Author name: Shannon Garcia

spotify-peeved-after-10,000-users-sold-data-to-build-ai-tools

Spotify peeved after 10,000 users sold data to build AI tools


Spotify sent a warning to stop data sales, but developers say they never got it.

For millions of Spotify users, the “Wrapped” feature—which crunches the numbers on their annual listening habits—is a highlight of every year’s end, ever since it debuted in 2015. NPR once broke down exactly why our brains find the feature so “irresistible,” while Cosmopolitan last year declared that sharing Wrapped screenshots of top artists and songs had by now become “the ultimate status symbol” for tens of millions of music fans.

It’s no surprise then that, after a decade, some Spotify users who are especially eager to see Wrapped evolve are no longer willing to wait to see if Spotify will ever deliver the more creative streaming insights they crave.

With the help of AI, these users expect that their data can be more quickly analyzed to potentially uncover overlooked or never-considered patterns that could offer even more insights into what their listening habits say about them.

Imagine, for example, accessing a music recap that encapsulates a user’s full listening history—not just their top songs and artists. With that unlocked, users could track emotional patterns, analyzing how their music tastes reflected their moods over time and perhaps helping them adjust their listening habits to better cope with stress or major life events. And for users particularly intrigued by their own data, there’s even the potential to use AI to cross data streams from different platforms and perhaps understand even more about how their music choices impact their lives and tastes more broadly.

Likely just as appealing as gleaning deeper personal insights, though, users could also potentially build AI tools to compare listening habits with their friends. That could lead to nearly endless fun for the most invested music fans, where AI could be tapped to assess all kinds of random data points, like whose breakup playlists are more intense or who really spends the most time listening to a shared favorite artist.

In pursuit of supporting developers offering novel insights like these, more than 18,000 Spotify users have joined “Unwrapped,” a collective launched in February that allows them to pool and monetize their data.

Voting as a group through the decentralized data platform Vana—which Wired profiled earlier this year—these users can elect to sell their dataset to developers who are building AI tools offering fresh ways for users to analyze streaming data in ways that Spotify likely couldn’t or wouldn’t.

In June, the group made its first sale, with 99.5 percent of members voting yes. Vana co-founder Anna Kazlauskas told Ars that the collective—at the time about 10,000 members strong—sold a “small portion” of its data (users’ artist preferences) for $55,000 to Solo AI.

While each Spotify user only earned about $5 in cryptocurrency tokens—which Kazlauskas suggested was not “ideal,” wishing the users had earned about “a hundred times” more—she said the deal was “meaningful” in showing Spotify users that their data “is actually worth something.”

“I think this is what shows how these pools of data really act like a labor union,” Kazlauskas said. “A single Spotify user, you’re not going to be able to go say like, ‘Hey, I want to sell you my individual data.’ You actually need enough of a pool to sort of make it work.”

Spotify sent warning to Unwrapped

Unsurprisingly, Spotify is not happy about Unwrapped, which is perhaps a little too closely named to its popular branded feature for the streaming giant’s comfort. A spokesperson told Ars that Spotify sent a letter to the contact info listed for Unwrapped developers on their site, outlining concerns that the collective could be infringing on Spotify’s Wrapped trademark.

Further, the letter warned that Unwrapped violates Spotify’s developer policy, which bans using the Spotify platform or any Spotify content to build machine learning or AI models. And developers may also be violating terms by facilitating users’ sale of streaming data.

“Spotify honors our users’ privacy rights, including the right of portability,” Spotify’s spokesperson said. “All of our users can receive a copy of their personal data to use as they see fit. That said, UnwrappedData.org is in violation of our Developer Terms which prohibit the collection, aggregation, and sale of Spotify user data to third parties.”

But while Spotify suggests it has already taken steps to stop Unwrapped, the Unwrapped team told Ars that it never received any communication from Spotify. It plans to defend users’ right to “access, control, and benefit from their own data,” its statement said, while providing reassurances that it will “respect Spotify’s position as a global music leader.”

Unwrapped “does not distribute Spotify’s content, nor does it interfere with Spotify’s business,” developers argued. “What it provides is community-owned infrastructure that allows individuals to exercise rights they already hold under widely recognized data protection frameworks—rights to access their own listening history, preferences, and usage data.”

“When listeners choose to share or monetize their data together, they are not taking anything away from Spotify,” developers said. “They are simply exercising digital self-determination. To suggest otherwise is to claim that users do not truly own their data—that Spotify owns it for them.”

Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, a senior staff technologist for the digital rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Ars that—while EFF objects to data dividend schemes “where users are encouraged to share personal information in exchange for payment”—Spotify users should nevertheless always maintain control of their data.

“In general, listeners should have control of their own data, which includes exporting it for their own use,” Hoffman-Andrews said. “An individual’s musical history is of use not just to Spotify but also to the individual who created it. And there’s a long history of services that enable this sort of data portability, for instance Last.fm, which integrates with Spotify and many other services.”

To EFF, it seems ill-advised to sell data to AI companies, Hoffman-Andrews said, emphasizing “privacy isn’t a market commodity, it’s a fundamental right.”

“Of course, so is the right to control one’s own data,” Hoffman-Andrews noted, seeming to agree with Unwrapped developers in concluding that “ultimately, listeners should get to do what they want with their own information.”

Users’ right to privacy is the primary reason why Unwrapped developers told Ars that they’re hoping Spotify won’t try to block users from selling data to build AI.

“This is the heart of the issue: If Spotify seeks to restrict or penalize people for exercising these rights, it sends a chilling message that its listeners should have no say in how their own data is used,” the Unwrapped team’s statement said. “That is out of step not only with privacy law, but with the values of transparency, fairness, and community-driven innovation that define the next era of the Internet.”

Unwrapped sign-ups limited due to alleged Spotify issues

There could be more interest in Unwrapped. But Kazlauskas alleged to Ars that in the more than six months since Unwrapped’s launch, “Spotify has made it extraordinarily difficult” for users to port over their data. She claimed that developers have found that “every time they have an easy way for users to get their data,” Spotify shuts it down “in some way.”

Supposedly because of Spotify’s interference, Unwrapped remains in an early launch phase and can only offer limited spots for new users seeking to sell their data. Kazlauskas told Ars that about 300 users can be added each day due to the cumbersome and allegedly shifting process for porting over data.

Currently, however, Unwrapped is working on an update that could make that process more stable, Kazlauskas said, as well as changes to help users regularly update their streaming data. Those updates could perhaps attract more users to the collective.

Critics of Vana, like TechCrunch’s Kyle Wiggers, have suggested that data pools like Unwrapped will never reach “critical mass,” likely only appealing to niche users drawn to decentralization movements. Kazlauskas told Ars that data sale payments issued in cryptocurrency are one barrier for crypto-averse or crypto-shy users interested in Vana.

“The No. 1 thing I would say is, this kind of user experience problem where when you’re using any new kind of decentralized technology, you need to set up a wallet, then you’re getting tokens,” Kazlauskas explained. Users may feel culture shock, wondering, “What does that even mean? How do I vote with this thing? Is this real money?”

Kazlauskas is hoping that Vana supports a culture shift, striving to reach critical mass by giving users a “commercial lens” to start caring about data ownership. She also supports legislation like the Digital Choice Act in Utah, which “requires actually real-time API access, so people can get their data.” If the US had a federal law like that, Kazlauskas suspects that launching Unwrapped would have been “so much easier.”

Although regulations like Utah’s law could serve as a harbinger of a sea change, Kazlauskas noted that Big Tech companies that currently control AI markets employ a fierce lobbying force to maintain control over user data that decentralized movements just don’t have.

As Vana partners with Flower AI, striving, as Wired reported, to “shake up the AI industry” by releasing “a giant 100 billion-parameter model” later this year, Kazlauskas remains committed to ensuring that users are in control and “not just consumed.” She fears a future where tech giants may be motivated to use AI to surveil, influence, or manipulate users, when instead users could choose to band together and benefit from building more ethical AI.

“A world where a single company controls AI is honestly really dystopian,” Kazlauskas told Ars. “I think that it is really scary. And so I think that the path that decentralized AI offers is one where a large group of people are still in control, and you still get really powerful technology.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Spotify peeved after 10,000 users sold data to build AI tools Read More »

flush-door-handles-are-the-car-industry’s-latest-safety-problem

Flush door handles are the car industry’s latest safety problem

China to the rescue?

In fact, the styling feature might be on borrowed time. It seems that Chinese authorities have been concerned about retractable door handles for some time now and are reportedly close to banning them from 2027. Flush-fit door handles fail far more often during side impacts than regular handles, delaying egress or rescue time after a crash. During heavy rain, flush-fit door handles have short-circuited, trapping people in their cars. Chinese consumers have even reported an increase in finger injuries as they get trapped or pinched.

That’s plenty of safety risk, but what about the benefit to vehicle efficiency? As it turns out, it doesn’t actually help that much. Adding flush door handles cuts the drag coefficient (Cd) by around 0.01. You really need to know a car’s frontal area as well as its Cd, but this equates to perhaps a little more than a mile of EPA range, perhaps two under Europe’s Worldwide Harmonised Light vehicles Test Procedure.

If automakers were that serious about drag reduction, we’d see many more EVs riding on smaller wheels. The rotation of the wheels and tires is one of the greatest contributors to drag, yet the stylists’ love of huge wheels means most EVs you’ll find on the front lot of a dealership will struggle to match their official efficiency numbers (not to mention suffering from a worse ride).

China’s importance to the global EV market means that, if it follows through on this ban, we can expect to see many fewer cars arrive with flush door handles in the future.

Flush door handles are the car industry’s latest safety problem Read More »

ai-vs.-maga:-populists-alarmed-by-trump’s-embrace-of-ai,-big-tech

AI vs. MAGA: Populists alarmed by Trump’s embrace of AI, Big Tech

Some Republicans are still angry over the deplatforming of Trump by tech executives once known for their progressive politics. They had been joined by a “vocal and growing group of conservatives who are fundamentally suspicious of the benefits of technological innovation,” Thierer said.

With MAGA skeptics on one side and Big Tech allies of the president on the other, a “battle for the soul of the conservative movement” is under way.

Popular resentment is now a threat to Trump’s Republican Party, warn some of its biggest supporters—especially if AI begins displacing jobs as many of its exponents suggest.

“You can displace farm workers—what are they going to do about it? You can displace factory workers—they will just kill themselves with drugs and fast food,” Tucker Carlson, one of the MAGA movement’s most prominent media figures, told a tech conference on Monday.

“If you do that to lawyers and non-profit sector employees, you will get a revolution.”

It made Trump’s embrace of Silicon Valley bosses a “significant risk” for his administration ahead of next year’s midterm elections, a leading Republican strategist said.

“It’s a real double-edged sword—the administration is forced to embrace [AI] because if the US is not the leader in AI, China will be,” the strategist said, echoing the kind of argument made by Sacks and fellow Trump adviser Michael Kratsios for their AI policy platform.

“But you could see unemployment spiking over the next year,” the strategist said.

Other MAGA supporters are urging Trump to tone down at least his public cheerleading for an AI sector so many of them consider a threat.

“The pressure that is being placed on conservatives to fall in line… is a recipe for discontent,” said Toscano.

By courting AI bosses, the Republican Party, which claims to represent the pro-family movement, religious communities, and American workers, appeared to be embracing those who are antithetical to all of those groups, he warned.

“The current view of things suggests that the most important members of the party are those that are from Silicon Valley,” Toscano said.

Additional reporting by Cristina Criddle in San Francisco.

© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

AI vs. MAGA: Populists alarmed by Trump’s embrace of AI, Big Tech Read More »

hands-on-with-apple’s-new-iphones:-beauty-and-the-beast-and-the-regular-looking-one

Hands-on with Apple’s new iPhones: Beauty and the beast and the regular-looking one


i have touched the new phones

A new form-vs.-function spectrum emerges as Apple’s phone designs diverge.

The iPhone Air. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

The iPhone Air. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

CUPERTINO, Calif.—We’re a long way from the days when a new iPhone launch just meant one new phone. It shifted to “basically the same phone in two sizes” a decade or so ago, and then to a version of “one lineup of regular phones and one lineup of Pro phones” in 2017 when the iPhone 8 was introduced next to the iPhone X.

But thanks to Apple’s newly introduced iPhone Air, the iPhone 17 lineup gives new phone buyers more choices and trade-offs than they’ve ever had before. Apple’s phones are now available in a spectrum of sizes, weights, speeds, costs, and camera configurations. And while options are great to have, it also means you need to know more about which one to pick.

We’ve gone hands-on with all four of Apple’s new phones, and while more extensive tire-kicking will be required, we can at least try to nail down exactly what kind of person each of these phones is for.

The iPhone Air: Designed for first impressions

There’s no more iPhone mini, and there’s no more iPhone Plus. Now we have an iPhone Air, and it is very much its own thing.

The phone is just over two-thirds the thickness of the iPhone 17, not counting what Apple now calls a “camera plateau” that stretches across the top of the device. It’s 0.22 inches thick and weighs 5.82 ounces, compared to 0.31 inches thick and 6.24 ounces for the iPhone 17. You have to go back to the iPhone 12 (5.78 ounces) to find a full-size iPhone that’s equally light, and that one had a 6.1-inch screen instead of the Air’s more expansive 6.5 inches.

Those don’t look like huge numbers on paper, but when you’re holding the iPhone Air, it does make a substantial difference. While the camera plateau makes it look top-heavy in photos, in reality, it’s light, and that weight is distributed evenly enough that it feels as well-balanced as any of the other iPhones.

The combination of a large-ish screen and light weight created a strong perception of lightness, compared to the iPhone 17 or especially the 7.27-ounce iPhone 17 Pro. I also found that the shiny titanium frame, while a fingerprint magnet, did slide around in my hand less than an aluminum finish.

It’s a phone built to make a strong first impression, whether you’re holding it in an Apple Store or just after an Apple event in a throng of YouTubers who are all throwing elbows so that they can film each individual phone in the hands-on area for 20 minutes apiece. But I do worry that living with the Air would be frustrating in the long haul, specifically because of battery life.

Again, on paper, the numbers Apple is quoting aren’t so far apart. The Air is rated for 27 hours of local video playback, compared to 30 hours for the iPhone 17 and 33 hours for the 17 Pro. But there’s a bigger gap between the numbers for streaming video—22 hours, 27 hours, and 30 hours for the Air, 17, and 17 Pro, respectively—that suggests that any activity that’s actively using the A19 Pro chip or wireless communication is going to drain the battery even faster.

Extrapolate that out two years, when your battery is going to be operating at somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of its original capacity, and a midday charge starts to sound like an inevitability. It’s telling that a thickness-and-weight-increasing external battery accessory was announced in the same breath as the iPhone Air.

The iPhone Air’s $99 MagSafe battery accessory. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

Apple’s official acknowledgement of and solution to the battery life issue is a $99 external battery that attaches with MagSafe and charges the phone wirelessly; by Apple’s estimates, it adds roughly 13 hours of runtime on top of what you get from the internal battery.

Doesn’t this defeat the purpose of having an iPhone Air, I hear you asking? Maybe so! But it is at least a better aesthetic match for the iPhone than a chunky third-party brick, and one that’s pretty easy to detach and put away once it has done its job and charged your phone. It has its own separate USB-C port for charging, and a small status light (orange when charging, green when charged) below the Apple logo. The magnetic connection feels sturdy enough that it would be hard to dislodge the battery by accident, but I can’t say that it absolutely couldn’t fall off if you were trying to jam the phone into a pocket or bag and caught the battery on something.

I can say that the iPhone Air probably isn’t for me, because the main things I want from a phone are more battery life and better cameras—I can appreciate something smaller and lighter, but only if it doesn’t compromise that other stuff (I got exactly this kind of upgrade when I jumped from an iPhone 13 Pro to a 15 Pro). That’s fine—when you introduce four phones at once, you don’t need to appeal to every iPhone user with every one of them. But I do wonder whether people will find the Air more convincing than they apparently found the now-departed iPhone mini and iPhone Plus.

The iPhone 17 Pro: Industrial design

If you look at the iPhone Air and you say, “I would actually take a thicker, heavier phone if it had a bigger battery in it,” Apple does already make that phone for you.

The iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max are more of a design departure from the standard iPhones than they have been in years past, with a distinctive aluminum unibody design and a gigantic camera plateau that replaces the old (and already substantial) three-lens camera bump on the older Pros.

Frankly, I’m not in love with the look of this new design—the aluminum unibody design may be good for durability, but it requires Apple to leave cutouts for other wireless-permeable materials all over the phone’s body, and the result is a two-tone design and a lumpy profile that gives the impression that form follows function on this one. It’s the iPhone equivalent of a polished concrete floor—utilitarian with a trendy veneer. It’s a phone I would be happy to put in a case.

It’s also a bit disappointing that the iPhone 17 Pro continues the Pro phones’ drift back upward in weight—we went from 7.27 ounces to 6.6 ounces from the iPhone 14 Pro to the 15 Pro, then to 7.03 ounces for the 16 Pro, and now right back to 7.27 ounces again. But weight is obviously incidental to other features for many Pro users, and the 17 Pro does at least do cool things that make the increased weight worth it.

The two-toned design, festooned with cutouts, makes the phone look a bit uneven to me. Andrew Cunningham

The one feature that’s easy to wrap your arms around in just a few minutes with the new phone is the upgraded telephoto camera lens, which shifts to a 48MP sensor that enables Apple’s Fusion Camera functionality for telephoto shots for the first time.

If you don’t know, the Fusion Camera system shoots 48MP images and then shrinks them to 12 or 24MP, depending on the phone you’re using—benefiting from the extra detail captured by the 48MP sensor, but keeping photo sizes manageable. To create “optical zoom,” the camera instead crops a native-resolution 12MP image out of the center of that sensor. Quality is reduced somewhat because you lose the benefits of the “pixel binning” process that is used to turn 48MP shots into 12MP or 24MP shots, but you’re still capturing native-resolution images without digital zoom.

Adding that to the telephoto lens for the first time doubles the amount of zoom Apple can offer—it starts at 4x zoom, and can go as high as 8x before you start relying on digital zoom.

Standard lens, iPhone 15 Pro. Andrew Cunningham

We were able to do a bit of shooting with the iPhone 17 Pro’s telephoto camera on the Apple Park campus. Compared to my iPhone 15 Pro and its 3x telephoto lens, the default 4x zoom on the iPhone 17 Pro already gets us a little closer, and the 8x zoom option gets you a lot closer. Zoom all the way in to the orange “hello” and you’ll notice some fuzziness and less-than-tack-sharp details, but for photo prints or sharing digitally the results are impressive.

The extra weight and unfinished look of the iPhone 17 Pro don’t make as good a first impression as the iPhone Air did, but I suspect iPhone Pro users (myself included) will find its larger battery and better camera to be acceptable trade-offs. It will be the easier phone to live with in the long term, in other words.

The iPhone 17: Still the default

The iPhone 17: It’s an iPhone! Credit: Andrew Cunningham

In between the industrial chic aesthetic of the iPhone 17 Pro and the lightness of the iPhone Air is the regular iPhone, which looks a whole lot like last year’s but might actually get the most noticeable functional upgrades of all three of them.

I’m mainly talking about the ProMotion screen, a 120 Hz OLED display panel with a dynamic refresh rate that can go as low as 1 Hz when the phone isn’t being used. Both ProMotion and the always-on screen feature that it enables have been exclusive to the iPhone Pro for years, even as higher-refresh-rate screens have spread through midrange and budget Android phones.

That extra smoothness is tough to give up once you’ve gotten used to it, and it pairs especially well with the extra motion and bounciness present in Apple’s new Liquid Glass interface. Fitting 6.3 inches of screen into a phone the same size as the 6.1-inch iPhone 16 also heightens the edge-to-edge screen effect. And both ProMotion and the larger screen help put some space between the iPhone 17 and the iPhone 16e, Apple’s current “budget” offering that comes in at just $200 under the price of the regular iPhone.

From the back: Still an iPhone! Credit: Andrew Cunningham

The other major functional upgrade for people who just walk into the store (or log on to their carrier’s website) and buy the default iPhone is that the base model has been bumped up to 256GB of storage, a reasonably generous allotment that should keep you from having too much trouble with gigantic movie files or years-old gigabytes-large iMessage conversations that you just can’t bear to delete.

This looks like an iPhone, and it feels like an iPhone, and there’s not a lot to convey from a quick hands-on session other than that. In this case, a lack of surprises is a good thing.

Photo of Andrew Cunningham

Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.

Hands-on with Apple’s new iPhones: Beauty and the beast and the regular-looking one Read More »

software-packages-with-more-than-2-billion-weekly-downloads-hit-in-supply-chain-attack

Software packages with more than 2 billion weekly downloads hit in supply-chain attack

Hackers planted malicious code in open source software packages with more than 2 billion weekly updates in what is likely to be the world’s biggest supply-chain attack ever.

The attack, which compromised nearly two dozen packages hosted on the npm repository, came to public notice on Monday in social media posts. Around the same time, Josh Junon, a maintainer or co-maintainer of the affected packages, said he had been “pwned” after falling for an email that claimed his account on the platform would be closed unless he logged in to a site and updated his two-factor authentication credentials.

Defeating 2FA the easy way

“Sorry everyone, I should have paid more attention,” Junon, who uses the moniker Qix, wrote. “Not like me; have had a stressful week. Will work to get this cleaned up.”

The unknown attackers behind the account compromise wasted no time capitalizing on it. Within an hour’s time, dozens of open source packages Junon oversees had received updates that added malicious code for transferring cryptocurrency payments to attacker-controlled wallets. With more than 280 lines of code, the addition worked by monitoring infected systems for cryptocurrency transactions and changing the addresses of wallets receiving payments to those controlled by the attacker.

The packages that were compromised, which at last count numbered 20, included some of the most foundational code driving the JavaScript ecosystem. They are used outright and also have thousands of dependents, meaning other npm packages that don’t work unless they are also installed. (npm is the official code repository for JavaScript files.)

“The overlap with such high-profile projects significantly increases the blast radius of this incident,” researchers from security firm Socket said. “By compromising Qix, the attackers gained the ability to push malicious versions of packages that are indirectly depended on by countless applications, libraries, and frameworks.”

The researchers added: “Given the scope and the selection of packages impacted, this appears to be a targeted attack designed to maximize reach across the ecosystem.”

The email message Junon fell for came from an email address at support.npmjs.help, a domain created three days ago to mimic the official npmjs.com used by npm. It said Junon’s account would be closed unless he updated information related to his 2FA—which requires users to present a physical security key or supply a one-time passcode provided by an authenticator app in addition to a password when logging in.

Software packages with more than 2 billion weekly downloads hit in supply-chain attack Read More »

nobel-laureate-david-baltimore-dead-at-87

Nobel laureate David Baltimore dead at 87

Nobel Prize-winning molecular biologist and former Caltech president David Baltimore—who found himself at the center of controversial allegations of fraud against a co-author—has died at 87 from cancer complications. He shared the 1975 Nobel Prize in Physiology for his work upending the then-consensus that cellular information flowed only in one direction. Baltimore is survived by his wife of 57 years, biologist Alice Huang, as well as a daughter and granddaughter.

“David Baltimore’s contributions as a virologist, discerning fundamental mechanisms and applying those insights to immunology, to cancer, to AIDS, have transformed biology and medicine,” current Caltech President Thomas F. Rosenbaum said in a statement. “David’s profound influence as a mentor to generations of students and postdocs, his generosity as a colleague, his leadership of great scientific institutions, and his deep involvement in international efforts to define ethical boundaries for biological advances fill out an extraordinary intellectual life.”

Baltimore was born in New York City in 1938. His father worked in the garment industry, and his mother later became a psychologist at the New School and Sarah Lawrence. Young David was academically precocious and decided he wanted to be a scientist after spending a high school summer learning about mouse genetics at the Jackson Laboratory in Maine. He graduated from Swarthmore College and earned his PhD in biology from Rockefeller University in 1964 with a thesis on the study of viruses in animal cells. He joined the Salk Institute in San Diego, married Huang, and moved to MIT in 1982, founding the Whitehead Institute.

Baltimore initially studied viruses like polio and mengovirus that make RNA copies of the RNA genomes to replicate, but later turned his attention to retroviruses, which have enzymes that make DNA copies of viral RNA. He made a major breakthrough when he proved the existence of that viral enzyme, now known as reverse transcriptase. Previously scientists had thought that the flow of information went from DNA to RNA to protein synthesis. Baltimore showed that process could be reversed, ultimately enabling researchers to use disabled retroviruses to insert genes into human DNA to correct genetic diseases.

Nobel laureate David Baltimore dead at 87 Read More »

porsche’s-insanely-clever-hybrid-engine-comes-to-the-911-turbo-s

Porsche’s insanely clever hybrid engine comes to the 911 Turbo S

Today, Porsche debuted a new 911 variant at the IAA Mobility show in Munich, Germany. It’s the most powerful 911 to date, excluding some limited-run models, and may well be the quickest to 60 mph from a standing start, dispatching that dash in just 2.4 seconds. And it’s all thanks to one of the most interesting hybrid powertrains on sale today.

Rather than just bolting an electric motor to an existing 911, Porsche designed an entirely new 3.6 L flat-six engine, taking the opportunity to ditch the belt drive and move some of the ancillaries, which can instead be powered by the car’s 400 V traction battery.

The system debuted in the 911 GTS T-Hybrid, which Ars recently reviewed. For that car, Porsche added a single electric turbocharger, which works like the MGU-H in a Formula 1 car. It spins up almost instantly to 120,000 rpm to eliminate throttle lag, but also recaptures excess energy from the spinning turbine and sends that to the 1.9 kWh battery pack.

The result is a turbocharged engine that has a remarkable throttle response that’s more like an EV, with no perceptible lag between initial tip-in and power being delivered to the wheels.

For the 2026 911 Turbo S, there are a pair of these electric turbochargers. And like the GTS, you’ll find a 53 hp (40 kW), 110 lb-ft (150 Nm) permanent synchronous motor inside the eight-speed dual clutch transmission. Total output is a heady 701 hp (523 kW) and 590 lb-ft (800 Nm), which is sufficient to cut the 0–60 mph (0–98 km/h) time to 2.4 seconds. 124 mph (200 km/h) takes just 8.4 seconds, half a second less than the 2025 Turbo S.

Porsche’s insanely clever hybrid engine comes to the 911 Turbo S Read More »

warner-bros.-sues-midjourney-to-stop-ai-knockoffs-of-batman,-scooby-doo

Warner Bros. sues Midjourney to stop AI knockoffs of Batman, Scooby-Doo


AI would’ve gotten away with it too…

Warner Bros. case builds on arguments raised in a Disney/Universal lawsuit.

DVD art for the animated movie Scooby-Doo & Batman: The Brave and the Bold. Credit: Warner Bros. Discovery

Warner Bros. hit Midjourney with a lawsuit Thursday, crafting a complaint that strives to shoot down defenses that the AI company has already raised in a similar lawsuit filed by Disney and Universal Studios earlier this year.

The big film studios have alleged that Midjourney profits off image generation models trained to produce outputs of popular characters. For Disney and Universal, intellectual property rights to pop icons like Darth Vader and the Simpsons were allegedly infringed. And now, the WB complaint defends rights over comic characters like Superman, Wonder Woman, and Batman, as well as characters considered “pillars of pop culture with a lasting impact on generations,” like Scooby-Doo and Bugs Bunny, and modern cartoon characters like Rick and Morty.

“Midjourney brazenly dispenses Warner Bros. Discovery’s intellectual property as if it were its own,” the WB complaint said, accusing Midjourney of allowing subscribers to “pick iconic” copyrighted characters and generate them in “every imaginable scene.”

Planning to seize Midjourney’s profits from allegedly using beloved characters to promote its service, Warner Bros. described Midjourney as “defiant and undeterred” by the Disney/Universal lawsuit. Despite that litigation, WB claimed that Midjourney has recently removed copyright protections in its supposedly shameful ongoing bid for profits. Nothing but a permanent injunction will end Midjourney’s outputs of allegedly “countless infringing images,” WB argued, branding Midjourney’s alleged infringements as “vast, intentional, and unrelenting.”

Examples of closely matching outputs include prompts for “screencaps” showing specific movie frames, a search term that at least one artist, Reid Southen, had optimistically predicted Midjourney would block last year, but it apparently did not.

Here are some examples included in WB’s complaint:

Midjourney’s output for the prompt, “Superman, classic cartoon character, DC comics.”

Midjourney could face devastating financial consequences in a loss. At trial, WB is hoping discovery will show the true extent of Midjourney’s alleged infringement, asking the court for maximum statutory damages, at $150,000 per infringing output. Just 2,000 infringing outputs unearthed could cost Midjourney more than its total revenue for 2024, which was approximately $300 million, the WB complaint said.

Warner Bros. hopes to hobble Midjourney’s best defense

For Midjourney, the WB complaint could potentially hit harder than the Disney/Universal lawsuit. WB’s complaint shows how closely studios are monitoring AI copyright litigation, likely choosing ideal moments to strike when studios feel they can better defend their property. So, while much of WB’s complaint echoes Disney and Universal’s arguments—which Midjourney has already begun defending against—IP attorney Randy McCarthy suggested in statements provided to Ars that WB also looked for seemingly smart ways to potentially overcome some of Midjourney’s best defenses when filing its complaint.

WB likely took note when Midjourney filed its response to the Disney/Universal lawsuit last month, arguing that its system is “trained on billions of publicly available images” and generates images not by retrieving a copy of an image in its database but based on “complex statistical relationships between visual features and words in the text-image pairs are encoded within the model.”

This defense could allow Midjourney to avoid claims that it copied WB images and distributes copies through its models. But hoping to dodge this defense, WB didn’t argue that Midjourney retains copies of its images. Rather, the entertainment giant raised a more nuanced argument that:

Midjourney used software, servers, and other technology to store and fix data associated with Warner Bros. Discovery’s Copyrighted Works in such a manner that those works are thereby embodied in the model, from which Midjourney is then able to generate, reproduce, publicly display, and distribute unlimited “copies” and “derivative works” of Warner Bros. Discovery’s works as defined by the Copyright Act.”

McCarthy noted that WB’s argument pushes the court to at least consider that even though “Midjourney does not store copies of the works in its model,” its system “nonetheless accesses the data relating to the works that are stored by Midjourney’s system.”

“This seems to be a very clever way to counter MJ’s ‘statistical pattern analysis’ arguments,” McCarthy said.

If it’s a winning argument, that could give WB a path to wipe Midjourney’s models. WB argued that each time Midjourney provides a “substantially new” version of its image generator, it “repeats this process.” And that ongoing activity—due to Midjourney’s initial allegedly “massive copying” of WB works—allows Midjourney to “further reproduce, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute image and video outputs that are identical or virtually identical to Warner Bros. Discovery’s Copyrighted Works in response to simple prompts from subscribers.”

Perhaps further strengthening the WB’s argument, the lawsuit noted that Midjourney promotes allegedly infringing outputs on its 24/7 YouTube channel and appears to have plans to compete with traditional TV and streaming services. Asking the court to block Midjourney’s outputs instead, WB claims it’s already been “substantially and irreparably harmed” and risks further damages if the AI image generator is left unchecked.

As alleged proof that the AI company knows its tool is being used to infringe WB property, WB pointed to Midjourney’s own Discord server and subreddit, where users post outputs depicting WB characters and share tips to help others do the same. They also called out Midjourney’s “Explore” page, which allows users to drop a WB-referencing output into the prompt field to generate similar images.

“It is hard to imagine copyright infringement that is any more willful than what Midjourney is doing here,” the WB complaint said.

WB and Midjourney did not immediately respond to Ars’ request to comment.

Midjourney slammed for promising “fewer blocked jobs”

McCarthy noted that WB’s legal strategy differs in other ways from the arguments Midjourney’s already weighed in the Disney/Universal lawsuit.

The WB complaint also anticipates Midjourney’s likely defense that users are generating infringing outputs, not Midjourney, which could invalidate any charges of direct copyright infringement.

In the Disney/Universal lawsuit, Midjourney argued that courts have recently found that AI tools referencing copyrighted works is “a quintessentially transformative fair use,” accusing studios of trying to censor “an instrument for user expression.” They claim that Midjourney cannot know about infringing outputs unless studios use the company’s DMCA process, while noting that subscribers have “any number of legitimate, noninfringing grounds to create images incorporating characters from popular culture,” including “non-commercial fan art, experimentation and ideation, and social commentary and criticism.”

To avoid losing on that front, the WB complaint doesn’t depend on a ruling that Midjourney directly infringed copyrights. Instead, the complaint “more fully” emphasizes how Midjourney may be “secondarily liable for infringement via contributory, inducement and/or vicarious liability by inducing its users to directly infringe,” McCarthy suggested.

Additionally, WB’s complaint “seems to be emphasizing” that Midjourney “allegedly has the technical means to prevent its system from accepting prompts that directly reference copyrighted characters,” and “that would prevent infringing outputs from being displayed,” McCarthy said.

The complaint noted that Midjourney is in full control of what outputs can be generated. Noting that Midjourney “temporarily refused to ‘animate'” outputs of WB characters after launching video generations, the lawsuit appears to have been filed in response to Midjourney “deliberately” removing those protections and then announcing that subscribers would experience “fewer blocked jobs.”

Together, these arguments “appear to be intended to lead to the inference that Midjourney is willfully enticing its users to infringe,” McCarthy said.

WB’s complaint details simple user prompts that generate allegedly infringing outputs without any need to manipulate the system. The ease of generating popular characters seems to make Midjourney a destination for users frustrated by other AI image generators that make it harder to generate infringing outputs, WB alleged.

On top of that, Midjourney also infringes copyrights by generating WB characters, “even in response to generic prompts like ‘classic comic book superhero battle.'” And while Midjourney has seemingly taken steps to block WB characters from appearing on its “Explore” page, where users can find inspiration for prompts, these guardrails aren’t perfect, but rather “spotty and suspicious,” WB alleged. Supposedly, searches for correctly spelled character names like “Batman” are blocked, but any user who accidentally or intentionally mispells a character’s name like “Batma” can learn an easy way to work around that block.

Additionally, WB alleged, “the outputs often contain extensive nuance and detail, background elements, costumes, and accessories beyond what was specified in the prompt.” And every time that Midjourney outputs an allegedly infringing image, it “also trains on the outputs it has generated,” the lawsuit noted, creating a never-ending cycle of continually enhanced AI fakes of pop icons.

Midjourney could slow down the cycle and “minimize” these allegedly infringing outputs, if it cannot automatically block them all, WB suggested. But instead, “Midjourney has made a calculated and profit-driven decision to offer zero protection for copyright owners even though Midjourney knows about the breathtaking scope of its piracy and copyright infringement,” WB alleged.

Fearing a supposed scheme to replace WB in the market by stealing its best-known characters, WB accused Midjourney of willfully allowing WB characters to be generated in order to “generate more money for Midjourney” to potentially compete in streaming markets.

Midjourney will remove protections “on a whim”

As Midjourney’s efforts to expand its features escalate, WB claimed that trust is lost. Even if Midjourney takes steps to address rightsholders’ concerns, WB argued, studios must remain watchful of every upgrade, since apparently, “Midjourney can and will remove copyright protection measures on a whim.”

The complaint noted that Midjourney just this week announced “plans to continue deploying new versions” of its image generator, promising to make it easier to search for and save popular artists’ styles—updating a feature that many artists loathe.

Without an injunction, Midjourney’s alleged infringement could interfere with WB’s licensing opportunities for its content, while “illegally and unfairly” diverting customers who buy WB products like posters, wall art, prints, and coloring books, the complaint said.

Perhaps Midjourney’s strongest defense could be efforts to prove that WB benefits from its image generator. In the Disney/Universal lawsuit, Midjourney pointed out that studios “benefit from generative AI models,” claiming that “many dozens of Midjourney subscribers are associated with” Disney and Universal corporate email addresses. If WB corporate email addresses are found among subscribers, Midjourney could claim that WB is trying to “have it both ways” by “seeking to profit” from AI tools while preventing Midjourney and its subscribers from doing the same.

McCarthy suggested it’s too soon to say how the WB battle will play out, but Midjourney’s response will reveal how it intends to shift tactics to avoid courts potentially picking apart its defense of its training data, while keeping any blame for copyright-infringing outputs squarely on users.

“As with the Disney/Universal lawsuit, we need to wait to see how Midjourney answers these latest allegations,” McCarthy said. “It is definitely an interesting development that will have widespread implications for many sectors of our society.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Warner Bros. sues Midjourney to stop AI knockoffs of Batman, Scooby-Doo Read More »

rfk-jr.-says-covid-shots-still-available-to-all-as-cancer-patients-denied-access

RFK Jr. says COVID shots still available to all as cancer patients denied access

Here are some key moments from today’s hearing:

Untrustworthy

With the fallout ongoing from the abrupt ouster of CDC Director Susan Monarez last week, many senators focused on what led to her downfall. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published two hours before the hearing, Monarez confirmed media reports that she had been fired by Kennedy for refusing to rubber-stamp changes to CDC vaccine guidance based on recommendations from Kennedy’s hand-selected advisors.

“I was told to preapprove the recommendations of a vaccine advisory panel newly filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric,” Monarez wrote in the op-ed. She said she refused, insisting that the panel’s recommendations be “rigorously and scientifically reviewed before being accepted or rejected.”

In today’s hearing, Senators directly confronted Kennedy with that statement from the op-ed. Kennedy repeatedly said that she is lying and that he never directed her to preapprove vaccine recommendations. Instead, he claims, he told her to resign after he asked her directly if she was a trustworthy person, and she replied, ‘No.”

After several exchanges about this with other senators, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) picked it apart further, saying:

“Are you telling us that the former head of CDC went to you, you asked her, ‘Are you a trustworthy person?’ And she said, ‘No, I am not a trustworthy person,'” Sanders asked.

“She didn’t say ‘No, I’m not a trustworthy person,'” Kennedy replied. “She said, ‘No.’ I’m giving a quote.”

After that, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who seemed skeptical of Kennedy’s arguments generally, pointed out the absurdity of the claim, quoting Kennedy’s previous praise of Monarez. “I don’t see how you go—over four weeks—from a public health expert with ‘unimpeachable scientific credentials,’ a longtime champion of MAHA values, caring and compassionate and brilliant microbiologists, and four weeks later fire her,” Tillis said.  “As somebody who advised executives on hiring strategies, number one, I would suggest in the interview you ask ’em if they’re truthful rather than four weeks after we took the time of the US Senate to confirm the person.”

RFK Jr. says COVID shots still available to all as cancer patients denied access Read More »

sextortion-with-a-twist:-spyware-takes-webcam-pics-of-users-watching-porn

Sextortion with a twist: Spyware takes webcam pics of users watching porn

“How you use this program is your responsibility,” the page reads. “I will not be held accountable for any illegal activities. Nor do i give a shit how u use it.”

In the hacking campaigns Proofpoint analyzed, cybercriminals attempted to trick users into downloading and installing Stealerium as an attachment or a web link, luring victims with typical bait like a fake payment or invoice. The emails targeted victims inside companies in the hospitality industry, as well as in education and finance, though Proofpoint notes that users outside of companies were also likely targeted but wouldn’t be seen by its monitoring tools.

Once it’s installed, Stealerium is designed to steal a wide variety of data and send it to the hacker via services like Telegram, Discord, or the SMTP protocol in some variants of the spyware, all of which is relatively standard in infostealers. The researchers were more surprised to see the automated sextortion feature, which monitors browser URLs for a list of pornography-related terms such as “sex” and “porn,” which can be customized by the hacker and trigger simultaneous image captures from the user’s webcam and browser. Proofpoint notes that it hasn’t identified any specific victims of that sextortion function, but suggests that the existence of the feature means it has likely been used.

More hands-on sextortion methods are a common blackmail tactic among cybercriminals, and scam campaigns in which hackers claim to have obtained webcam pics of victims looking at pornography have also plagued inboxes in recent years—including some that even try to bolster their credibility with pictures of the victim’s home pulled from Google Maps. But actual, automated webcam pics of users browsing porn is “pretty much unheard of,” says Proofpoint researcher Kyle Cucci. The only similar known example, he says, was a malware campaign that targeted French-speaking users in 2019, discovered by the Slovakian cybersecurity firm ESET.

The pivot to targeting individual users with automated sextortion features may be part of a larger trend of some cybercriminals—particularly lower-tier groups—turning away from high-visibility, large-scale ransomware campaigns and botnets that tend to attract the attention of law enforcement, says Proofpoint’s Larson.

“For a hacker, it’s not like you’re taking down a multimillion-dollar company that is going to make waves and have a lot of follow-on impacts,” Larson says, contrasting the sextortion tactics to ransomware operations that attempt to extort seven-figure sums from companies. “They’re trying to monetize people one at a time. And maybe people who might be ashamed about reporting something like this.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Sextortion with a twist: Spyware takes webcam pics of users watching porn Read More »

philips-introduces-budget-friendly-hue-bulbs-as-part-of-major-lineup-overhaul

Philips introduces budget-friendly Hue bulbs as part of major lineup overhaul

The standard Hue bulbs are also getting an upgrade. The new models can dim to as low as 0.2 percent (compared to 2 percent for the Essential bulbs), and Philips claims they can produce the full range of visible color temperatures (from 1,000 to 20,000 K, compared to the 2,200 to 6,500 K range of the Essential bulbs).

The next-most-important addition to the ecosystem is probably the new Hue Bridge Pro, the Hue ecosystem’s first new bridge accessory in a decade. In addition to being faster, the new $99 bridge supports “150+ lights” and “50+ accessories,” at least triple the number supported by the previous Bridge (which is still sticking around at $66 as a lower-cost accessory for smaller setups). Users with multiple Hue bridges will eventually be able to replace them all with a single Bridge Pro, but Hueblog reports that this capability won’t be available until “later this year.”

Other new Hue products include indoor and outdoor strip lights, including cheaper models under the new Essential brand umbrella; Festavia-branded outdoor string lights; and a $170 Hue Secure video doorbell. The new hub and most of the new bulbs are being launched in North America starting today, but the doorbell won’t launch until October, and many of the strip and string lights will be released in November or December. Signify’s press release has specific pricing and availability information for all the accessories.

Philips introduces budget-friendly Hue bulbs as part of major lineup overhaul Read More »

audi-design-finds-its-minimalist-groove-again-with-concept-c

Audi design finds its minimalist groove again with Concept C

Fans of the TT rejoice—there’s a new Audi two-seater on the way. The German automaker just unveiled Concept C, a stylish and minimalist sports car that marks the start of a new styling philosophy and, hopefully, a return to the bold designs that brought it so much success.

There are design cues and links back through Audi’s history, but this is no pastiche of a retro design as we might have seen from J Mays. Rather, Audi’s design team under Chief Creative Officer Massimo Frascella says that the design influences include one of the pre-war Silver Arrows racing cars, the 1936 Auto Union Type C—Audi being one of the four brands that combined to form Auto Union.

The design is deceptively large—bigger than a TT or even an R8. Aud

The slats that cover the Concept C’s rear bring to mind the cooling louvres at the rear of the Type C, necessary to let the heat generated by its monstrous V16 engine to escape the rear engine bay. But I also see some of the streamlined Rennlimousine in the Concept C’s slab sides.

It’s a much simpler design than the TT concept from 1995, which manages to look almost fussy in its details compared to the Concept C. But the way the air intakes are formed underneath the headlights reminds me a lot of the Bentley Hunaudieres, a mid-engined concept from 1999.

Audi design finds its minimalist groove again with Concept C Read More »