23 vipph
Stojakovic, Wilkinson lead short-handed Cal past Sacramento State, 83-77 in Cal ClassicNokia Corporation: Repurchase of own shares on 13.12.2024
Late kickoff return TDs by Turpin and Thomas spark the Cowboys as they end their 5-game skidThe Dallas Cowboys (3-7) visit the Washington Commanders (7-4) on Sunday, November 24, 2024 at Commanders Field and will aim to break a five-game losing streak. What channel is Commanders vs. Cowboys on? What time is Commanders vs. Cowboys? The Commanders and the Cowboys play at 1 p.m. ET. NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more. Commanders vs. Cowboys betting odds, lines, spread Commanders vs. Cowboys recent matchups Commanders schedule Cowboys schedule NFL week 12 schedule This content was created for Gannett using technology provided by Data Skrive.
This month marks the twentieth anniversary of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution. When protests over a rigged presidential election first erupted in downtown Kyiv on November 22, 2004, few observers could have imagined that they were witnessing the opening act in a geopolitical drama that would eventually lead to the largest European conflict since World War II. And yet there can be little doubt that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s desire to crush Ukraine first began to take shape two decades ago as he watched the Ukrainian people defy their own authoritarian rulers and demand a democratic future. For the past twenty years, there has been a tendency to view the Orange Revolution primarily as a political failure. This assessment is easy enough to understand. After all, while the revolution overturned a fraudulent presidential vote and brought reformist candidate Viktor Yushchenko to power, it did not lead to the kind of political transformation that the millions of Ukrainians who participated in the protest movement hoped for. Instead, Yushchenko spent much of his presidency squabbling with colleagues and compromising with opponents, before eventually losing the 2010 election to Orange Revolution villain Viktor Yanukovych. While the revolution clearly fell short of its lofty political goals, focusing exclusively on domestic Ukrainian politics is short-sighted. In order to appreciate the true historic significance of the Orange Revolution, it must viewed in a far broader context. Prior to the revolution, post-Soviet Russia had substantial influence in Ukraine, with Vladimir Putin topping polls as the most popular politician among Ukrainians. At the same time, the two countries were already quite distinct. The centralized power vertical in Russia created the conditions for hard authoritarianism. In contrast, the need to balance competing centers of influence and power in Ukraine gave rise to a softer authoritarianism. Putin’s heavy-handed promotion of Viktor Yanukovych ahead of the 2004 presidential election, and his subsequent push for a crackdown on protesters during the Orange Revolution, highlighted the growing differences between the two nations. This hastened Ukraine’s trajectory away from Russia, a pattern that continues to this day. As the world watches the Russian invasion of Ukraine unfold, UkraineAlert delivers the best Atlantic Council expert insight and analysis on Ukraine twice a week directly to your inbox. Putin played a very prominent personal role in the Orange Revolution. Russian television, which was at the time widely watched in Ukraine, relentlessly pushed the candidacy of Viktor Yanukovych during the buildup to Ukraine’s presidential election. On the eve of the vote, Putin made the fateful decision to intervene directly. He traveled to Kyiv in late October 2004, where he was greeted with an impromptu military parade before appearing on national TV to lecture the Ukrainian public at length on the importance of backing his preferred presidential pick. It soon became clear that Putin had miscalculated disastrously. His open and unapologetic attempt to interfere in Ukraine’s internal affairs was widely interpreted as a grave insult and an indication of his contempt for Ukrainian statehood. This electrified public opinion and helped mobilize millions of previously apolitical Ukrainians. Weeks later, after a deeply flawed second round of voting, Ukrainians would respond to the attempted theft of their election by flooding into central Kyiv in huge numbers. It is no exaggeration to say that Putin’s act of supreme imperial hubris was one of the key causes of the Orange Revolution. This pattern has repeated itself throughout the past twenty years, with Putin’s efforts to impose his will on Ukraine consistently backfiring and pushing the two countries further apart. In 2013, he pressured his Ukrainian ally Yanukovych to abandon European integration and return the country to the Kremlin orbit, only for this to provoke a second revolution and the fall of the Yanukoych regime. Putin then opted for a military solution. He began the invasion of Ukraine in February 2014 with the seizure of Crimea, before sending forces into eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region weeks later. When it became obvious that this limited military intervention had merely succeeded in strengthening Ukraine’s resolve to exit the Russian sphere of influence entirely, Putin began plotting what would become the full-scale invasion of February 2022. Since the Orange Revolution, Putin’s quest to reconquer Ukraine has come to define his entire reign. In his single-minded pursuit of this goal, he has demonstrated a willingness to incur huge costs. In addition to the lives of the countless Russian soldiers killed or maimed while fighting in Ukraine, Putin has also sacrificed Russia’s economic prosperity, the country’s international standing, and its ties to the developed world. The historic shift in Putin’s worldview was already evident soon after the Orange Revolution. Within a few months of Ukraine’s people power uprising, he ordered work to begin on the development of what would become the Kremlin’s flagship RT English-language media platform. This was the first step in a process that has established the Putin regime as the undisputed global leader in the dissemination of anti-Western disinformation. In spring 2005, the Kremlin also backed a nationwide campaign encouraging Russians to display orange-and-black St. George’s ribbons in honor of the Soviet victory over Nazi Germany. With images of rebellious Ukrainians sporting orange ribbons still fresh in everyone’s minds, the loyalist symbolism of this counter-gesture was hard to miss. St. George’s ribbons have gone on to establish themselves at the heart of a fanatical victory cult as the Putin regime has sought to justify its own authoritarianism via ever more extravagant forms of WWII reverence. What began life as a reaction to the orange ribbons of Ukraine’s revolution has become the ultimate symbol of the entire Putin era. Why is Putin so obsessed with Ukraine, and what was it about the country’s Orange Revolution that triggered him so irreversibly? The answers to these questions lie in Putin’s imperialistic understanding of Russian identity and his formative political experiences as a KGB officer in Eastern Europe during the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Putin was in East Germany in 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell. He watched helplessly as the entire Soviet presence throughout the region crumbled amid a surge in pro-democracy protests. In his own account of this traumatic time, Putin claims that his stunned superiors informed him, “Moscow is silent.” This experience has haunted Putin and left him convinced that Moscow must never be “silent” again, especially when confronted by mass protest movements or attempts to shake off Kremlin control. Putin is particularly sensitive to modern Ukraine’s national awakening and its embrace of European democracy because he views the country as part of Russia’s imperial heartlands. If a democratic political culture can take root in a place as central to Russia’s national identity as Ukraine, this could prove contagious and serve as a catalyst for similar demands within Russia itself. Tellingly, Putin first began to indicate his opposition to Ukrainian independence soon after the Orange Revolution. In April 2005, he had recent events in Ukraine very much in mind when he branded the fall of the USSR “the greatest political catastrophe of the twentieth century.” This is apparent from some of the lesser quoted segments of his speech, which also referenced an “epidemic of disintegration” and bemoaned the fate of the “tens of millions of countrymen” who found themselves beyond the borders of Russia in 1991. At the time, Ukraine was home to by far the largest population of ethnic Russians in the former Soviet Union. Little has changed during the intervening twenty years. Today’s ongoing Russian invasion is a direct result of Putin’s firm conviction that the loss of Ukraine would pose an existential threat to Russia itself. It is therefore delusional to suggest that some kind of limited territorial settlement could end the current war and lead to a sustainable peace. Instead, any attempt to offer concessions will only result in a temporary pause in hostilities before Putin resumes his campaign to extinguish Ukrainian statehood. Vladimir Putin’s efforts to reassert Russian control over Ukraine date back to the 2004 Orange Revolution and have now escalated from political interference to the bloodiest European war for generations. He sees the destruction of the Ukrainian state as his historic mission and believes the fate of Russia hinges on his success. In such circumstances, talk of compromising with the Kremlin is futile. Instead, Peace will only be possible if Putin can be convinced that Ukrainian independence is irreversible. Peter Dickinson is editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert service. Further reading The views expressed in UkraineAlert are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Atlantic Council, its staff, or its supporters.The stage is set for another exciting chapter of innovation as Prime Minister Narendra Modi gears up to engage with young minds during the grand finale of the Smart India Hackathon 2024 via videoconferencing. The event, spanning 51 centers across the nation, promises to be a dynamic forum for more than 1,300 student teams who will present their solutions to the challenges presented by various ministries, departments, and industries, or introduce their inventive concepts in the Student Innovation Category. This year's hackathon boasts over 250 problem statements, highlighting critical issues and inviting solutions in sectors like healthcare, smart technologies, and sustainability. A significant rise in participation is noted, with over 86,000 teams joining at the institute level before filtering down to the national stage. (With inputs from agencies.)NEW YORK (AP) — With the end of 2024 around the corner, you might be reflecting on financial goals for 2025. Whether you're saving to move out of your parents' house or pay off student loan debt, financial resolutions can help you stay motivated, said Courtney Alev, consumer advocate for Credit Karma. “Entering a new year doesn’t erase all our financial challenges from the prior year," Alev said. “But it can really help to bring a fresh-start mentality to how you’re managing your finances.” If you’re planning to make financial resolutions for the new year, experts recommend that you start by evaluating the state of your finances in 2024. Then, set specific goals and make sure they're attainable for your lifestyle. Here are some tips from experts: Think about how you currently deal with finances — what's good, what's bad, and what can improve. “Let this be the year you change your relationship with money,” said Ashley Lapato, personal finance educator for YNAB, a budgeting app. If you feel like money is a chore, that there's shame surrounding the topic of money, or like you were born being “bad at money,” it's time to change that mentality, Lapato said. To adjust your approach, Lapato recommends viewing money goals as an opportunity to imagine your desired lifestyle in the future. She recommends asking questions like, “What do my 30s look like? What do my 40s look like?” and using money as a means to get there. Liz Young Thomas, head of SoFi Investment Strategy, added that it’s key you forgive yourself for past mistakes in order to move into the new year with motivation. When setting your financial resolutions for 2025, it's important to establish the “why” of each, said Matt Watson, CEO of Origin, a financial tracking app. “If you can attach the financial goal to a bigger life goal, it’s much more motivating and more likely you’ll continue on that path,” Watson said. Whether you're saving to buy a house, pay off credit card debt or take a summer vacation, being clear about the goal can keep you motivated. Watson also recommends using a tool to help you keep track of your finances, such as an app, spreadsheet, or website. “After three years of inflation, your pay increases are likely still playing catch up to your monthly expenses, leaving you wondering where all the money is going," said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate. "Make that monthly budget for 2025 and resolve to track your spending against it throughout the year." McBride said that you may need to make adjustments during the year as certain expenses increase, which would require cutting back in other areas. “Calibrate your spending with your income, and any month you spend less than budgeted, transfer the difference into your savings account, ideally a high-yield savings account,” he said. “Interest rates aren’t likely to come down very fast, so you’re still going to have to put in the hard work of paying down debt, especially high-cost credit card debt, and do so with urgency,” McBride said. Start by taking stock of how much debt you have now relative to the beginning of the year. Hopefully you’ve made steady progress on paying it down, but, if you’ve gone in the other direction, McBride encourages making a game plan. That includes looking into 0% balance transfer offers. “You have more power over credit card interest rates than you think you do," said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree. “Wielding that power is one of the best moves you can make in 2025.” A 0% balance transfer credit card is “a good weapon” in the fight against high card APRs, or annual percentage rates, he said. A low-interest personal loan is an option as well. You may simply be able to pick up the phone and ask for a lower interest rate. LendingTree found that a majority of people who did that in 2024 were successful, and the average reduction was more than 6 points. When planning for your financial resolutions, it’s important to consider how you’re going to make your goals sustainable for your lifestyle, said Credit Karma's Alev. “It really is a marathon, not a sprint,” Alev said. Alev recommends setting realistic, practical goals to make it easier to stick with them. For example, instead of planning to save thousands of dollars by the end of the year, start by saving $20 a paycheck. Even when your plans are achievable, there are times you'll get derailed. Maybe it’s an unexpected medical bill or an extraordinary life event. When these situations happen, Alev recommends trying not to feel defeated and working to get back on track without feeling guilty. “You can't manage what you can't see, so set a New Year’s resolution to check your credit score monthly in 2025," said Rikard Bandebo, chief economist at VantageScore. “Be sure to pay more than the minimum on your credit accounts, as that's one of the best ways to boost your credit score.” Bandebo also advises student loan borrowers to make all payments on time, as servicers will begin to report late payments starting in January, and missed payments will affect borrowers' credit scores. Automated changes, like increasing workplace 401(k) plan contributions, setting up direct deposits from paychecks into dedicated savings accounts, and arranging for monthly transfers into an IRA and/or 529 college savings accounts all add up quickly, McBride said. Your financial goals can encompass more than just managing your money better — they can also be about keeping your money safe from scams . A golden rule to protect yourself from scams is to “slow down,” said Johan Gerber, executive vice president of security solutions at Mastercard. “You have to slow down and talk to other people if you’re not sure (whether or not) it’s scam,” said Gerber, who recommends building an accountability system with family to keep yourself and your loved ones secure. Scammers use urgency to make people fall for their tricks, so taking your time to make any financial decision can keep you from losing money. Your financial goals don’t always have to be rooted in a dollar amount — they can also be about well-being. Finances are deeply connected with our mental health, and, to take care of our money, we also need to take care of ourselves. “I think that now more than any other year, your financial wellness should be a resolution," said Alejandra Rojas, personal finance expert and founder of The Money Mindset Hub, a mentoring platform for women entrepreneurs. "Your mental health with money should be a resolution.” To focus on your financial wellness, you can set one or two goals focusing on your relationship with money. For example, you could find ways to address and resolve financial trauma, or you could set a goal to talk more openly with loved ones about money, Rojas said. —— The Associated Press receives support from Charles Schwab Foundation for educational and explanatory reporting to improve financial literacy. The independent foundation is separate from Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. The AP is solely responsible for its journalism.
T. Rowe Price Group Inc. stock underperforms Thursday when compared to competitors despite daily gainsGabriel trolls Manchester United target Viktor Gyokeres as fans label Arsenal star as ‘certified menace’
Hunter, Jeanty give Heisman ceremony a different vibeTrump has flip-flopped on abortion policy. His appointees may offer clues to what happens nextThousands of Syrians celebrate in central Damascus during first Friday prayers since Assad's fall
Can I earn superannuation income in Australia and still get a pension?For those on the right side of the political aisle, 2024 was a mixed bag. We had to trudge through the final year of Joe Biden’s disastrous presidency while fighting to prevent the administration from inflicting further economic carnage. Yet we also received an enormous gift with the victory of President-elect Donald Trump. Here are my top five moments of 2024. By far, this was best. Things did not look good for Trump at the start of the year, as he faced a litany of felony charges across multiple jurisdictions. But despite the legal onslaught, Trump refused to back down. (tncms-inline)9a826eb8-a769-4b71-b7ae-7e84438f7477[0](/tncms-inline) Aside from his legal problems, Trump faced several opponents as he fought for the GOP presidential nomination. In the spring, many political pundits and talking heads thought Trump could not win the Republican nomination. Yet he emerged victorious and united the GOP under the “Make America Great Again” banner. Trump then pulled off one of the biggest comebacks in political history as he cruised to victory and helped the Republican Party gain control of both houses of Congress. This election will go down in history as a turning point, considering the vast inroads Trump made among voters who traditionally voted for Democrats. Though the polls were tight heading into the debate between Trump and Biden, the absolutely pitiful performance by Biden completely changed the race. Soon after Biden flopped in front of millions of Americans, the Democratic Party pulled the plug on his reelection effort. Of course, this short-sighted move benefited Trump greatly, as it demonstrated that the sitting president was going senile. More important, it led to the rise of Vice President Kamala Harris to the top of the Democratic ticket. Considering Harris’ flip-flops on basically every central policy position, it really was a blessing in disguise that she inherited Biden’s place and was eventually destroyed by Trump. This could have easily been first or second on my list. In midsummer, Trump was crisscrossing the country, holding outdoor rallies. Unfortunately, Trump’s proclivity to engage with his supporters nearly cost him his life. But despite two would-be assassins somehow evading Secret Service detection — and one fired several shots — Trump was largely unharmed. While this was a blessing, we must never forget that one person, Corey Comperatore, died at the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally, and two others were wounded. On Oct. 14, SpaceX launched its Super Heavy Starship, the most powerful rocket in the world. Then, in an unprecedented engineering marvel, the 23-story-tall Super Heavy booster returned to the launch pad in an upright position and was “caught” without a hitch. It was like something straight out of a science-fiction movie, and it demonstrated that the age of space exploration has entered a new chapter. The department, known as DOGE, is an early Christmas present for conservatives and libertarians. For decades, we have been warning that the size and scope of the federal government is unsustainable and that big government is bad news for personal liberty. Finally, some significant spending cuts and institutional reforms are in the offing. With the national debt exceeding $36 trillion and trillion-dollar deficits the new normal, we need to downsize the federal bureaucracy and get back on sound fiscal footing before it is too late. Talgo is the editorial director at The Heartland Institute. He wrote this for InsideSources.com . Get local news delivered to your inbox!By CHRISTINE FERNANDO CHICAGO (AP) — As Donald Trump’s Cabinet begins to take shape, those on both sides of the abortion debate are watching closely for clues about how his picks might affect reproductive rights policy in the president-elect’s second term . Trump’s cabinet picks offer a preview of how his administration could handle abortion after he repeatedly flip-flopped on the issue on the campaign trail. He attempted to distance himself from anti-abortion allies by deferring to states on abortion policy, even while boasting about nominating three Supreme Court justices who helped strike down the constitutional protections for abortion that had stood for half a century. In an NBC News interview that aired Sunday, Trump said he doesn’t plan to restrict medication abortion but also seemed to leave the door open, saying “things change.” “Things do change, but I don’t think it’s going to change at all,” he said. The early lineup of his new administration , including nominations to lead health agencies, the Justice Department and event the Department of Veterans Affairs, has garnered mixed — but generally positive — reactions from anti-abortion groups. Abortion law experts said Trump’s decision to include fewer candidates with deep ties to the anti-abortion movement could indicate that abortion will not be a priority for Trump’s administration. “It almost seems to suggest that President Trump might be focusing his administration in other directions,” said Greer Donley, an associate law professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. Karen Stone, vice president of public policy at Planned Parenthood Action Fund , said while many of the nominees have “extensive records against reproductive health care,” some do not. She cautioned against making assumptions based on Trump’s initial cabinet selections. Still, many abortion rights groups are wary, in part because many of the nominees hold strong anti-abortion views even if they do not have direct ties to anti-abortion activists. They’re concerned that an administration filled with top-level officials who are personally opposed to abortion could take steps to restrict access to the procedure and funding. After Trump’s ambiguity about abortion during his campaign, “there’s still a lot we don’t know about what policy is going to look like,” said Mary Ruth Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law. That approach may be revealed as the staffs within key departments are announced. Trump announced he would nominate anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Health and Human Services Department, which anti-abortion forces have long targeted as central to curtailing abortion rights nationwide. Yet Kennedy shifted on the issue during his own presidential campaign. In campaign videos, Kennedy said he supports abortion access until viability , which doctors say is sometime after 21 weeks, although there is no defined timeframe. But he also said “every abortion is a tragedy” and argued for a national ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy, a stance he quickly walked back. The head of Health and Human Services oversees Title X funding for a host of family planning services and has sweeping authority over agencies that directly affect abortion access, including the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The role is especially vital amid legal battles over a federal law known as EMTALA, which President Joe Biden’s administration has argued requires emergency abortion access nationwide, and FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All, called Kennedy an “unfit, unqualified extremist who cannot be trusted to protect the health, safety and reproductive freedom of American families.” His potential nomination also has caused waves in the anti-abortion movement. Former Vice President Mike Pence , a staunch abortion opponent, urged the Senate to reject Kennedy’s nomination. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the national anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said the group had its own concerns about Kennedy. “There’s no question that we need a pro-life HHS secretary,” she said. Fox News correspondent Marty Makary is Trump’s pick to lead the FDA, which plays a critical role in access to medication abortion and contraception. Abortion rights groups have accused him of sharing misinformation about abortion on air. Russell Vought , a staunch anti-abortion conservative, has been nominated for director of the Office of Management and Budget. Vought was a key architect of Project 2025 , a right-wing blueprint for running the federal government. Among other actions to limit reproductive rights, it calls for eliminating access to medication abortion nationwide, cutting Medicaid funding for abortion and restricting access to contraceptive care, especially long-acting reversible contraceptives such as IUD’s. Despite distancing himself from the conservative manifesto on the campaign trail, Trump is stocking his administration with people who played central roles in developing Project 2025. Trump acknowledged that drafters of the report would be part of his incoming administration during the Sunday interview with NBC News, saying “Many of those things I happen to agree with.” “These cabinet appointments all confirm that Project 2025 was in fact the blueprint all along, and the alarm we saw about it was warranted,” said Amy Williams Navarro, director of government relations for Reproductive Freedom for All. Dr. Mehmet Oz , Trump’s choice to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is a former television talk show host who has been accused of hawking dubious medical treatments and products. He voiced contradictory abortion views during his failed Senate run in 2022. Oz has described himself as “strongly pro-life, praised the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade , claimed “life starts at conception” and referred to abortion as “murder.” But he also has echoed Trump’s states-rights approach, arguing the federal government should not be involved in abortion decisions. “I want women, doctors, local political leaders, letting the democracy that’s always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves,” he said during a Senate debate two years ago. An array of reproductive rights groups opposed his Senate run. As CMS administrator, Oz would be in a key position to determine Medicaid coverage for family planning services and investigate potential EMTALA violations. Related Articles National Politics | In promising to shake up Washington, Trump is in a class of his own National Politics | Election Day has long passed. In some states, legislatures are working to undermine the results National Politics | Trump taps his attorney Alina Habba to serve as counselor to the president National Politics | With Trump on the way, advocates look to states to pick up medical debt fight National Politics | Trump taps forceful ally of hard-line immigration policies to head Customs and Border Protection As Florida’s attorney general, Pam Bondi defended abortion restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period. Now she’s Trump’s choice for attorney general . Her nomination is being celebrated by abortion opponents but denounced by abortion rights groups concerned she may revive the Comstock Act , an anti-vice law passed by Congress in 1873 that, among other things, bans mailing of medication or instruments used in abortion. An anti-abortion and anti-vaccine former Florida congressman, David Weldon, has been chosen to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which collects and monitors abortion data across the country. Former Republican congressman Doug Collins is Trump’s choice to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs amid a political battle over abortion access and funding for troops and veterans. Collins voted consistently to restrict funding and access to abortion and celebrated the overturning of Roe v. Wade. “This is a team that the pro-life movement can work with,” said Kristin Hawkins, president of the national anti-abortion organization Students for Life.
Chris Mubiru leads Northwestern State over North Alabama 71-58
While iPads are incredibly useful on their own, it's easy to run into plenty of minor inconveniences while using them. Touch screens aren't always as precise as many people would like them to be, and trying to keep such a large device protected from the elements can be difficult at times. While there are some essential accessories every iPad user should have , there are plenty of other additions that can be an immense help on their own. Even if not all of those items were designed for Apple devices, a couple of extra purchases can significantly improve your experience. Among the most useful iPad accessories in 2024 are the previously mentioned essentials, but there are many different brands making these accessories. Even the options provided directly by Apple might not be the best choices in the long run, as more affordable or even higher-quality options can be found elsewhere. This is something to consider when deciding on what you need for your iPad, especially if you don't want your current woes to come back to you in the future. The Apple Pencil is probably one of the first accessories you should consider for an iPad. The Pro and USB-C versions are available directly from Apple, though older models — like the 2nd gen Pencil — can be found through other sellers like Amazon . Buying directly from Apple will allow you to engrave the pencil as well, giving it a personal touch so everyone knows it belongs solely to you. While this feature isn't technically useful, it's a nice bonus on top of the Pencil's existing capabilities. While it might seem like a glorified stylus at first, the Apple Pencil is specially designed for enhanced usability. On top of great control in art-focused applications, learning the tips every new Apple Pencil user should know can help you control many apps and features with much less effort. It even makes browsing the internet easier by showing a preview of where you're hovering, so that you can avoid clicking malicious or incorrect links. Despite initial impressions, the Apple Pencil is an all-around excellent accessory for any iPad owner. An iPad is technically a computer on its own, which means it's possible to connect keyboards to it. This includes extra-cheap third-party keyboards with Bluetooth, letting you connect to the iPad without needing to deal with any wires. Alternatively, you could go a step further and buy the specialized Magic Keyboard designed for the iPad Pro. While it's quite a bit more expensive in comparison, its full capabilities are far beyond standard alternatives. Our Apple Magic Keyboard for iPad Pro review took note of the many benefits this accessory was able to grant. On top of how it allows for more tactile feedback when typing and even provides its own cursor, the Magic Keyboard attaches directly to the iPad itself, allowing you to keep track of both items with great ease. It even provides an extra USB port specifically for charging. Especially if your touch screen is facing issues, getting an extra keyboard for your iPad is far from a bad idea. Other than keyboards, mice can also be useful input devices for the iPad. While you can get the Magic Mouse directly from Apple, it doesn't offer much more functionality than cheaper third-party alternatives like a simple Amazon Basics mouse . Pairing these accessories with an iPad might seem challenging at first, but the right adapters will let you plug them in directly. It's not as smooth of a fit as the Magic Keyboard, but it's a great alternative if you need more precision. If you happen to play a lot of games on your iPad, you could also rely on controllers as another input device. Apple offers the SteelSeries Nimbus+ as one such option, which provides all the essentials a controller could need — including control sticks and a home button. Other Bluetooth controllers should work just fine, including those taken from dedicated gaming consoles such as the PlayStation or Switch. This will be especially helpful for more competitive titles that require quick movements and reactions, as relying on a touch screen won't do you many favors in those scenarios. Like iPhones, iPads have a wide variety of cases you can choose from. However, iPads, in particular, have a different form of protective shelling known as a Folio . These covers attach directly to the iPad and cover the screen, protecting it from dust and debris when not in use. They even automatically shut down and turn on the iPad's screen depending on whether it's being used or not. For such a simple design, it's incredibly helpful in ways traditional cases usually aren't. Of course, the iPad does have various options for more traditional cases. Many of the best iPad cases that are both tough and trendy come in Folio-style designs, but there are plenty that simply cover the outer shell of the device just like they do with phones. These might be a better choice if you don't care for the extra capabilities of Folio covers and want to save a few extra bucks. After all, while it's a very useful accessory, not everyone will agree on it being worth around $80. While iPads are very lightweight and thin, they often don't offer much in the way of extra connections. This is especially problematic if you don't have the chance to use wireless connections for other accessories like keyboards and mice. Luckily, companies like Anker provide specialized USB hubs that you can attach to an iPad using a direct USB-C connection. In some cases, these hubs allow the device to have more connectivity than some laptops. While Apple doesn't supply these USB hubs, you can find multiple versions to suit your needs. For example, the Satechi iPad Pro USB-C Hub sticks to basics for those who don't need so many connections. These specially designed hubs connect directly to the iPad, but you can use other wired hubs instead if you don't mind losing out on the portability. Regardless, getting this accessory will open up many more options if you plan on getting other accessories alongside it. While some iPad accessories, such as the Magic Keyboard and Folio, allow the device to stay upright on its own, a dedicated stand might be a better choice for some users. Many portable stands are much cheaper in the long run, and the ones that aren't can often be adjusted to a much greater degree. The Twelve South Hoverbar is particularly noteworthy, as it allows the iPad to stay in your line of sight even if you're working out or otherwise occupied. These are far more versatile than the little flap-stands you'll find on most other iPad accessories. Interestingly, while accessories like the Folio include their own stand, stands themselves aren't exempt from including their own bonuses. Satechi once again makes a name for itself with its iPad Pro dock, which turns the tablet into a mini-iMac thanks to a built-in USB hub. These combined accessories can go a long way in making your iPad feel more like a replacement for your computer, which can be a big help if you find yourself using the tablet as your main device anyway. When it comes to portability, keeping track of your belongings can be a great concern. With the help of the Apple AirTag , this becomes less of a concern as you can use your Apple device to track lost or missing items. While it's best used with an iPhone, it's possible to pair your iPad with the trackers easily enough, so you won't be restricted from finding what's most important to you. Just make sure you don't lose the iPad itself unless you pair it with Apple's "Find My" network alongside the AirTags. Our Apple AirTag review noted how effective these trackers were, which should help you keep an eye on more robust accessories like stands or mice. It's mostly convenient for iPad users who are constantly on the go, prone to putting their items down in public places before picking them back up. As long as you keep the tablet itself close to you at all times, there isn't much need to worry about losing sight of your valuables. If you're often out and about, keeping your iPad charged is likely one of the many other concerns you'll have. This is where power banks come into play, acting as a powerful portable charger for your tablet. In a sense, it's basically a portable battery, giving you more time on your iPad than you might even need in the first place. Of course, the power bank needs to be charged as well, but you can always keep both devices plugged in overnight to make sure they're ready to go during the day. Apple offers the mophie powerstation as one of its options, coming in various capacities and having plugs available for multiple devices at once. Other brands like Belkin offer more lightweight options that can magnetically attach to your iPad, making them less cumbersome if you're already packed to the brim with countless other accessories. Whether you need that extra portability or not, having a fully charged power bank will absolutely help you during long trips away from other charging ports. Considering the tablet's size, it shouldn't be too surprising that the iPad won't provide the best listening experience on its own. For that, you're better off getting separate headphones or earbuds like the Apple AirPods . These can connect to the tablet just as easily as any other device, helping you get immersed when watching movies or listening to music. Extra features like noise canceling are especially useful when traveling, particularly if you're walking down busy roads or through crowded streets. If you're looking for something a bit less personal, external speakers are a perfectly viable alternative. Wireless Bluetooth accessories like the Beats Pill are also able to connect to the iPad, so you can share music or important videos with anyone else in the room. Some of these speakers are small and portable, making them easy to carry around. It's far from the worst choice for those who have the iPad as their primary device, especially if they want to share videos or music with friends who don't have a tablet of their own. Depending on the specific iPad you get, you could have as much storage as you'll ever need ... or you'll be left with very little space after just a couple of weeks. Thanks to the tablet's USB-C connection, though, external storage like the Samsung T7 Shield SSD can make up for pretty much all of that missing space. An iPad Pro with 2 TB storage costs $1,000 more than the version with just 256 GB, but an external SSD with that space will hardly cost more than a couple of hundred bucks. Considering the massive extra value you get, it's hard not to recommend investing in external storage for your iPad. Of course, there are plenty of different storage-focused companies out there. It might not be a bad idea to look at major SSD brands ranked worst to best before going all-in on something subpar that will make you wish you just spent more money on internal storage. You should also be wary of how these external options are only going to be connected through USB, so any accidental disconnects could result in some data loss. Even so, regardless of using an iPad or any other device, more storage options will always be helpful.
SANTA CLARA, Calif. , Dec. 13, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Marvell Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: MRVL), today announced a quarterly dividend of $0.06 per share of common stock payable on January 30, 2025 to shareholders of record as of January 10, 2025 . About Marvell To deliver the data infrastructure technology that connects the world, we're building solutions on the most powerful foundation: our partnerships with our customers. Trusted by the world's leading technology companies for over 25 years, we move, store, process and secure the world's data with semiconductor solutions designed for our customers' current needs and future ambitions. Through a process of deep collaboration and transparency, we're ultimately changing the way tomorrow's enterprise, cloud, automotive, and carrier architectures transform—for the better. Marvell® and the Marvell logo are registered trademarks of Marvell and/or its affiliates. For further information, contact: Ashish Saran Senior Vice President, Investor Relations 408-222-0777 ir@marvell.com View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/marvell-technology-inc-declares-quarterly-dividend-payment-302331636.html SOURCE Marvell
FALLS VILLAGE – Authors Kurt Andersen and William Cohan didn’t hold back when talking about how the country will be negatively affected by the election of President-elect Donald Trump. The two were the guest speakers at Friday’s Salisbury Forum in a presentation titled “Following the Money: What Will Become of America.” The newly renovated auditorium at Housatonic Valley Regional High School was packed. Andersen began by stating the election was not, as many claim, a mandate for Trump, noting a 1.7% vote margin is very low. “The only mandate is that the Democrats did so much worse getting the vote out. The Republicans had no mandate but to please their leader.” The two speculated on why certain excessively wealthy people became such strong supporters of Trump, but concluded they just didn’t understand their motivation. Perhaps it was their stand on Israel, or maybe the desire to rub elbows with Elon Musk. When Andersen said so many of them know nothing about history, politics and culture and are “shockingly dumb” about such topics, Cohan said, “They get rich and think they know about everything. The X landscape allows them to do that.” Both acknowledged Trump’s constant references to “the evil media.” When asked, Cohan said Jeff Bezos’s decision not to endorse a presidential candidate in The Washington Post wasn’t about the practice being old-fashioned and ineffectual, but because he didn’t want to anger someone who could be the next president. “When we were growing up, newspapers took pride in their endorsements,” he said. “I don’t understand why he did that. It’s very disturbing.” Cohan sardonically said he was looking forward to seeing retribution to investigative journalists. “Don’t joke about that,” responded Andersen. With Trump in the middle of picking his cabinet members and other positions to be part of his administration, the two agreed it has become a “clown show.” Cohan said, “I like the ‘Star Wars’ bar metaphor better.” Both repeated that they cannot even begin to figure out Trump’s thinking. Andersen termed Scott Bessent, the secretary of treasury pick, “a buffoon” and Marco Rubio, named to be secretary of state, was labeled by Trump “Little Marco” and he still comes back for more. Andersen said “If you keep going lower and lower on his list of appointments and they get more insane, the ones at the top don’t look so bad.” Touching on Robert Kennedy, Jr. as being named to head the Department of Health and Human Services, Cohan said the stocks of some pharmaceutical companies are tumbling as a result. “He’s committed every felony. Trump likes him because he’s done worse things than Trump. Kennedy’s father and uncle must be rolling over in their graves.” Andersen doesn’t believe that Trump will follow through on his promise of mass deportation. He said of the 11 million undocumented, 8 million are in the workforce, holding jobs in farming, hospitality and landscaping. “He can’t risk losing all those employees,” he said. But Cohan brought up the bipartisan immigration bill that Trump, as a private citizen, was able to quash. As for the tariffs Trump proposes to install, Cohan said they could increase costs to consumers, causing inflation to spike and the economy to tank. Sounding deflated, Cohan said, “I’m tired of speculating on this guy. I don’t know if he’s capable of moderating his views. He may think of ways to repeal the 22nd Amendment, so I’m not sure this is his last rodeo. He’s the luckiest guy on earth. He’s not going to jail. He’s a masterful politician; I’ll give him that.” Contact Ruth Epstein at kcsruthe @ aol.com.John Stankey to Update Shareholders at UBS Global Media & Communications Conference on December 10
None
In the digital age, information flows at speeds and scales that are unprecedented in human history. Social media platforms, digital news outlets, and personal devices collectively serve as both mirrors and engines of cultural discourse. Within this vast ecosystem, a new frontier has emerged: synthetic media or AI-generated media. And with its advanced outpacing our ability to corral its impact, we are headed for trouble. Synthetic media encompasses anything from deepfakes—highly convincing audio-visual fabrications—to seemingly benign AI-driven marketing campaigns. Although synthetic media hold transformative potential for creative expression, storytelling, and other constructive uses, they also possess the capacity to disrupt factual consensus, exploit cognitive biases, and further polarize social and political communities. This risk is compounded by lagging regulations and an under-informed public. Deepfakes, in particular, have transitioned from obscure internet novelty to a major concern for politicians, corporations, and everyday people. These manipulations often appear so authentic that viewers can be easily misled into believing false narratives or malicious content. Beyond the realm of video, AI systems can create deceptive audio and text that masquerade as human-generated. As large language models continue to evolve, the line between human and machine authorship becomes increasingly blurred, raising ethical and legal questions about authenticity, accountability, and transparency. The consequences of failing to regulate and label AI-generated media can be dramatic. Consider how misleading content might alter electoral outcomes, stoke social conflicts, damage reputations, or lead to fraudulent activities. These risks are not hypothetical; examples have already surfaced globally, with high-profile incidents where political leaders were impersonated or where “evidence” of events that never occurred went viral. Urgent calls to regulate AI-generated media are therefore not alarmist—they reflect a pragmatic response to a rapidly escalating threat landscape. One crucial reason for the urgency in regulating AI-generated media is rooted in our cognitive wiring. Humans evolved to process visual and auditory cues quickly, relying on these cues for survival. Our ancestors formed snap judgments about threats or opportunities in part because of the speed at which they could interpret sensory data. This evolutionary trait endures in modern times: we tend to believe our eyes and ears, and this trust in our sensory perception underpins the credibility we accord to photographs, videos, or audio recordings. Deepfakes exploit this trust. A well-crafted synthetic video or audio clip triggers the same cognitive mechanisms that authenticate what we see or hear in everyday life. Moreover, because technology increasingly blurs the boundary between what is computer-generated and what is real footage, people lack the inherent “cognitive safe-guards” or “skepticism filters” that would otherwise protect them. This vulnerability is especially pronounced when we are emotionally invested in the content—such as a purported leaked video supporting our political beliefs or exposing the misdeeds of a public figure we may already distrust. Beyond the broader evolutionary tendency to trust our senses, deepfakes and other forms of AI-generated content can exploit a variety of cognitive biases: : We naturally gravitate toward information that aligns with our preexisting beliefs. AI-generated content that confirms our worldview—whether it is a faked video showing a rival politician in a compromising position or marketing material suggesting our lifestyle is superior—reinforces that belief. This is especially problematic in online echo chambers and algorithmic social media, where such content can spread unchecked. : We often judge the likelihood of events by how easily examples come to mind. If deepfakes featuring a specific type of scandal become widespread, we are more likely to assume that such scandals are common and, consequently, believe them more readily. : Early impressions matter. The first piece of information we see about a topic often becomes the benchmark against which subsequent information is compared. A viral AI-manipulated video that spreads quickly can set a narrative “anchor” in the public’s mind, making corrections or denials less persuasive later. At the heart of many disinformation campaigns lies the “illusory truth effect,” a well-documented psychological phenomenon in which repeated exposure to a statement increases the likelihood of individuals accepting it as true. Even if the content is labeled as false or is obviously misleading upon careful inspection, frequent repetition can transform falsehoods into something that “feels” true. Deepfakes and AI-generated texts can be replicated or disseminated easily, enabling bad actors to harness this effect at scale. For instance, a deepfake might be briefly posted on social media—enough to generate initial traction and headlines—and then taken down or debunked. The image or snippet of the fake can continue circulating in people’s memories or reappear elsewhere, fortifying the original false impression. Without clear, consistent labeling mechanisms to counteract this cyclical exposure, the illusion can become a self-reinforcing loop in the public sphere. The introduction of malicious deepfakes into the public discourse raises the specter of heightened political polarization. As misinformation spreads, groups on different sides of the ideological spectrum may become entrenched in opposing “realities,” each bolstered by fabricated evidence that appears legitimate. This polarized environment fosters a climate of hostility and erodes the possibility of reasoned debate or consensus-based decision-making. Moreover, polarizing content tends to garner more clicks, shares, and comments—a phenomenon that social media algorithms can inadvertently amplify. When platform engagement metrics favor content that triggers strong emotional reactions, deepfakes that evoke outrage or support particular biases become hot commodities in the information marketplace, spiraling ever outward and forming a vicious cycle of mistrust. AI-manipulated media also risks reinforcing societal biases in more insidious ways. Deepfakes can be used to stage events that validate racial, gender, or cultural stereotypes. For example, an unscrupulous individual might distribute a manipulated video that portrays certain ethnic or religious groups in a negative light, fueling xenophobic or racist sentiments. Even if the content is later revealed as inauthentic, the initial exposure can have lasting effects. People who already harbor prejudices may use the deepfake as retroactive “proof” of their biases, while those previously neutral might become more susceptible to persuasion. This cycle not only marginalizes vulnerable communities but may also stoke social and political unrest. The ultimate casualty in an environment saturated with unmarked AI-generated media is a collectively agreed-upon reality. Democracy and social cohesion hinge upon the ability to arrive at shared facts—from the outcome of elections to scientific data on public health. When any piece of evidence can be digitally fabricated or manipulated, skepticism escalates and conspiratorial thinking can flourish. : Grassroots movements often rely on viral videos or audio clips to disseminate evidence of social injustices or to call for political change. If the authenticity of such evidence is routinely called into question, activism may lose its momentum. Conversely, maliciously designed deepfakes could falsely implicate activists in wrongdoing, discrediting their causes. : Ordinary citizens are inundated with content daily, from social media posts to streaming services. Without clear cues, it becomes harder for them to filter real events from artificial fabrications. As trust diminishes, a general malaise or cynicism can set in, dissuading people from civic engagement or even basic media consumption. : Communities lacking media literacy or robust digital infrastructure may be even more vulnerable to deepfake-driven manipulation. In regions with limited access to fact-checking resources or high barriers to digital literacy, malicious content can gain traction rapidly. Similarly, older adults may be more prone to believing doctored videos, given they grew up in an era where the public generally trusted film or television footage as verifiable proof. The rapid evolution of AI outpaces the slower, methodical processes of legislative bodies. While lawmakers debate and study the implications, new algorithms make the creation of deepfakes more efficient and convincing. The cost barrier is dropping; what once required a well-funded lab can now be done on a laptop with open-source tools. Malicious actors—be they private trolls, political propagandists, or even foreign adversaries—are quick to exploit this. Delayed responses grant these actors a substantial head start. They can shape public perceptions in ways that are difficult to reverse, especially when global events—elections, international conflicts, or public health crises—hang in the balance. Lessons from prior disinformation campaigns show that once a narrative takes root, it can persist long after fact-checks and retractions. : In 2020, a manipulated video of a prominent politician slurring words circulated widely, causing uproar among opponents and concern among supporters. Although debunked days later, the initial impact on public opinion had already been registered in poll data. : CEOs and CFOs have been impersonated via AI-generated voice technology, instructing subordinates to transfer funds or provide sensitive company information. In several known cases, companies lost millions of dollars before realizing the voice messages were fabricated. : Faked videos purporting to show atrocities committed by one side in a regional conflict have the capacity to incite violence. When these videos go viral and are further amplified by local media, the risk of escalation grows dramatically. Regulatory measures and explicit labeling protocols must adopt a preemptive, rather than reactive, stance. Instead of waiting for catastrophic misuse to illustrate just how damaging deepfakes can be, policymakers and technology companies can collaborate on robust frameworks to identify, label, and remove malicious content. By setting a strong precedent early, societies can minimize the risk of normalizing deception. : One of the simplest methods to label synthetic media involves text overlays within the video or image. For instance, the corners of a video could carry watermarks stating “AI-Generated” or “Digitally Altered.” While watermarks can be removed by a sophisticated manipulator, a standardized approach across platforms would help consumers quickly identify legitimate versus suspicious content. : Beyond visible overlays, invisible digital watermarks embedded in the file’s data can serve as a more tamper-resistant form of labeling. Any attempt to alter the file or remove the watermark would ideally degrade the quality or otherwise be detectable by specialized tools. : When AI-generated media is played—whether it is a video or an audio clip—platforms could require a brief disclaimer that states: “The following content has been identified as AI-generated.” This approach, similar to content warnings, can preempt potential misunderstandings and encourage viewers or listeners to approach the material with a critical eye. Social media platforms, streaming services, and other digital outlets are at the vanguard of content distribution. Their role in combating synthetic disinformation is critical: : Platforms can invest in AI-driven detection algorithms that continually scan uploaded content for known markers of manipulation (e.g., inconsistencies in lighting or facial movement). Although detection algorithms are in a cat-and-mouse game with deepfake generation, continued innovation and real-time updates can mitigate large-scale malicious dissemination. : Just as users can report spam or hate speech, platforms could introduce specialized reporting categories for suspected deepfakes. Advanced user communities, such as professional fact-checkers and journalists, can further support the verification process. : Clear guidelines are needed so that moderators know how to handle suspected deepfakes. This includes removal timelines, appeals processes, and transparency reports that show how many pieces of deepfake content were flagged and removed. The arms race between deepfake creators and detection tools is well underway. Several promising methods focus on subtle artifacts or “fingerprints” left by generative models—for example, unnatural blinking patterns, inconsistencies in lighting, or abnormal facial muscle movements. As generative models become more advanced, detection approaches must keep pace by training on the latest synthetic data. Machine learning experts emphasize that no single detection method is a silver bullet; a multi-layered approach is best. For instance, a platform might combine digital watermark checks, physiological feature analysis, and blockchain-based content provenance tracking to create a robust defense system. While detection alone cannot stop all malicious activity, it serves as a foundational pillar in the overall strategy to combat synthetic manipulation. Even the most sophisticated detection technologies will falter if the general public remains unaware of the threat. Education campaigns—run by governments, NGOs, and tech companies—can teach people how to spot potential deepfakes. These initiatives might include: One of the most frequent objections to regulating and labeling AI-generated media pertains to free speech. Critics argue that mandatory labeling could impede creative expression, from artists experimenting with generative art to filmmakers using AI for special effects. They worry that an overly broad or poorly defined regulatory framework may chill innovation and hamper the legitimate uses of synthetic media. However, these concerns can be addressed through nuanced policies. For instance, requiring an “AI-Generated” watermark does not necessarily stifle the creative process; it merely informs the audience about the content’s origin. The difference between legitimate creativity and malicious manipulation lies in transparency and intent. If creators are upfront about their manipulations, they still retain the freedom to innovate while respecting the public’s right to be informed. Another valid concern is that legislation aiming to curb malicious deepfakes could become a vehicle for authoritarian regimes to clamp down on free speech. Leaders could exploit the label of “synthetic media” to discredit genuine evidence of human rights abuses, or to justify mass censorship. This underscores the need for international standards accompanied by oversight mechanisms that ensure labeling requirements and takedown policies are not abused. To prevent overreach, any law targeting synthetic media should be transparent, narrowly tailored, and subject to judicial review. Multi-stakeholder input—from civil liberties groups, academic experts, industry representatives, and everyday citizens—can help craft legislation that balances public protection with fundamental human rights. Regulation in the realm of AI-generated media sits at the intersection of civil liberties and public welfare. The dilemma is not dissimilar to debates around hate speech or misinformation. While societies must preserve the right to free expression, they also have an obligation to protect citizens from harm. AI-generated media, when weaponized, can be as harmful as defamatory propaganda or incitement of violence, meriting its own set of safeguards. A measured approach ensures that policies serve their intended purpose—helping citizens distinguish truth from fabrication—without morphing into tools of repression. A transparent labeling requirement, combined with a legal framework that penalizes malicious intent, can maintain this balance. In effect, it draws a line between permissible creative uses of AI and the reckless endangerment of public trust. Regulations and labeling initiatives that work in one cultural or linguistic context may not translate seamlessly elsewhere. For instance, text overlays in English may fail to inform audiences in countries where English is not widely spoken. Additionally, cultural norms around privacy, free speech, and state authority vary widely. A labeling system that is accepted in one area might be viewed skeptically in regions with stronger censorship regimes or different legal traditions. Moreover, the very concept of “free speech” is not uniform across the globe. Some countries already have strong hate speech or misinformation laws, while others may lack the legal infrastructure to implement new regulations. Therefore, any international effort to standardize labeling must incorporate local adaptations, ensuring that the underlying principle of transparency remains intact, but is delivered in culturally and linguistically appropriate forms. Despite these variations, certain universal principles can guide the global approach to regulating AI-generated media: : Whether through text overlays, digital watermarks, or disclaimers, the public must be made aware when they are viewing synthetic media. The precise methods for delivering this information can be adapted locally, but the underlying principle should remain consistent. : Creators and distributors of synthetic media have a responsibility to ensure that viewers or listeners have enough information to make informed judgments about content authenticity and its context relative to reality. This is especially crucial when real human images, voices, or personal data are manipulated. : Governments, platform operators, and creators should be held accountable for failing to meet established guidelines. Where malicious intent is proven, legal mechanisms must be in place to enforce sanctions. Where ignorance or technical limitations lead to unintentional violations, a tiered system of penalties or corrective measures might be more appropriate. Deepfake technology is not confined to national borders; malicious actors often operate on a global scale. Consequently, international collaboration is essential. Just as nations have come together to form treaties on cybercrime, chemical weapons, and other cross-border threats, a similar multilateral framework could address the proliferation of AI-generated disinformation. A global body—potentially an offshoot of organizations like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)—could help establish best practices, offering guidance on policy, detection tools, and public education. While enforcement would likely remain at the national level, international oversight could encourage consistency, reduce regulatory loopholes, and mobilize resources for less technologically advanced nations. AI-generated media is a double-edged sword. It opens possibilities for unprecedented creative applications, from hyper-realistic film productions to empathetic storytelling experiences that place audiences in different worlds or historical eras. Education could become more immersive, activism more compelling, and art more provocative. Yet these constructive ends are overshadowed by the grave potential for harm—sowing social discord, undermining electoral processes, discrediting legitimate reporting, and exacerbating societal biases. The psychological underpinnings that make deepfakes so effective—our inherent trust in sensory data, coupled with cognitive biases like the illusory truth effect—underscore the urgency of swift action. Without explicit labeling, accountability frameworks, and educational programs, AI-manipulated content will further erode public consensus on reality. In communities already rife with political or ideological fault lines, the infiltration of advanced deepfakes could tip the balance toward conflict or, at the very least, deepen existing fractures. Regulation and labeling standards stand as our first line of defense. Text overlays, digital watermarks, platform-based disclaimers, and multi-layered detection systems can help restore at least a measure of trust. Legislation, if carefully crafted, can deter malicious actors by raising the legal and moral stakes. Global collaboration and cultural sensitivity will be necessary to ensure that these measures neither hamper legitimate creativity nor become tools for repression. In many ways, the fight against unregulated synthetic media is part of the broader struggle to preserve truth, accountability, and informed democratic governance in a digital world. Failing to act immediately risks normalizing an environment where fabricated evidence permeates public discourse, institutions lose credibility, and citizens retreat into isolated echo chambers of misaligned “facts.” By contrast, a robust system of labeling, legislation, and public awareness can provide the bulwark we need against a future where the line between truth and fabrication is hopelessly blurred. It is now, at this critical juncture, that we must institute comprehensive and enforceable regulations for AI-generated media. In doing so, we safeguard not only our political systems, social cohesion, and individual reputations, but also the very concept of shared reality. If we respond adequately and swiftly, we may harness the wonders of AI-driven creativity while ensuring that the cornerstone of civil society—our trust in what we see and hear—remains intact. Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based portrait, events, and landscape photographer. He holds an M.S. in Applied Mathematics and a doctorate in Music Composition. He is also an avid equestrian.
Use it or lose it, developers warned as Labour targets land banking
win vip
Jeddah: England wicketkeeper-batter Phil Salt was bought by Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) for Rs 11.50 crore in the IPL 2025 Auction here at the Abadi Al Johar Arena in Jeddah on Sunday. Salt received significant attention at the auction with a base price of Rs 2 crore. Mumbai Indians (MI) opened the bidding, but Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) quickly entered the fray. The price shot past Rs 4 crore in no time. As the competition heated up, Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) joined at Rs 4.4 crore, eager to reclaim Salt. His ability to unleash power play fireworks kept the paddles moving. RCB and KKR locked horns, driving the price to Rs 6.5 crore, then Rs 8 crore, and beyond. KKR momentarily gained the upper hand at Rs 8.25 crore, but RCB countered at Rs 9 crore. The bid surged past Rs 10 crore, with RCB regaining control at Rs 10.5 crore. Despite KKR’s persistence, they eventually paused as RCB claimed Salt for Rs 11.5 crore. The opening batter was key for the Knight Riders in their IPL 2024 winning campaign. He played 12 games and racked up 435 runs at an average of 39.55. In another purchase, South Africa wicketkeeper-batter Quinton de Kock was sold to KKR for Rs 3.60 crore. He entered the IPL auction with a base price of Rs 2 crore, but bidding for the South African keeper-batter started slowly. Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH) eventually opened proceedings, followed by Mumbai Indians (MI) at Rs 2.2 crore. The prospect of de Kock reuniting with Rohit Sharma at the top of MI’s batting order sparked excitement, but SRH ensured the bidding remained competitive. The price climbed to Rs 3 crore, where MI briefly held the lead. However, Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) joined the fray, pushing the bid to Rs 3.6 crore. MI opted out, leaving KKR to secure de Kock for Rs 3.6 crore. Lucknow Super Giants (LSG), de Kock’s previous franchise, chose not to exercise their Right to Match. Following RCB and KKR’s battle for Salt, the latter went on to buy Rahmanullah Gurbaz without any challenge as the Afghanistan wicketkeeper-batter went for his base price of Rs 2 crore to KKR.
216 vipph
vip seat
vip 7
