similar regulations, Australia is the first country to formally enact such a law. // Related Stories Jeff Wichman, director of incident response at cybersecurity firm Semperis, cautions that mandatory reporting is a double-edged sword. While the government may gain valuable data and insights into attacker profiles, the law may not reduce the frequency of attacks. Instead, it could serve mainly to publicly shame breached organizations – while cybercriminals continue to profit. A recent Semperis study found that over 70 percent of 1,000 ransomware-hit companies opted to pay the ransom and hope for the best. "Some companies, they just want to pay it and get things done, to get their data off the dark web. Others, it's a delayed response perspective, they want negotiations to happen with the attacker while they figure out what happened," Wichman explained. According to the study, 60 percent of victims who paid received functional decryption keys and successfully recovered their data. However, in 40 percent of cases, the provided keys were corrupted or ineffective.

Mauricio Rocha | TaAU | Alejandro Castro | OMA | Michel Desvigne | Robert Moses | El Equipo Mazzanti | ContraFuerte |  Batlleiroig | Christian Kerez Earlier this year, news broke that levels of fine particulate matter in Paris had dropped by an astounding 55 per cent since 2005. Through a combination of regulation and public policy, the city has vastly reduced the number of cars on its streets, introducing bike lanes and public green spaces in the place of around 50,000 parking spaces. This issue is dedicated to roads and the architectures that support them. Cities around the world are reckoning with 20th-century car-oriented urban planning, as epitomised by Robert Moses’s New York (p36). Existing roads are increasingly repurposed for broader uses, prioritising pedestrians, cyclists and other forms of movement. São Paulo’s Minhocão has been gradually reclaimed by residents, and the restoration of a historical promenade in Reus is inclusive for all. Meanwhile, OMA’s new bridge in Bordeaux is designed to host public events – as well as six lanes of motorised traffic. Elsewhere, automobile infrastructure continues to expand; in Bahrain, four new car parks stand largely empty, and a roadside service station in Colombia is yet to be occupied. Roads promise prosperity and progress, often with expansionist ambitions; as Nadi Abusaada writes, ‘The road is both the myth and mechanism of the colonial frontier’.  Electric vehicles are now heralded as the future of transport, but as Nelo Magalhães writes in this issue’s keynote, ‘EVs do nothing to change the mass of roads or the issue of their maintenance’. The shift needed is more radical and wide‑reaching.  1522: Roads cover (above)Highway #5, Los Angeles, California, USA (2009) is part of Edward Burtynsky: The Great Acceleration, an exhibition on view at the International Center of Photography in New York City until 28 September. In it, a motorway bulldozes its way through suburbia, sending out smaller branches that further subdivide it. Credit: © Edward Burtynsky, courtesy Flowers Gallery, London folio (lead image)Home follows a family living in a house next to an uncompleted motorway, who reclaim it, temporarily, as an extension of their home. Credit: Album / Alamy keynote How much does your road weigh? Nelo Magalhãesbuilding Malecón de Villahermosa by Taller de Arquitectura Mauricio Rocha, TaAU and Alejandro Castro in Villahermosa, Mexico Laure Nashed building Simon Veil bridge by OMA and Michel Desvigne Paysagiste in Bordeaux, France John Bingham-Hall reputations Robert Moses Andy Battlebuilding Control and operations centre by El Equipo Mazzanti and ContraFuerte in Bolombolo, Colombia Felipe Walter essay Cape to Cairo Sara Salem essay A short history of the roadblock Jan-Werner Müller outrage The Amazonian road to COP30 Martha Dillonrevisit Schlangenbader Straße estate in Berlin, Germany Sophie Lovell essay Living with the Big Worm Richard J Williamsbuilding Passeig de Boca de la Mina by Batlleiroig in Reus, Spain Blanca Pujals essay Taking Norway’s scenic routes Tomà Berlanda building Pearling Path car parks by Christian Kerez in Muharraq, Bahrain Oliver Wainwright typology Petrol station Tom Wilkinson essay The road is the frontier Nadi Abusaada

Netflix has no shortage of options when it comes to science fiction programming and experimental anthology series, but Love, Death + Robots is an especially beautiful love letter to science fiction’s chameleonic nature and endless versatility. The unpredictable animated anthology series combines sci-fi with comedy, horror, fantasy, mystery, and romance as it brings gripping genre literature to life through a modern lens. In doing so, Love, Death + Robots doesn’t just celebrate science fiction; it helps it evolve. Sci-fi is a revelatory storytelling genre that can open the audience’s mind and forever change their perception of reality. The best of it probes, inspires, and admonishes, which is exactly what Tim Miller (Deadpool) and Jennifer Yuh Nelson (Kung Fu Panda 2 and 3) strive for in Love, Death + Robots, now in its fourth season. Nothing is off-limits in the series, whether it’s a cat-fueled dystopia, gladiatorial combat atop dinosaurs, or a poet’s feud with Satan. The show aims to create the same level of jubilation in its viewers as those who discovered these short stories for the first time. Pretty much all the vignettes have been based on short stories that Tim’s read throughout his life,” explains Nelson, Love, Death + Robots’ supervising director. “We have hundreds of these stories just piled up.” There’s a true passion for the source material that helps Love, Death + Robots excel. This enormous collection of genre classics gets carefully selected as each new season takes shape.  “We try to curate the perfect mix. So we have a little something for everybody,” creator Miller elaborates. This has been one of the secrets to Love, Death + Robots’ success. Each collection of episodes is truly unique and feels like a pulpy paperback of short stories. In fact, Love, Death + Robots has even published collections of each season’s stories. “All the money goes to the authors,” Miller proudly adds. “We want people to read the stories! Forget about making them into movies.” Love, Death + Robots has resonated with science fiction fans who appreciate captivating and concise storytelling. That being said, Love, Death + Robots is also a visual extravaganza that pushes just as many boundaries in animation. Four seasons in, the series “Often, we choose the director and the animation studio according to their specialty,” Nelson explains as she continues to break down the meticulous nature of this process. “If we have two tentpole episodes that look a certain way, then we want to make sure that those episodes are going to look vastly different from each other.” For instance, Titmouse’s impressionistic work on Volume IV’s “How Zeke Got Religion” actively enhances the story. “You need to find their thing,” Nelson adds in reference to Love, Death + Robots’ roster of animation studios and what they each bring to the table. “It’s important for us, especially for this series, to make sure that we’re really showcasing the whole breadth of animation,” asserts Nelson. “Sometimes these directors are very much pioneers in what they do, and no one else is doing what they do. That’s why we end up working with them.” Photo-realistic 3D animation, stop-motion, traditional 2D visuals, and stop-motion are just some of the animation styles on display in Love, Death + Robots. The series has even increasingly dipped its toe into live-action stories that blur the lines between reality and animation. “Rarely do you see such a showcase of animation like this,” Nelson says. “This is a way to show new ideas, new looks, and new innovation by different directors and studios around the world.” Miller reiterates that it’s a deeply collaborative process where the animation studios have just as much agency as the storytellers.  “We push it in the initial direction, and then the directors come in and do their pitch.” The final product becomes a synthesis of ideas that are built upon ambition and taking risks. “We try to give them as much freedom as we can,” Miller emphasizes. This relationship has paid off well, earning the animated series 13 Primetime Emmy Awards, including Outstanding Short Form Animated Program and Outstanding Individual Achievement in Animation. The series’ latest batch of episodes is likely to add to this already impressive collection of accolades. Love, Death + Robots’ 45 episodes provide a broad, brave mix of everything that science fiction and animation have to offer. However, the series continues to look forward and is determined to surpass these heights. “We’ve got a lot of stories,” boasts Miller. “I have the next season—seasons, actually—picked out.” And while there were previously spin-offs and off-shoots in consideration, Love, Death + Robots is the perfect incubator for these stories, whether they’re two minutes or 20 minutes. “The beauty of the show is that we’d never get some of these ideas made if we were asking to do a feature,” admits Miller.  Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! Love, Death + Robots plays by its own rules and continues to redefine anthology storytelling. It’s still the only series where fans can alternate between a string puppet rock concert and Russian Civil War soldiers fighting ancient supernatural evils. “There’s still a lot of room to do new and innovative things that we haven’t done before,” Miller insists. “Although we always seem to end up with too many cat stories. I can’t really explain that.” Four volumes of Love, Death & Robots are available to stream on Netflix now.

A new report claims that internally, Apple has already been testing Large Language Models for Siri that are vastly more powerful than the shipping Apple Intelligence, but executives disagree about when to release it.Internally, Siri us close to ChatGPT level accuracy.Backing up AppleInsider's position that Apple is not behind on AI, the company has regularly been publishing research showing its progress moving the field forward. Now according to Bloomberg, Apple has already been working with AI systems considerably more power than the on-device Apple Intelligence it has shipped so far.Specifically, the report says that internally, Apple is using multiple different models with ever greater complexity. Apple is said to be testing models with 3 billion, 7 billion, 33 billion, and 150 billion parameters. Rumor Score: 🤯 Likely Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

In June, we hosted a webinar featuring experts from Arm, the Unity Accelerate Solutions team, and SYBO Games, the creator of Subway Surfers. The resulting roundtable focused on profiling tips and strategies for mobile games, the business implications of poor performance, and how SYBO shipped a hit mobile game with 3 billion downloads to date.Let’s dive into some of the follow-up questions we didn’t have time to cover during the webinar. You can also watch the full recording.We hear a lot about the Unity Profiler in relation to CPU profiling, but not as much about the Profile Analyzer (available as a Unity package). Are there any plans to improve it or integrate it into the core Profiler toolset?There are no immediate plans to integrate the Profile Analyzer into the core Editor, but this might change as our profiling tools evolve.Does Unity have any plans to add an option for the GPU Usage Profiler module to appear in percentages like it does in milliseconds?That’s a great idea, and while we can’t say yes or no at the time of this blog post, it’s a request that’s been shared with our R&D teams for possible future consideration.Do you have plans for tackling “Application Not Responding” (ANR) errors that are reported by the Google Play store and don’t contain any stack trace?Although we don’t have specific plans for tracking ANR without stack trace at the moment, we will consider it for the future roadmap.How can I share my feedback to help influence the future development of Unity’s profiling tools?You can keep track of upcoming features and share feedback via our product board and forums. We are also conducting a survey to learn more about our customers’ experience with the profiling tools. If you’ve used profiling tools before (either daily or just once) or are working on a project that requires optimization, we would love to get your input. The survey is designed to take no more than 5–10 minutes to complete.By participating, you’ll also have the chance to opt into a follow-up interview to share more feedback directly with the development team, including the opportunity to discuss potential prototypes of new features.Is there a good rule for determining what counts as a viable low-end device to target?A rule of thumb we hear from many Unity game developers is to target devices that are five years old at the time of your game’s release, as this helps to ensure the largest user base. But we also see teams reducing their release-date scope to devices that are only three years old if they’re aiming for higher graphical quality. A visually complex 3D application, for example, will have higher device requirements than a simple 2D application. This approach allows for a higher “min spec,” but reduces the size of the initial install base. It’s essentially a business decision: Will it cost more to develop for and support old devices than what your game will earn running on them?Sometimes the technical requirements of your game will dictate your minimum target specifications. So if your game uses up large amounts of texture memory even after optimization, but you absolutely cannot reduce quality or resolution, that probably rules out running on phones with insufficient memory. If your rendering solution requires compute shaders, that likely rules out devices with drivers that can’t support OpenGL ES 3.1, Metal, or Vulkan.It’s a good idea to look at market data for your priority target audience. For instance, mobile device specs can vary a lot between countries and regions. Remember to define some target “budgets” so that benchmarking goals for what’s acceptable are set prior to choosing low-end devices for testing.For live service games that will run for years, you’ll need to monitor their compatibility continuously and adapt over time based on both your actual user base and current devices on the market.Is it enough to test performance exclusively on low-end devices to ensure that the game will also run smoothly on high-end ones?It might be, if you have a uniform workload on all devices. However, you still need to consider variations across hardware from different vendors and/or driver versions.It’s common for graphically rich games to have tiers of graphical fidelity – the higher the visual tier, the more resources required on capable devices. This tier selection might be automatic, but increasingly, users themselves can control the choice via a graphical settings menu. For this style of development, you’ll need to test at least one “min spec” target device per feature/workload tier that your game supports.If your game detects the capabilities of the device it’s running on and adapts the graphics output as needed, it could perform differently on higher end devices. So be sure to test on a range of devices with the different quality levels you’ve programmed the title for.Note: In this section, we’ve specified whether the expert answering is from Arm or Unity.Do you have advice for detecting the power range of a device to support automatic quality settings, particularly for mobile?Arm: We typically see developers doing coarse capability binning based on CPU and GPU models, as well as the GPU shader core count. This is never perfect, but it’s “about right.” A lot of studios collect live analytics from deployed devices, so they can supplement the automated binning with device-specific opt-in/opt-out to work around point issues where the capability binning isn’t accurate enough.As related to the previous question, for graphically rich content, we see a trend in mobile toward settings menus where users can choose to turn effects on or off, thereby allowing them to make performance choices that suit their preferences.Unity: Device memory and screen resolution are also important factors for choosing quality settings. Regarding textures, developers should be aware that Render Textures used by effects or post-processing can become a problem on devices with high resolution screens, but without a lot of memory to match.Given the breadth of configurations available (CPU, GPU, SOC, memory, mobile, desktop, console, etc.), can you suggest a way to categorize devices to reduce the number of tiers you need to optimize for?Arm: The number of tiers your team optimizes for is really a game design and business decision, and should be based on how important pushing visual quality is to the value proposition of the game. For some genres it might not matter at all, but for others, users will have high expectations for the visual fidelity.Does the texture memory limit differ among models and brands of Android devices that have the same amount of total system memory?Arm: To a first-order approximation, we would expect the total amount of texture memory to be similar across vendors and hardware generations. There will be minor differences caused by memory layout and alignment restrictions, so it won’t be exactly the same.Is it CPU or GPU usage that contributes the most to overheating on mobile devices?Arm: It’s entirely content dependent. The CPU, GPU, or the DRAM can individually overheat a high-end device if pushed hard enough, even if you ignore the other two completely. The exact balance will vary based on the workload you are running.What tips can you give for profiling on devices that have thermal throttling? What margin would you target to avoid thermal throttling (i.e., targeting 20 ms instead of 33 ms)?Arm: Optimizing for frame time can be misleading on Android because devices will constantly adjust frequency to optimize energy usage, making frame time an incomplete measure by itself. Preferably, monitor CPU and GPU cycles per frame, as well as GPU memory bandwidth per frame, to get some value that is independent of frequency. The cycle target you need will depend on each device’s chip design, so you’ll need to experiment.Any optimization helps when it comes to managing power consumption, even if it doesn’t directly improve frame rate. For example, reducing CPU cycles will reduce thermal load even if the CPU isn’t the critical path for your game.Beyond that, optimizing memory bandwidth is one of the biggest savings you can make. Accessing DRAM is orders of magnitude more expensive than accessing local data on-chip, so watch your triangle budget and keep data types in memory as small as possible.Unity: To limit the impact of CPU clock frequency on the performance metrics, we recommend trying to run at a consistent temperature. There are a couple of approaches for doing this:Run warm: Run the device for a while so that it reaches a stable warm state before profiling.Run cool: Leave the device to cool for a while before profiling. This strategy can eliminate confusion and inconsistency in profiling sessions by taking captures that are unlikely to be thermally throttled. However, such captures will always represent the best case performance a user will see rather than what they might actually see after long play sessions. This strategy can also delay the time between profiling runs due to the need to wait for the cooling period first.With some hardware, you can fix the clock frequency for more stable performance metrics. However, this is not representative of most devices your users will be using, and will not report accurate real-world performance. Basically, it’s a handy technique if you are using a continuous integration setup to check for performance changes in your codebase over time.Any thoughts on Vulkan vs OpenGL ES 3 on Android? Vulkan is generally slower performance-wise. At the same time, many devices lack support for various features on ES3.Arm: Recent drivers and engine builds have vastly improved the quality of the Vulkan implementations available; so for an equivalent workload, there shouldn’t be a performance gap between OpenGL ES and Vulkan (if there is, please let us know). The switch to Vulkan is picking up speed and we expect to see more people choosing Vulkan by default over the next year or two. If you have counterexamples of areas where Vulkan isn’t performing well, please get in touch with us. We’d love to hear from you.What tools can we use to monitor memory bandwidth (RAM <-> VRAM)?Arm: The Streamline Profiler in Arm Mobile Studio can measure bandwidth between Mali GPUs and the external DRAM (or system cache).Should you split graphical assets by device tiers or device resolution?Arm: You can get the best result by retuning assets, but it’s expensive to do. Start by reducing resolution and frame rate, or disabling some optional post-processing effects.What is the best way to record performance metric statistics from our development build?Arm: You can use the Performance Advisor tool in Arm Mobile Studio to automatically capture and export performance metrics from the Mali GPUs, although this comes with a caveat: The generation of JSON reports requires a Professional Edition license.Unity: The Unity Profiler can be used to view common rendering metrics, such as vertex and triangle counts in the Rendering module. Plus you can include custom packages, such as System Metrics Mali, in your project to add low-level Mali GPU metrics to the Unity Profiler.What are your recommendations for profiling shader code?You need a GPU Profiler to do this. The one you choose depends on your target platform. For example, on iOS devices, Xcode’s GPU Profiler includes the Shader Profiler, which breaks down shader performance on a line-by-line basis.Arm Mobile Studio supports Mali Offline Compiler, a static analysis tool for shader code and compute kernels. This tool provides some overall performance estimates and recommendations for the Arm Mali GPU family.When profiling, the general rule is to test your game or app on the target device(s). With the industry moving toward more types of chipsets (Apple M1, Arm, x86 by Intel, AMD, etc.), how can developers profile and pinpoint issues on the many different hardware configurations in a reasonable amount of time?The proliferation of chipsets is primarily a concern on desktop platforms. There are a limited number of hardware architectures to test for console games. On mobile, there’s Apple’s A Series for iOS devices and a range of Arm and Qualcomm architectures for Android – but selecting a manageable list of representative mobile devices is pretty straightforward.On desktop it’s trickier because there’s a wide range of available chipsets and architectures, and buying Macs and PCs for testing can be expensive. Our best advice is to do what you can. No studio has infinite time and money for testing. We generally wouldn’t expect any huge surprises when comparing performance between an Intel x86 CPU and a similarly specced AMD processor, for instance. As long as the game performs comfortably on your minimum spec machine, you should be reasonably confident about other machines. It’s also worth considering using analytics, such as Unity Analytics, to record frame rates, system specs, and player options’ settings to identify hotspots or problematic configurations.We’re seeing more studios move to using at least some level of automated testing for regular on-device profiling, with summary stats published where the whole team can keep an eye on performance across the range of target devices. With well-designed test scenes, this can usually be made into a mechanical process that’s suited for automation, so you don’t need an experienced technical artist or QA tester running builds through the process manually.Do you ever see performance issues on high-end devices that don’t occur on the low-end ones?It’s uncommon, but we have seen it. Often the issue lies in how the project is configured, such as with the use of fancy shaders and high-res textures on high-end devices, which can put extra pressure on the GPU or memory. Sometimes a high-end mobile device or console will use a high-res phone screen or 4K TV output as a selling point but not necessarily have enough GPU power or memory to live up to that promise without further optimization.If you make use of the current versions of the C# Job System, verify whether there’s a job scheduling overhead that scales with the number of worker threads, which in turn, scales with the number of CPU cores. This can result in code that runs more slowly on a 64+ core Threadripper™ than on a modest 4-core or 8-core CPU. This issue will be addressed in future versions of Unity, but in the meantime, try limiting the number of job worker threads by setting JobsUtility.JobWorkerCount.What are some pointers for setting a good frame budget?Most of the time when we talk about frame budgets, we’re talking about the overall time budget for the frame. You calculate 1000/target frames per second (fps) to get your frame budget: 33.33 ms for 30 fps, 16.66 ms for 60 fps, 8.33 ms for 120 Hz, etc. Reduce that number by around 35% if you’re on mobile to give the chips a chance to cool down between each frame. Dividing the budget up to get specific sub-budgets for different features and/or systems is probably overkill except for projects with very specific, predictable systems, or those that make heavy use of Time Slicing.Generally, profiling is the process of finding the biggest bottlenecks – and therefore, the biggest potential performance gains. So rather than saying, “Physics is taking 1.2 ms when the budget only allows for 1 ms,” you might look at a frame and say, “Rendering is taking 6 ms, making it the biggest main thread CPU cost in the frame. How can we reduce that?”It seems like profiling early and often is still not common knowledge. What are your thoughts on why this might be the case?Building, releasing, promoting, and managing a game is difficult work on multiple fronts. So there will always be numerous priorities vying for a developer’s attention, and profiling can fall by the wayside. They know it’s something they should do, but perhaps they’re unfamiliar with the tools and don’t feel like they have time to learn. Or, they don’t know how to fit profiling into their workflows because they’re pushed toward completing features rather than performance optimization.Just as with bugs and technical debt, performance issues are cheaper and less risky to address early on, rather than later in a project’s development cycle. Our focus is on helping to demystify profiling tools and techniques for those developers who are unfamiliar with them. That’s what the profiling e-book and its related blog post and webinar aim to support.Is there a way to exclude certain methods from instrumentation or include only specific methods when using Deep Profiling in the Unity Profiler? When using a lot of async/await tasks, we create large stack traces, but how can we avoid slowing down both the client and the Profiler when Deep Profiling?You can enable Allocation call stacks to see the full call stacks that lead to managed allocations (shown as magenta in the Unity CPU Profiler Timeline view). Additionally, you can – and should! – manually instrument long-running methods and processes by sprinkling ProfilerMarkers throughout your code. There’s currently no way to automatically enable Deep Profiling or disable profiling entirely in specific parts of your application. But manually adding ProfilerMarkers and enabling Allocation call stacks when required can help you dig down into problem areas without having to resort to Deep Profiling.As of Unity 2022.2, you can also use our IgnoredByDeepProfilerAttribute to prevent the Unity Profiler from capturing method calls. Just add the IgnoredByDeepProfiler attribute to classes, structures, and methods.Where can I find more information on Deep Profiling in Unity?Deep Profiling is covered in our Profiler documentation. Then there’s the most in-depth, single resource for profiling information, the Ultimate Guide to profiling Unity games e-book, which links to relevant documentation and other resources throughout.Is it correct that Deep Profiling is only useful for the Allocations Profiler and that it skews results so much that it’s not useful for finding hitches in the game?Deep Profiling can be used to find the specific causes of managed allocations, although Allocation call stacks can do the same thing with less overhead, overall. At the same time, Deep Profiling can be helpful for quickly investigating why one specific ProfilerMarker seems to be taking so long, as it’s more convenient to enable than to add numerous ProfilerMarkers to your scripts and rebuild your game. But yes, it does skew performance quite heavily and so shouldn’t be enabled for general profiling.Is VSync worth setting to every VBlank? My mobile game runs at a very low fps when it’s disabled.Mobile devices force VSync to be enabled at a driver/hardware level, so disabling it in Unity’s Quality settings shouldn’t make any difference on those platforms. We haven’t heard of a case where disabling VSync negatively affects performance. Try taking a profile capture with VSync enabled, along with another capture of the same scene but with VSync disabled. Then compare the captures using Profile Analyzer to try to understand why the performance is so different.How can you determine if the main thread is waiting for the GPU and not the other way around?This is covered in the Ultimate Guide to profiling Unity games. You can also get more information in the blog post, Detecting performance bottlenecks with Unity Frame Timing Manager.Generally speaking, the telltale sign is that the main thread waits for the Render thread while the Render thread waits for the GPU. The specific marker names will differ depending on your target platform and graphics API, but you should look out for markers with names such as “PresentFrame” or “WaitForPresent.”Is there a solid process for finding memory leaks in profiling?Use the Memory Profiler to compare memory snapshots and check for leaks. For example, you can take a snapshot in your main menu, enter your game and then quit, go back to the main menu, and take a second snapshot. Comparing these two will tell you whether any objects/allocations from the game are still hanging around in memory.Does it make sense to optimize and rewrite part of the code for the DOTS system, for mobile devices including VR/AR? Do you use this system in your projects?A number of game projects now make use of parts of the Data-Oriented Technology Stack (DOTS). Native Containers, the C# Job System, Mathematics, and the Burst compilerare all fully supported packages that you can use right away to write optimal, parallelized, high-performance C# (HPC#) code to improve your project’s CPU performance.A smaller number of projects are also using Entities and associated packages, such as the Hybrid Renderer, Unity Physics, and NetCode. However, at this time, the packages listed are experimental, and using them involves accepting a degree of technical risk. This risk derives from an API that is still evolving, missing or incomplete features, as well as the engineering learning curve required to understand Data-Oriented Design (DOD) to get the most out of Unity’s Entity Component System (ECS). Unity engineer Steve McGreal wrote a guide on DOTS best practices, which includes some DOD fundamentals and tips for improving ECS performance.How do you go about setting limits on SetPass calls or shader complexity? Can you even set limits beforehand?Rendering is a complex process and there is no practical way to set a hard limit on the maximum number of SetPass calls or a metric for shader complexity. Even on a fixed hardware platform, such as a single console, the limits will depend on what kind of scene you want to render, and what other work is happening on the CPU and GPU during a frame.That’s why the rule on when to profile is “early and often.” Teams tend to create a “vertical slice” demo early on during production – usually a short burst of gameplay developed to the level of visual fidelity intended for the final game. This is your first opportunity to profile rendering and figure out what optimizations and limits might be needed. The profiling process should be repeated every time a new area or other major piece of visual content is added.Here are additional resources for learning about performance optimization:BlogsOptimize your mobile game performance: Expert tips on graphics and assetsOptimize your mobile game performance: Expert tips on physics, UI, and audio settingsOptimize your mobile game performance: Expert tips on profiling, memory, and code architecture from Unity’s top engineersExpert tips on optimizing your game graphics for consolesProfiling in Unity 2021 LTS: What, when, and howHow-to pagesProfiling and debugging toolsHow to profile memory in UnityBest practices for profiling game performanceE-booksOptimize your console and PC game performanceOptimize your mobile game performanceUltimate guide to profiling Unity gamesLearn tutorialsProfiling CPU performance in Android builds with Android StudioProfiling applications – Made with UnityEven more advanced technical content is coming soon – but in the meantime, please feel free to suggest topics for us to cover on the forum and check out the full roundtable webinar recording.