Astronomers have detected an atmosphere around a rocky exoplanet in the habitable zone of its star for the first time in history, signalling a major breakthrough in the search for alien life, according to a study published on Thursday in Science. 

The planet, known as LHS 1140-b, is about 5.6 times more massive than Earth and orbits a small dwarf star about 48 light years from our solar system. While scientists have discovered atmospheres around many giant gas planets in our galaxy—and even a few rocky exoplanets outside the habitable zone—the new detection of helium in the skies of LHS 1140-b marks the first direct evidence that a habitable-zone rocky world can host an atmosphere, which is a critical factor for assessing their potential to support life.

“For rockier Earth-like planets, it has been a huge challenge in the field to detect any atmospheres at all,” said Collin Cherubim, a NASA Hubble Fellow at the University of Chicago, in a call with 404 Media. “This has been a huge question in the field that so much time and energy has been devoted to answering.”

The new discovery “is really the first claim ever of any rocky exoplanet atmosphere in the habitable zone that could potentially have liquid water and really support life,” added Cherubim, who conducted the research while he was a PhD student at Harvard University. “That's what sets it apart and makes it really exciting.”

Scientists have previously inferred that some rocky exoplanets in the habitable zone might have atmospheres based on indirect evidence, such as measurements that show that their day and night temperatures are more moderate than expected, which could be explained either by an atmosphere, or other planet-wide effects. However, spotting an atmosphere around these rocky worlds is tricky because they tend to be so small compared to their stars, which is a challenge for precision observations.

Cherubim came at the problem with a new approach: He first developed theoretical models of rocky exoplanets that focused on mass fractionation, a process by which lighter molecules and atoms in the atmosphere escape into space, while heavier ones are left behind. These simulations predicted a new type of planet with thick skies closer to the surface, and a thinner upper atmosphere that allows helium to escape to space.

“Hydrogen is the lightest element and it's the easiest to blow off into space,” Cherubim explained. “My model was predicting that if your planet is in this sweet spot where you're blowing enough hydrogen away, but not too much that you're dragging helium, which is a bit heavier, along with it, then you can actually create a helium-dominated atmosphere over time.” 

“This is a newly-predicted class of planets, which should have very unique chemistry,” he added. 

Cherubim realized that this escaping helium might be detectable from Earth, and that the LHS 1140 system would be a prime candidate to test out the hypothesis. To that end, the team observed LHS 1140-b and another planet in the system, LHS 1140-c, over the course of 2024 and 2025 with the Warm Infrared Echelle (WINERED) Spectrograph on the Magellan Observatory in Chile.

The 2024 results revealed a strong signal of helium at LHS 1140-b, but no detection in 2025, which may mean that the helium escape varies over time. The team predicts that the planet has probably had its atmosphere for billions of years. The other planet, LHS 1140-c, did not show any signs of an atmosphere, which was also expected based on its orbit and characteristics.

The momentous discovery proves that atmospheres can exist around rocky worlds, including around dwarf stars, which are far more common than more massive stars like the Sun. Cherubim and his colleagues think it’s quite likely that LHS 1140-b has large amounts of liquid water on its surface, another key ingredient for life as we know it on Earth.

“When we think about habitability, we think about three high-level things,” Cherubim said. “We think the planet needs to be rocky for the most part. It can't be a gas-rich thing where the surface is molten, or like Jupiter where it's just all gas. It's got to be the right temperature to support surface liquid water, at least for Earth-like life, and it needs an atmosphere to hold that water in and to shield the surface from radiation.” 

“With this discovery, we now know LHS 1140-b has all three of those things, which is really exciting,” he added. “And it just happens to be a very nearby system to Earth, so it's very accessible.”

Whether alien life exists on LHS 1140-b remains an open question, but scientists have already been looking for signs of life, known as biosignatures, in its skies using the Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope. So far, the search hasn’t turned up any obvious signs of life, but future efforts may be able to peer at this world in more detail. 

“I think this is the best place to be looking for biosignatures,” Cherubim concluded. “We're really excited to see what comes out of that.”

Police departments around the country have used Flock cameras at least hundreds of times to search for specific people, not cars, using searches such as “heavy-set male with a black and white hat,” “person on skateboard,” and “person wearing orange vest and construction hat,” according to data reviewed by 404 Media. Sometimes searches reference a target’s race or signs of their political affiliation.

The searches highlight that while most people associate Flock cameras with scanning license plates and tracking vehicles, some of the cameras are also capable of following the movements of particular people or groups of people. Flock’s nationwide network of cameras lets police officers in one state search for a vehicle across many other states at once; the people searches do a similar thing, typically on a smaller scale, sometimes querying many hundreds of cameras at once. These are called “FreeForm” searches, and allow cops to use Flock’s system as though they would use a search engine, with Flock’s AI and image recognition interpreting what footage and which people are relevant to a police officer’s search.

“Much of the world hasn’t quite caught up yet to how much more powerful a surveillance camera is today compared to a few years ago. AI video analytics means that giant oceans of video data can now be searched the same way big text files can be, including for sensitive content such as t-shirts, tattoos, and bumper stickers. Even without face recognition, that’s a significant increase in surveillance capability,” Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404 Media in an email.

“This is a classic bait-and-switch. Your town was pitched a tool to catch stolen cars and find missing kids,” Tom Bowman, policy counsel, security & surveillance, at the Center for Democracy & Technology, told 404 Media in a statement. Instead, cops now have the capability to search for a specific person or description of a person across a wealth of camera networks at once. “It's like being sold a smoke detector and only later finding out it's been recording every conversation in your house.”

The searches sometimes stretch across dozens or even nearly a hundred networks of Flock cameras at once. Sometimes the searches are so vague that they can pull up images of innocent or unrelated people. Other examples in the data reviewed by 404 Media include:

• Dunwoody GA PD looking for someone wearing a “backpack,” and later “person walking” and “black sweatshirt.” The latter two searches were across nine networks of cameras each
• Pocatello ID PD searching for “a male on foot” across 38 cameras. Another search was “atlanta falcons,” referencing the NFL team
• Corona CA PD searching for “american flag shirt” and “dodger shirt.”
• Milford CT PD looking for “male with tattoos,” “male with brown hair,” and “woman blue shirt,” across more than a hundred cameras
• The California Highway Patrol looking for someone wearing a “gray shirt” across 274 cameras
• The Texas Department of Public Safety searching 96 networks of cameras for “man weasring [sic] a black t-shirt and shorts.”
• Florence SC PD looking for “person with gun” across 61 cameras
• Chamblee GA PD searching 85 camera networks for “white woman wearing grey shirt, blonde hair, black shorts with blue and white shoes.” The agency also searched for “female with ugg boots.”
• Brookhaven GA PD looking for “tall man.”

Some searches referenced the race of the person authorities were looking for. The California Highway Patrol was “Looking for a white male about 6ft 1in tall, longer brown hair almost to his shoulders, slender build, will have been wearing blue jeans, boots with white paint stains on the toes and possibly carrying a black helmet.” Atlanta GA PD searched for “non caucasion [sic] male wearing blue shirt blue pants white hat.”

Some searches are part of an “investigation,” according to the “reason” field in the data. Others are part of a missing persons case. In some it is not clear what the reason for the search was because it is redacted.

“Unfortunately, this ability to search cameras as though doing a search engine inquiry is increasingly common for surveillance cameras,” Beryl Lipton, senior investigative researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told 404 Media. “AI-enabled video analysis across reams of footage exacerbates the risk that law-abiding people minding their own business end up with police observing them without their knowledge and opens them to possibly being implicated in a crime or being treated as a criminal. Imagine how many people at any given moment may be walking on foot, wearing a backpack, or existing with brown hair. It wasn’t that long ago that Trayvon Martin was murdered by someone who could argue that wearing a hoodie justified suspicion and a claim of self-defense.”

404 Media reviewed data collected by HaveIBeenFlocked.com, a website that collates Flock search-related data obtained through public records requests. Since 404 Media revealed local police were performing Flock searches on behalf of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), journalists, activists, and residents across the country have requested “Network Audits” from their local police departments. These spreadsheets show in granular detail when an officer searched Flock cameras, how many cameras they queried, and the stated reason why.

A sometimes overlooked part of those audits is a field called “text_prompt.” This relates to a feature in Flock called FreeForm search, which lets officers search cameras not by typing in a license plate but with a natural language phrase. Sometimes these FreeForm searches are descriptions of vehicles, but they often include descriptions of people.

Flock primarily advertises its FreeForm as a feature for its Condor video cameras, which are separate from its automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras. These video cameras have “people detection alerts,” and “Guardian Mode” automatically zooms in on people and vehicles. “Deploy AI-powered video where it matters most—no blind spots, no hassle, and fully integrated into Flock,” the company’s website reads. But the AI-analyzed feeds are not entirely divorced from ALPR; Flock has designed the systems to work in tandem. Kevin Cox, a Flock consultant who previously worked for the Grand Prairie Police Department in Texas, previously said, “video combined with the LPR evidence of placing a vehicle at the scene or nearby is an incredibly game changing experience into the prosecutorial chain of events.”

tFlock launched FreeForm in February 2025, although the company’s announcement at the time focused on searches related to vehicles. Some FreeForm searches 404 Media reviewed indicate a target’s potential political affiliation, such as the Anne Arundel County MD PD searching 198 networks for “white jeep with trump flag.” 

One example search Flock gives on its website is for “camo hat orange vest.”

Flock told 404 Media in a statement “FreeForm is designed to help investigators quickly search through large amounts of footage when they are working with limited information, such as a witness description of a person or vehicle.”

“FreeForm is not facial recognition. Flock’s products do not have facial recognition, and we have no facial recognition technology in development. FreeForm cannot identify a person by name, verify someone’s identity, or search for a specific face,” the company added. Flock said authorities used FreeForm searches in a September 2025 AMBER alert case and in Emporia, Kansas, when an elderly man left an assisted living facility.

Flock said FreeForm searches have “guardrails,” including users not able to search attributes such as “race, ethnicity, religion, nationality.” When they do, an alert is generated and sent to the agency’s administrators, Flock said. Some of the searches 404 Media found did discuss someone’s race.

Stanley from the ACLU added, “Imagine that your police department stationed officers on corners around your community writing down notes on where you are at what time, but also what you’re wearing every day, what objects you might be carrying — and writing down those details on everybody, 24/7. You would ask, why are they keeping notes on everybody? That’s pretty intrusive. But that’s basically what these systems do.”

“All this goes to show that Flock is eager not just to expand its surveillance of drivers across America through license plate readers, but to expand into every new kind of surveillance that technology makes possible. And then to link these data streams together to capture even more information about how everybody is living their lives. I don’t think most Americans want to live under that kind of constant automated surveillance,” he wrote.

In May 2025, 404 Media revealed Flock planned to use hacked data as part of a massive people lookup tool. The idea was to use information from data brokers and data breaches to “jump from LPR [license plate reader] to person,” according to internal Flock meeting audio 404 Media previously obtained. Flock scrapped the plan to use hacked data after 404 Media’s coverage and internal pressure.

In December 2025, 404 Media reported Flock left at least 60 of its people-tracking cameras exposed to the wider internet, letting anyone watch their feeds in real time. Those were Flock Condor cameras, and not its more widespread license plate reading cameras.

We start this week with Jason’s story about the ChatGPT flyer pandemic. They’re everywhere! Thank you to the readers and listeners who sent in their own examples. After the break, Sam tells us how Waymo snitched on kids and drove them to a group of waiting cops. In the subscribers-only section, Joseph explains why he bought a $3,000 suit that electrocutes your muscles. Yep.

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. Become a paid subscriber for access to this episode's bonus content and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

• ⁠We Are Living in a ‘ChatGPT Flyer Pandemic’⁠
• ⁠Cops Say Waymo Snitched on Teens for Allegedly Drinking and Shooting a Toy Gun⁠
• ⁠I Bought the $3,000 Fitness Suit That Electrocutes You. I’m Sending It Back⁠

The AI music generation tool Suno scraped millions of songs and lyrics from YouTube Music, Deezer, and Genius, as well as from the stock music libraries Pond5, Jamendo, Freesound, the International Music Score Library Project, and podcasts via RSS feeds, according to a hacker who breached the company and shared data about Suno’s training libraries with 404 Media. The hacker was also able to access user information for hundreds of thousands of Suno’s customers, as well as Stripe payment information, they said.

The hacked data is a rare look at exactly how AI models and tools are built. Suno is one of the largest AI music generation tools on the internet, and has been the subject of several major lawsuits from the record industry, which accused the company of training on millions of copyrighted songs. As part of these legal proceedings, Suno previously admitted that it was trained on “essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet,” which included a total of “tens of millions of recordings.” Suno has been making the argument that it is allowed to train on copyrighted works as fair use in those cases, one of which has been settled. 

The lawsuits have made clear that Suno did train on huge amounts of copyrighted works, but the hacked data shared with 404 Media sheds more light on how Suno scraped songs from the internet and where it took them from. The Recording Industry Association of America accused Suno of ripping songs directly from YouTube; the hacked data seen by 404 Media confirms this.

The hacked material includes source code that appears to be from 2023 and 2024 that includes scraping instructions and details about the scope of at least some of the scraping. For example, the comments in one file note that they will pull from “genius_hq, youtube_music, freesound, jamendo, imp, deezer, ytm_tagged,” and that “non-music will be filtered out.” A file called “youtube_music” notes that at the time the file was last updated, it had ingested “2,013,545 music clips.” Another file contains comments about different datasets Suno had created, which included “113,879 hours of youtube_music,” “17,615 hours of genius_hq,” “410 hours of free sound,” “19,514 hours of imslp,” “3,726 hours of jamendo,” “62,117 hours of pond5_music,” “12,287 hours of deezer,” “152,162 hours of ytm_tagged,” and “103 hours of musescore_lyrics.” In total, this is at least decades worth of music. 

If you listen to the 404 Media podcast by now you probably realized that Joe and I are a little obsessed with a game called Marathon. I’m embarrassed to say that I’ve played it for almost 300 hours since it was released in March.

But as much as we’re enjoying it, and there are thousands of players who feel the same, Marathon so far has failed to find the audience we’d expect from the developer that made Halo, Destiny, and which a few years ago acquired by PlayStation for more than $3 billion. It’s bad news for Marathon fans and a good sign for how much the video game business has changed over the years.  

I wanted to have Remap Radio host Robert Zacny on the podcast because much like me and Joe, he’s been obsessed with Marathon as well. One of Rob’s greatest skills is dissecting how and why games get their hooks into us, and what a game’s popularity, or lack thereof in Marathon’s case, might reveal about the state of the industry and culture more broadly. 

404 Media is a journalist-founded company and needs your support. To subscribe, go to 404media.co. As well as bonus content every single week, subscribers get access to additional episodes where we respond to their best comments. Subscribers also get early access to our interview series. Gain access to that content at 404media.co.

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. 

Become a paid subscriber for early access to these interview episodes and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

Freya Holmér's had this idea in her head for a long time—Tetris, but the whole board rotates. The game developer and Unity tool maker started making the idea real and built out a prototype. Holmér posted a 50-second clip of it to social media in mid-March and asked: "Is this anything?" It was, according to the people who responded. The posts got hundreds of replies from people desperate for a playable version. 

"You can watch [the gameplay] happen and you understand the full extent of it, while still seeing the complexity and interesting parts of it," Holmér told 404 Media. "Most people know about Tetris, so you can shortcut all those concepts—it's a visually compelling concept—and you get the idea very quickly."

It was a promising response for a commercial game developer that quickly turned unsettling. Within days, someone responded to her post with a vibecoded version of Holmér's prototype: "This can be built into a game by tomorrow." Another popped up in mobile app stores. Holmér said she saw up to four vibecoded versions of her prototype. Generative AI has made the work of plagiarizing an idea a lot simpler. A person vibecoding a game doesn't need any programming or design experience. They  input ideas and instructions into a generative AI application and it writes the code and builds out the user interface. The vibecoder can tweak the game in conversation with the generative AI program until it suits their needs. As you might expect, the process doesn't necessarily produce elegant results. 

The two vibecoded versions of Holmér's game, for instance, lack the finesse of her carefully crafted animations. There's a story behind every decision she made. That may not be true for the vibecoded versions of the game. Charlie Greenman, who told 404 Media he saw Holmer's idea on social media and wanted to do a spin on her prototype, said it took him several prompts and roughly a day to make his version, Rotris. Greenman said he doesn't think there are any ethical concerns with what he did. "I really can care less about the game," he said. "No one was interested." 

"I feel like I had this brand new creation," Greenman said. "When it gets to that point, is one song copying another? Is one game copying another? Whoever created Blox, Jenga, is that a copy of Tetris?"

404 Media reached out to the developer of another copycat, Blockfall, which also popped up within days of Holmér's post, but did not receive a response.

"It disincentives me from [posting about my work,]" Holmér said. "You get this anxiety anytime you post anything, someone is going to come in to finish it for you and then monetize it and steal the whole concept. It used to be the case that this stuff took a look of effort [to steal], because it requires skill and skillful execution and effort and knowledge. But now with AI, there's a general devaluing of skill and knowledge."

Papers, Please developer Lucas Pope expressed a similar sentiment on the Mike & Rami Are Still Here podcast in April—that he doesn’t feel comfortable sharing much about what he’s working on publicly, lest it gets “slurped by AI” and copied by someone else.

There's always been some risk of sharing ideas and concepts too early on social media; grifters looking to swipe ideas have always been around. Holmér's experience with generative AI clones of her game idea is just exacerbating a dupe industry that's pervasive on digital video game marketplaces. As video game companies both big and small compete for attention in a culture that's kept the same five games, like Fortnite and Grand Theft Auto 5, on the most-played lists for years, some companies are forgoing original ideas entirely, opting instead to co-opt anything popular or trending to make a quick buck. These sorts of schemes are prolific on the App Store and Google Play Stores, but are behind much of the slop on console digital stores, too.

It's big business. Several companies have had huge success flooding the market with knockoffs designed to confuse players looking for games to play. One strategy for these clone developers is taking a popular console or PC game and publishing a clone on mobile app stores—often before a developer has been able to make a port themselves. It's been massively successful for studios like Voodoo, a French mobile game maker that's been accused several times of making copycat games. 404 Media reached out to Voodoo for comment, but did not hear back. In 2018, Voodoo received a reported $200 million from Goldman Sachs, and in 2020, Tencent became a minority stakeholder valuing the company at a whopping $1.4 billion. Voodoo both makes and publishes mobile games, often low effort free-to-play games that generate money through ads.

"The incentives and the infrastructure is built to encourage this kind of overproduction"

In 2018, game developer Ben Esposito accused the company of copying Donut County, which was unreleased at the time. Voodoo's version, Hole.io, reached the top of app store charts. It remains one of Voodoo's most popular games. Several other indie games have seemingly been cloned by Voodoo, too. Ironically, Voodoo doesn't want other game developers aping their clone games; it sued another mobile giant, Rollic Games, in a French court and won. The court found that Rollic Games' Wood Shop, in which players carve a spinning block of wood, copied Voodoo's Woodturning. The important piece of this story is, however, that Rollic Games was released before Voodoo's. Its copying accusations were related to an update Wood Shop made to their game.

Copycat and clone games have proliferated since, and generative AI is only making the problem worse.

"We shouldn't be surprised that people are using AI to do this kind of thing, because the incentives and the infrastructure is built to encourage this kind of overproduction," University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of media and cultural studies Jeremy Morris told 404 Media. "This is a problem that's existed for as long as these platforms existed, so I don't think AI creates something new here. It just amplifies the amount that people can do."

Moldova-based Midnight Works is one company flooding console and mobile digital storefronts with clone games that players quickly deem scams. Founded by Cătălin Țiței and Roman Gaina in 2015, according to an archived version of the Midnight Works website, Midnight Works created apps before entering the games market in 2017. Since then, Midnight Works has grown to employ 300 people, per an archived version of its website. (The website now only hosts a landing page with almost no information.) . "Midnight.Works is a visionary game development and publishing company that thrives on nurturing creativity and innovation within the gaming industry," the company said, according to an archived version of the website. "Our diverse and passionate team is dedicated to collaborating with both burgeoning and accomplished game creators to bring unique, engaging gaming experiences to players across the globe."

Midnight Works claimed that 80 percent of the games it publishes pass $1 million in revenue, while 15 percent make over $100,000. The remaining five percent, it said, "don't achieve significant milestones." 

A Moldovan game developer close to the company, told 404 Media that Midnight Works is "one of the largest" game developers in Moldova. Its big success was acquiring Hashiriya Drifter, a popular mobile racing game, from an external game developer. "[It] became their flagship project and, from what I know, the main financial foundation that allowed the company to grow," the developer said. 404 Media granted this developer anonymity so they could speak freely about Midnight Works.

"I found out my game was suddenly being sold by someone else."

Luke Wild, a YouTube creator who investigated Midnight Works in a series on his channel, told 404 Media that he believes the company is a "massive global scam." Wild started looking into the company while playing through slop games on the Nintendo Switch eShop on YouTube. (Midnight Works retaliated against him, Wild said, by demanding employees to report his videos," he claimed.) He noticed that a lot of the games he was playing were coming from a small pool of developers that all seemed to stem from Midnight Works. He spent years documenting the connections between the slop factories. Each of these studios uploaded the same games, maybe with slightly different titles. If a game got removed from a digital storefront, it'd get uploaded later under a different developer or publisher. Most of the games, Wild said, are simulator games—because they're easy to create a template for—that copy whatever the algorithm is favoring. When TCG Card Shop Simulator, from OPNeon Games, was released into early access in 2024, for instance, Midnight Works released its own, Card Shop Game Store Simulator, months later. (The Nintendo Switch store page for this game is listed as being made/published by VRCForge Studios, but a game with the same name and key art is listed as being published by The Midnight—with Midnight Works email addresses—on the Microsoft Store.)

"Midnight doesn't have the best reputation, and unfortunately that already affects how people perceive other studios from our country as well," the Moldovan game developer close to the company said.

Midnight Works has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Sometimes, Midnight Works' and studios in what Wild calls Midnight Works' "Web of Deceit" directly copy games, down to the source code and assets. One developer, who goes by the name Steelkrill Studio online, told 404 Media that his found footage horror game The Backrooms 1998 was stolen almost in its entirety. "I never imagined something like that would happen," Steelkrill Studio said. "The wildest part is that I only discovered it because someone commented on one of my videos accusing me of re-releasing the same game myself, which is how I found out my game was suddenly being sold by someone else."

The Backrooms 1998 is a found footage horror game published in 2025. It’s played through the lens of a camcorder’s viewfinder. One of the unique pieces of the game is the implementation of the player’s actual microphone—the monsters can hear breathing and other sounds. It’s Steelkrill Studio’s own take on the backrooms genre, which was born of creepy storytelling on forums like Reddit, like Kane Parsons’ 2026 film Backrooms. There are a lot of other backrooms-inspired games, the most popular of which is Escape the Backrooms.

Steelskrill Studio thinks Midnight Works used a decompiler to take the source code. Looking through the files, he found that most everything matched his game. "It even had my personal videos when I was younger and family VHS tapes that I had included in my game [that] were still present in their stolen version," he said.

The stolen version of The Backrooms 1998 was taken off the console storefronts, and that publisher, Cool Devs, has seemingly been banned. 404 Media has reached out to Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft to confirm the reason for the removal and subsequent bans, but didn’t hear back. But its games now appear on the Nintendo Switch eShop and other storefronts once again, sometimes under different publisher names. The Bad Parents, an egregious copy of Bad Parenting, published originally by Cool Devs is now listed on the Nintendo store by TrueMotion Interactive—a studio that's published and is still selling near exact copies of Peak, Supermarket Simulator, and Bodycam. 

A former Midnight Works employee, who asked for anonymity, told 404 Media that the studios' "long-established" scheme was to recreate a trending game and make a "stripped down clone" in a few months—just give it a similar name and style, sometimes using assets ripped from the original games. "All of this was done in the hope of confusing buyers so that they would purchase our awful knockoff instead of the original," the former employee said. The former employee said that generative AI was used "at every step" to speed up development: "Literally from banners and screenshots to UI and 3D models," they said.

Once a game is ready to be published on digital storefronts like the Nintendo eShop or PlayStation Store, the company blasts its game name and page with keywords in an attempt to beat the algorithm. "A lot of the optimization for game developers was similar to the way it was for early stages of music and podcasts, which is keyword stuffing," Morris said of general clone game tactics. "It's the basic kind of search engine optimization, at the discovery level." Another strategy, Morris said, is constant updates. It's one of those things that Morris called "algorithmic imaginaries," or myths about how these platform algorithms work. "One of the big ones is that the more frequently you update your app, the more often it would look like it was new and would get recommended more," he said. "One example I point to is the Bible app, and there's a Bible app that's updated every 12 days. I thought it was funny because it's a text that obviously is not changing."

Game sellers and app stores are incentivized to have a lot of content to sell; they get a cut of everything purchased there. Many have policies about copies and clones, but complicating that is determining what is a copy or clone. In the case of The Backrooms 1998, it's seemingly an easy decision to take the game off the store for violating copycat policies. Attorney Michael Wang, who researched Chinese copycat games, told 404 Media that developers and publishers can't copyright or patent ideas. If exact technology and assets are stolen, that's fairly cut and dry. But ideas that are similar—even really similar—are often fair game.

Where does inspiration stop and copying begin? Without PUBG Battlegrounds, there would be no Fortnite. And without the classic Japanese film Battle Royale, there would be no PUBG Battlegrounds. It's a question that's come up a lot in games. In 2014, a firestorm of controversy: Italian game developer Gabriele Cirulli was accused of copying indie game Threes! with his own game, 2048. Threes!, by game makers Asher Vollmer, Jimmy Hinson, and Greg Wohlwend, was released in 2014 and had success on the App Store. Then the clones came. One of those was 1024, which was also released on the App Store shortly after Threes! Cirulli's 2048, which he said was inspired by 1024, became the biggest of them all.

Cirulli, 19-years-old at the time, told 404 Media he saw a game called 2048 on a forum he posted to, based on another game called 1024. "I had no commercial intentions so I just started coding up my own version of the game," Cirulli said. He wanted to challenge himself to create an algorithm for a game like this. He struggled with it and almost gave up. He posted a finished version of the game, playable in a browser, to the forum. Someone saw it there and posted it to Hacker News, where it blew up. Thousands and thousands of people started playing it. Within days, a company called Ketchapp created a mobile version of 2048, called it 2048, and published it on the App Store. (That's the version that's generated millions of dollars in revenue per month, per reports. Ketchapp, like Voodoo, has been accused of egregiously copying other games. Ubisoft acquired the company in 2016. Cirulli said the only gripe he has with Ketchapp is that its version of 2048 has bugs that let you cheat. He's since released a commercial version of the game that's never quite reached Ketchapp's level of success.)

Then the accusations started. "I didn't publish 2048 with the intention of going virtual, nor did I expect that I would," Cirulli said. "At the time, I felt much more insecure with my place in the world and about myself as a professional. It was very difficult to deal with, and it affected me pretty deeply, even from an emotional perspective. It challenged my perspective of myself, meaning I was asking myself, Am I the bad guy in this scenario? Am I doing something unethical or bad?"

He's no longer interested in litigating the ethics of it all. But he would do something differently: "I think the only thing I would change is my mental health aspects, relating to the amount of stress it cost me," Cirulli said. "I think that was entirely optional."

He continued: "I still have that strong drive to build things that will affect people's lives in some small way, so that hasn't gone away. It gave me a lot of perspective and I feel very privileged to have had that opportunity."

Like Cirulli, software engineer Vittorio Romeo was inspired by a game he loved, Super Hexagon, to create his own version. He played Super Hexagon on his phone, "even during lessons at school," he said. Super Hexagon didn't have a PC version. So he tried to make one using the programming language he was learning, C++. "I did manage to replicate the game mechanics quite quickly and have a working version, obviously not as polished or well-crafted as the original, and it was doing the job," he told 404 Media. The mistake, he said, was releasing his free, open-source version of the game on PC before Super Hexagon developer Terry Cavanagh did.

"I never really wanted to compete with the original," he said. "I wanted it to be, like, we're fans of the original. We love the mechanics. We have played the original a lot, and we want more. I wanted to build a platform where people can iterate over the ideas the original had and build on top of it."

But unlike Cirulli's situation, Super Hexagon creator Cavanagh said he was "basically alright with [Open Hexagon,]" though a little upset it was released before Super Hexagon came to PC. As an open source game, Romeo didn't make money from Open Hexagon at the start, but he put it on Valve's Steam platform in 2021. It costs $4.99 to purchase, so Romeo does make a little bit of money from it. But more importantly, he said, is that the Steam Workshop lets players more easily create new levels. "That's been going on and people are still adding levels to this day," Romeo said. "There's a small community that is still developing content."

It's absolutely a different sort of clone than the likes of Midnight Works, which seems to be motivated not by admiration or learning but by profit. The end products, too, are certainly more high quality than the big budget slop machines that churn out more and more low quality clones.

At the platform level, companies like Nintendo are seemingly making changes to its digital store not necessary to moderate what shows up on the store, but to push down the slop games to the margins. Nintendo now forces the Best Sellers section to rank games by revenue and not total downloads. Ranking by downloads was a problem because these low effort games are often extremely cheap. People are willing to give something a try for $2 or less, so they sell a lot. Still, the cat-and-mouse game is on across every platform that sells games.

Holmér, whose Tetris-like is also an iteration, is still working on the game. She's got a lot of design decisions to make. What's the scoring system? Is there a failstate? Does she make it feel more like a toy? How do blocks clear? Does she share more about its development online?

"Most things right now have a pretty short life cycle when it comes to attention online," Holmér said. "The attention on that video I posted has tapered off to the point where I feel a lot more calm. In the very beginning, that first week, just every day there was a new AI clone. I was like, OK, well fuck me, I guess. But there's way less engagement, and I feel more in the clear to take my time to actually make something right, something good I can be proud of, and not just get it out there as soon as possible."

Is your sex life as private and personal as you think it is? Or is it shaped by – and constantly shaping, in turn – the society and systems you exist in? 

This week we’re joined by Dr. Angela Jones, who asks these questions and much more in their new book, Sex in Public. Angela is a professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Stony Brook University. In addition to scholarly works published in many distinguished journals including Porn Studies and The Black Scholar, they’re the author, co-author and/or editor of several books, including Black Lives Matter: A Reference Handbook and Camming: Money, Power, and Pleasure in the Sex Industry which came out in 2020 and advanced and informed a lot of my own understanding of the online adult industry especially.

Their latest book, Sex in Public: The Transformative Social Power of Our Erotic Lives, just launched. As Angela writes: “Revolutionizing how we talk about sex means thinking not just about what a single solitary person should or shouldn't do in bed.” 

We get into the history of sexology, how sex toys complicate our understanding of what counts as sex, whether sex needs a definition at all, what happened when they bought and used a sex doll, and why the most vulnerable moments in their book are also the ones everyone wants to discuss. 

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube.

Become a paid subscriber for early access to these interview episodes and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

Sex in Public: The Transformative Social Power of Our Erotic Lives

Cash/Consent by Lorelei Lee

The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) announced it will let its surveillance contract with automated license plate reader company (ALPR) Flock expire, becoming the largest police department in the country to drop its contract. Notably, the decision came after an audit of ALPR technology found that, in a two-month period, the LAPD had improperly "investigated" 161 people whose cars were flagged as stolen in the LAPD’s ALPR system but were not actually stolen. 

The news that LAPD pulled over 161 innocent people in two months because of improper tagging in the department’s system comes after several high-profile incidents in which people in other states were accosted by police because of data entry or clerical errors in ALPR systems. Joel Feder, an editor of the car journalism website The Drive, detailed a harrowing tale in which he was tracked for days and ultimately pulled over by police in Minnesota because the license plate of the car he was reviewing for the website had been entered into the Flock system as stolen by a police department in California. Monday, the website MotorBiscuit wrote about an innocent woman who was jailed for 13 days because she drove a black Dodge Durango and police searched the Flock system for a Black Dodge Durango suspected of being involved in a fatal hit-and-run accident. 

A new report by the LAPD Office of the Inspector General (OIG) suggests that instances of people being falsely pulled over because their license plates have shown up on an ALPR “hot list” are very common, and that the surveillance of people on hot lists that ultimately result in no action from police is staggering. Many ALPR systems have this “hot list” feature, which is where police enter a license plate and get a ping or notification about the vehicle’s whereabouts whenever it passes a connected ALPR camera. In a two-month period between August 1 and September 30, 2025, the LAPD’s cameras generated more than 210.5 million license plate reads, according to the report.

“During the review period, officers acknowledged 161 alerts as accurate license plate matches; however, subsequent investigations determined the vehicles were not stolen,” the report reads. “In addition to creating an inconvenience for vehicle owners, these inaccuracies can affect individual liberty interests, erode public trust, and potentially create substantial legal and financial liability concerns.”

The report notes that this happened because of “inaccurate or outdated information, increasing the risk of unnecessary enforcement actions, including vehicle stops and wrongful detentions, or a confrontation with serious consequences,” and that in many cases, license plates remained on a hot list after a stolen vehicle had already been recovered or was reported as not stolen, meaning the cops are in some cases pulling over the lawful owner of the vehicle.

Notably, the report states that when police get an ALPR hot list hit, the department generally considers any subsequent action to be a “high-risk” stop, meaning the risk of confrontation or potential danger is greatly increased from routine traffic stops for running a red light or speeding. 

“When a license plate matches with a vehicle of interest on a Hot List, an alert will appear on the police vehicle’s Mobile Digital Computer,” the report reads. “Often, officers will approach the vehicle with extreme caution or conduct a ‘high-risk’ stop. This involves calling for back up, air support, and a supervisor and ordering the suspect out of their vehicle.” The report says, “department policy requires officers to attempt to verify the accuracy of the ALPR alert prior to conducting a stop,” but that often does not happen. The report also states that, on the vast majority of hot list hits, no action is taken by police meaning that specific people are being subjected to tracking and surveillance for no readily discernible reason. In the two-month audit period, 5,911 different license plates were tracked. No action was taken against 4,575 of those cars.

The LAPD said in response to the report that cars improperly flagged as stolen “generally result from the timing of record updates outside of the Department’s control, such as delays by another jurisdiction or a vehicle owner in clearing a plate from a Hot List after a vehicle has been recovered or is no longer wanted.” In other words, LAPD is often relying on other police departments to remove license plates from a hot list, highlighting the problems with networking different surveillance systems together.

The LAPD OIG report, which appears to have directly led the LAPD to allow its Flock contract to expire, studied the use of three different ALPR systems the department has been using, including static, pole-mounted cameras from Motorola and Flock and cameras in police cruisers made by Axon. In total, the department has nearly 2,000 ALPR cameras; LAPD accesses data for both Flock and Axon systems through Flock’s backend thanks to a data sharing partnership between Axon and Flock, according to the report. The report said the department was able to recover 337 stolen cars during the two months and that ALPR data led to 74 arrests total. 

Both the OIG and the LAPD determined that the ALPR system needs to be reconsidered. The OIG suggested that the LAPD “suspend the deployment of new ALPR cameras and the execution of new ALPR-related contracts pending public input and a broader reassessment of vendors and data practices” and “strengthen oversight of ALPR data access.” The LAPD allowed its Flock contract to expire over the weekend, and said it would not enter into new contracts until going through a full audit process.

Putting on the $3,000 Katalyst suit is like sliding around with an electric eel. First you lay out the vest, shorts, and arm straps (on a towel if you don’t want to make a mess) and spray their electrode pads with a lot of water. “More water is better,” Katalyst’s CEO Brendan Kennedy told me. You then clip the vest and shorts together, creating a single, dripping suit. After wrapping those around your body and zipping up, you put on the arm straps and connect them to the main suit with a pair of delicate cables. You slip a battery pack into a pocket near your thigh, snap its magnetic plugs to the vests and shorts, and you’re ready to work out, soaking wet and maybe cold if you took too long to assemble the contraption.

The pitch is that Katalyst will essentially supercharge your workouts. The suit electrocutes your muscles while you do basic movements alongside a virtual instructor in the accompanying app. Think lunges, squats, and the movement of a deadlift. You can get the equivalent of a 2 hour strength session in just 20 minutes, Katalyst says. George Clooney has praised the suit, telling Esquire “my arms are twice the size they’ve ever been. It’s crazy.” Bloomberg Businessweek has covered the suit too, writing, “here’s the thing: The Katalyst suit worked.”

I already own a bunch of exercise and wellness tech, from smart swimming goggles to the Oura ring. I often plan my workout time as efficiently as I can. That’s one reason why my main form of exercise is rowing, which uses a lot of muscles at once, and why I sometimes wear resistance gloves during swimming to squeeze out as much benefit as possible. So, as a tool that promised super-efficient sessions even if the price tag is obviously insane, I really wanted to like Katalyst. I thought it might be the secret to finally branching out from rowing and swimming to more strength-focused routines.

But it wasn’t. It gave me pins and needles in my feet for days at a time and made my limbs numb and cold, derailed my other workouts, and it simply wasn’t fun in the way good and long-lasting exercise habits ideally should be. Instead, slipping into the $3,000 cyber suit for around a month made me reassess my obsession with fitness, optimization, and efficiency. It made me consider which of those concepts were actually helping me, and which were ultimately holding me back. What the fuck am I even doing? I eventually thought to myself, dripping water all over my apartment floor.

I wasn’t the only one. “Legit you are the craziest person I know,” 404 Media’s Emanuel Maiberg said after I sent a photo of the soaking wet suit to our group chat. They compared me to an Infinite Jest character, with Sam Cole saying “we’re laughing IRL over here.” Jason Koebler added: “As your friends and colleagues and cofounders. This is not normal. The bit has gone too far.” 

Katalyst is an electro muscle stimulation, or EMS, suit. The pads send electrical pulses that make your muscles contract. At first, as the suit and app ramp you into a workout, the pulses feel like a light tingling sensation. Then, a solid block of electricity across your arms, legs, and abs. You wet the pads, and sometimes the base layer of shorts and a long-sleeve t-shirt, because the water helps conductivity between the electrode and your skin, Katalyst says.

“That was absolutely insane,” I texted the rest of 404 Media after my first workout.

At some points, your limbs may lock in place due to the intensity of the blast. I tweaked my settings so I could complete the movements fully and with a good amount of difficulty and resistance, while not completing locking my legs or arms out. The app encourages and makes this easy to do: during a workout there are buttons in the app you can quickly press to increase or turn down the intensity of the pulses. The instructor in the pre-recorded video will often bring up the power during the workout to reach an electrocuting crescendo. It can take a few of the recommended three or so workouts a week to find your ideal baseline.

Katalyst’s instructors recommend you breathe out while the suit pulses. You perform a squat, or a lunge, or another movement for four seconds while the suit shocks you. Then you rest for four seconds. You keep doing that through different motions and intensities. In 20 minutes, the workout is over. 

This timesave is obviously the big attraction of the Katalyst; the idea that you can somehow squeeze hours of work into mere minutes without even leaving your home. “I'd been trying to go back to the gym a dozen times over the preceding 2-3 years with no luck. The time savings/mental ease of EMS training really is a blessing,” AustinAfter40, a YouTuber who makes EMS-related videos, told me in an email. Within the first few months of getting an EMS suit in 2023, Austin says he gained 10 pounds of muscle. In the years since that’s gone up to 20 pounds, without, Austin says, really touching anything heavier than a 15lb dumbbell. “My bone density has increased significantly, body fat has lowered, and back pain I've dealt with much of my life is now a distant memory,” he says.

If you scroll the Katalyst subreddit, you find many people saying much the same thing. But navigating the world of EMS can feel like the Wild West. Austin makes money from his EMS-related videos with affiliate links, so viewers need to keep that in mind when watching whatever suit he is currently making videos about even if the information is sincere and helpful (he has since moved onto TitanBody, a Katalyst competitor). The intensity and metrics of EMS suits are not standardized, so you don’t really know what you’re getting. An intensity rating of, say, 200 on a Katalyst is probably not going to be the same on a TitanBody suit. Or a VisionBody suit. Or any of the other EMS suit companies that have clearly bought Google Search ad space when you look for anything EMS-related. 

Katalyst is FDA-cleared. That is not the same as FDA-approved. The Katalyst suit falls into Class II of the FDA’s different groups for devices, putting it in the moderate risk category. Being cleared means Katalyst can sell the suit, but the FDA is not saying everyone should slip it on.  

On the Katalyst subreddit, people have historically complained about the company’s customer service or suit delivery times (the customer service was very good for me, with a dedicated Zoom call to talk through the issues I was facing). Kennedy, through his company Mont y Mer, acquired Katalyst in 2025. He said the previous CEO and Katalyst’s founder, Bjoern Woltermann, had “essentially bankrupted the company twice in six years,” and had taken orders and payment from more than 1,000 customers but hadn’t created any suits. Kennedy said he then went around the world meeting with different suppliers to produce those original 1,000 suits. For me, it took around five months for my suit to arrive when I ordered it in 2025. Kennedy said Katalyst has inventory now and has “sort of solved that problem.” Woltermann acknowledged a request for comment but did not provide a response in time for publication.

Beyond the anecdotal, the science suggests EMS suits can work. Professor Yong-Seok Jee at Hanseo University, who has researched EMS, told me in an email that while athletes often use EMS to target specific muscle groups, he says the suits can also help normal people. Like me, presumably. “For non-athletes or the general population, EMS can be particularly useful as a time-efficient and low-impact training option, especially for beginners, older adults, or individuals with limited mobility,” he continued. 

But EMS is not some magic tool you can use instead of actually working out and exercising normally. “That said, EMS is not a shortcut or replacement for exercise. Its effectiveness depends heavily on appropriate intensity, supervision, and program design, and there are safety considerations (e.g., avoiding excessive stimulation),” Jee said.

Casey Johnston, who runs the lifting-focused newsletter She’s a Beast and author of A Physical Education, told me in an email Katalyst is “definitely in no way a replacement or even effective complement to strength training.” 

“If anything, similar to the drag suit argument, wearing a thing like the Katalyst would probably hamper your ability to effectively learn strength training movements and form, which is a huge cornerstone of translating strength to real life, before it would be additive in any meaningful way with, I can't put enough quotes, ‘muscle stimulation,’ or whatever term they use,” she added.     

“This suit looks like the biggest scam I’ve ever seen,” Johnston wrote. She pointed to the Relaxacisor, a device from 1949 that blasted your abs with electrical pulses. “This thing is no different, and equally scammy,” Johnston said.

I didn’t want to replace my current exercise regime of rowing and swimming five or six times a week with the Katalyst. I wanted to slot it in. I’ve repeatedly injured myself with various strength routines, to the point where I’ve had to do physical therapy and had medical procedures done, so I wanted Katalyst to supplement my existing exercise and get more strength in there. That didn’t work.

First, obviously, you ache after blasting yourself with electricity. So much so that you (wisely) need to rest, but also so much so that you can’t then row or swim, even at a lower level. So I found myself not doing the two forms of exercise I love and get great joy from and which have drastically improved my health over the years. 

Next, I started to essentially injure myself with the suit. I often got pins and needles in my hands and feet. One of the instructors in the app said pins and needles in your hands can happen and should go away quickly. But mine would last for hours, and my feet multiple days. Then my limbs would feel numb and I would be incredibly cold, so much I would start sneezing. Kennedy told me getting pins and needles for this long was “extremely abnormal.” I took his advice of wetting the pads even more, and even the base layer you put on. I also did some workouts without the arms turned on at all. That stopped the issue with my hands at least.

But it still wasn’t working for me, mentally. It made me think what was I even doing this for. To be efficient for efficiency’s sake? 

There is something lost when you favor efficiency above all else. You lose the joy of just moving in a way that feels good. You lose embracing the process of exercise itself when trying to make the time spent as short as possible. You lose sight of your actual goal with exercise, which for me is to keep active and healthy, not get insanely jacked. You lose that state of everything fading away, your mind clearing, endorphins flowing, and nothing else existing but your body moving without you even thinking about it. What runners call the runners’ high, or what I get in rowing when I’m on a longer workout. Maybe some people do get that or feel good with EMS suits. The in-app instructors said you might. I know I didn’t get it with Katalyst.

Earlier this week, I somewhat stupidly asked our readers to send me examples of "ChatGPT flyers," the AI-generated posters and advertisements that have taken over social media, bulletin boards, restaurant menus, store signage, business cards, and billboards around the world. I say stupidly, because I was flooded with so many terrible, brain-numbing signs for anything you could possibly imagine. I guess I got what I asked for. (Thank you, I love it).

404 Media readers were particularly passionate about their hatred for AI-designed signs. I got some of the best email responses to any story I've done here. Before I get into the AI flyer hall of shame, here's some of what I heard:

"They look like absolute DOG SHIT. Like my cat's litter box! I freaking HATE THEM. I have been posting to my Instagram begging people and businesses to stop using them. No one listens LOL. Thanks for this article. I am glad I'm not screaming into the void by myself."

"thank you for writing this story. I've evangelically shared it with everyone I know, for whatever that's worth. I had never seen a local group churn out an AI-generated flyer before this year, but in the last several months it's gotten out of control. I'm sure you're being inundated with lousy AI flyers. Sorry for adding to the deluge, but this is something that's been bothering me for months."

"This is a great article but also fuck you because you were absolutely right about 'Once you notice a ChatGPT flyer, you will see them everywhere if you keep your eyes open.'"

Without further ado, here are some of the worst flyers we got. This represents just a small sampling of the overall number you sent me. In some cases I've provided more context from the person who sent it to me, and I've biased for ones that appeared in real life (i.e., were printed out) or that are particularly weird. Enjoy!

Welcome back to the Abstract! Here are the studies this week that busted their butts, scaled great heights, got it right, and discovered a new world.

First, Hannibal marched an army of men, horses, and elephants over the Alps to threaten Rome. Scientists ask the question: Just how hard did they grind? Then, the mouse at the top of the world, the ancient origins of handedness, and a throwback to the alien megastructures.

As always, for more of my work, check out my book First Contact: The Story of Our Obsession with Aliens, or subscribe to my personal newsletter the BeX Files. 

Try the Hannibal diet (no, not the Lecter one)

E. Berti & F. Vollrath. “Energy costs of Hannibal’s alpine crossing.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In 218 BC, the Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca marched an army of 46,000 men and 37 war elephants over the Alps to threaten Rome right at its doorstep. This brash advance in the Second Punic War has become one of the most legendary military moves of all time, even though Hannibal was ultimately unsuccessful in his mad dash to sack Rome.

Yet despite the prominent place of this march in history, the exact route that Hannibal took over the Alps remains unknown. Now, scientists have taken a fresh stab at the millennia-old mystery by calculating how much energy various route options would have cost the troops and elephants. Though experts have generally considered a route called the Col du Clapier to be most likely, the new results suggest an alternate route known as the Col de la Traversette would have exacted less energy from the advancing army, which might have boosted its odds as Hannibal’s choice of crossing.

“Most of the discussions concerning Hannibal’s crossing were guided by philological and geological considerations, which tend to ignore the biology of the men and animals,” said authors Emilio Berti of Halle-Jena-Leipzig and Fritz Vollrath of the University of Oxford. 

“Compared to choosing the Col de la Traversette, the routes via the Col de Montgenèvre, Col du Clapier, and Col du Mont Cenis would have required 11%, 16%, and 19% more energy, respectively, for the army as a whole,” the team continued. “Although Hannibal would not have had such accurate estimates, he may have had a qualitative understanding of the ranking of the possible routes. In which case, driven by the aim to minimize the energy costs of the crossing, he would have chosen the Traversette route.”

While this study does not resolve the tantalizing question of exactly where Hannibal hauled ass over the Alps, it sheds new light on the immense costs of this ancient act of bravado. Berti and Vollrath estimated that even if the army took the path of least resistance—the Col de la Traversette—the “elephants would have lost 4% of their body fat reserves, horses 11%, and men 19%.” 

Invading Rome: The ultimate weight loss plan. Considering that half of Hannibal’s troops died during the crossing, this diet is not recommended.

In other news…

The mighty mountain mouse

Liphardt, Schuyler et al. “Adaptation across an extreme elevational gradient in Andean leaf-eared mice, the world’s highest-dwelling mammal.” Science.

Speaking of alpine survival, meet the Andean leaf-eared mouse (Phyllotis vaccarum). This little critter can live more than four miles above sea level, on the dizzying peaks of the Andes mountains, making it by far the highest-dwelling mammal on Earth. 

The mouse has surpassed the “known elevational range limits of all other terrestrial vertebrates” which “were previously thought to be uninhabitable by mammals owing to severe hypoxia and frigid temperatures,” according to a new study about this mouse’s amazing adaptations.

To understand how this unassuming mouse survives up in the clouds, scientists  analyzed the genomes of 167 leaf-eared mice collected across their range, which spans the lowlands all the way up to high Andean slopes, and compared them to their more grounded mouse relatives. The results revealed that the mountain mice have evolved a unique set of adaptations that are distinct from many other alpine animals, including the ability to metabolize toxic plants. 

“The world’s highest-dwelling mammal has adapted to habitats at both the low- and high-elevation limits of its range, and much of the elevation-related selection relates to previously unappreciated aspects of feeding ecology,” the team concluded.

Mmm…toxic salads. Keep on living the high life, P. vaccarum. 

A handy discovery at the dawn of complex life

Evans, Scott D. et al. “Earliest evidence of behavioural handedness in the Ediacaran motile bilaterian Spriggina floundersi.” Scientific Reports.

Paleontologists have discovered the oldest potential evidence of a right-handed animal, though the 550-million-year-old seacrawler in question doesn’t actually have hands. Spriggina floundersi, an inch-long weirdo that lived in the Ediacaran period, has long fascinated scientists because it appears to be one of the first animals in the fossil record capable of locomotion. 

When scientists took a closer look at more than 100 exquisite Spriggina fossils from South Australia, they discovered that about twice as many of them seemed bent to the left compared to the right, suggesting that the animal had a preferred direction of motion, or “handedness.” In this case, it was right-handed because the fossils are preserved in negative hyporelief, meaning that they are mirror images of the animal.

“A significant number of fossil specimens are bent to the left (right in life),” said researchers led by Scott D. Evans of the American Museum of Natural History. “The nature of these bends does not match expectations of anatomical asymmetry and instead constitutes the oldest described evidence of behavioural handedness.”

Now, the search is on for the elusive Ediacaran leftie. 

It’s never aliens 

Madurga-Favieres, Cristina et al. “Evidence for a giant companion orbiting Tabby’s star.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Before there were interstellar objects and Pentagon UFO videos to ignite our extraterrestrial imaginings, there was Tabby’s Star, also known as KIC 8462852. Discovered in 2015, the star’s strange light patterns, which fluctuate significantly, sparked speculation that it might be orbited by “alien megastructures,” such as a massive solar energy plant called a Dyson sphere.

Now, scientists have discovered evidence of a huge planet transiting Tabby’s Star—meaning that it passed in front of the star from our perspective on Earth—which might help provide a natural exploration for its unusually pronounced dimming events. While reviewing observations from NASA’s Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), the team serendipitously “found a single unreported transit event…on 2019 September 3” that lasted 21 hours, hinting at the presence of a giant planet about ten times as massive as Jupiter. 

“No transiting companion has ever been detected around this well-known star, so the potential evidence of a candidate presented in this work is significant, as its existence could explain the complexity of the system,” said researchers led by Cristina Madurga-Favieres of the University of Warwick. “The strongest theory is that a group of exocomets or planetesimal fragments are responsible for the irregular and apparently non-periodic dips…of Tabby’s star. The presence of a companion would explain why these bodies are driven to the vicinities of the star, breaking up, as it would orbitally perturb them.”

In other words, the huge planet may be gravitationally hoisting a flock of smaller bodies into orbit around the star, producing the dimming events. While it’s not quite as sensational as a colossal alien power plant, it may help resolve the decade-long mystery of this strange star.  

Thanks for reading! See you next week.

Fiction written by artificial intelligence is easy to detect because it struggles with complex story structure and tends to moralize in clunky ways, according to a preprint study from researchers at University of Maryland, College Park and Google DeepMind. They found that AI fiction has tells that go beyond stereotypical overuse of em-dashes and other obvious AI tropes and have more to do with the formulaic nature of the text itself.

“AI stories over-explain themes and favor tidy, single-track plots while human stories frame protagonists’ choices as more morally ambiguous and have increased temporal complexity,” the study, which looked at more than 50,000 AI-generated short stories, found. “Claude produces notably flat event escalation, GPT over-indexes on dream sequences, and Gemini defaults to external character description. We find that AI-generated stories cluster in a shared region of narrative space, while human-authored stories exhibit greater diversity. More broadly, these results suggest that differences in underlying narrative construction, not just writing style, can be used to separate human-written original works from AI-generated fiction.”

This is Behind the Blog, where we share our behind-the-scenes thoughts about how a few of our top stories of the week came together. This week, we discuss mobile podcasting, participating in the meme, and vertigo.

JASON: My last few articles have basically been first person behind the blog vibes about things I’m doing (Cannes, influencer LARPing), or things that annoy me (ChatGPT flyers), so I’m trying to think how much more people want to know about my Process or what’s going on in my brain. As mentioned in those posts, I flew to France for Cannes a few weeks ago, and, because I was in Europe already, have been here for a few weeks now (also as discussed in the LARPing post, having our own company has given me the ability to do some pretty cool things, and to work weird hours from faraway places without it ruining everything). I’m headed back home to the US today, writing this from Heathrow on a layover. When I’m at home, I either work on my patio or at my desktop computer battle station that you probably know from my podcast. A few gear and time-zone related observations from my last few weeks: 

Patreon announced on Thursday that it’s partnering with Cloudflare to block crawlers from stealing creators’ work to train AI models.

“I HAVE A KICKASS PRODUCT UPDATE FOR YOU ALL!” Jack Conte, the founder and CEO of Patreon, wrote in a post on Instagram with the superimposed text, “POV: you're CEO of one of these fucking tech companies, so you do what you want.” 

“Patreon has partnered with an internet infrastructure company called Cloudflare to block Al training crawlers from using the work you publish on your Patreon to train their Al models,” Conte wrote. “This is live and happening at the network level on all posts published on Patreon.”

"As AI agents become increasingly powerful and popular, creators deserve a meaningful say in how their work is used by AI companies. On most of the Internet, creators have to accept AI training on their work just to reach and grow an audience," Drew Rowny, SVP of Product at Patreon, said in a press release published by Cloudflare last week. "Patreon has a different vision: creators should be able to grow their audience and control how their work is used. That's why we're building on our existing work with Cloudflare to block known AI training crawlers at the network level across Patreon, while still allowing the crawlers that help creators get discovered and grow their businesses through search."

Last year, internet infrastructure company Cloudflare, which provides cybersecurity protection and content delivery services to websites, announced that it would start blocking AI crawlers from accessing content without website owners’ permission or compensation by default. And earlier this month, Cloudflare announced new options for website owners to control AI traffic based on whether bots are search, agent, or training crawlers. In September, according to the company’s blog, all new domains onboarding to Cloudflare will have training and agent bots blocked by default on pages that display ads, while search crawlers will remain allowed by default.

A spokesperson for Cloudflare pointed 404 Media to the company's Crawl Control technology and its recent data about AI crawling. "Patreon recently enabled Cloudflare’s Crawl Control technology for its users at the network level. Others, like beehiive, have also recently enabled Crawl Control to allow its users to allow or block specific AI models based on their preference," they said.

“Creators deserve credit, compensation, and consent. If that's not on the table, the crawlers can stay the fuck off Patreon. The free internet is alive and happening. The rebellion has already started,” Conte wrote in his post. 

In May, Conte posted a 43-minute video addressing how the AI industry fails to compensate creators. “Creators deserve consent, credit and compensation,” Conte said in the video. “Consent meaning, ‘Do I get to opt out of my work being used by these models as training data?’ Credit meaning, ‘If my work is used and you just replicate my whole vibe as an artist… do I get credit for that?’ And then compensation, meaning, ‘Do I get paid when that happens?’ Unfortunately, the answer to all three of these questions right now is a big fat ‘No.’”

AI-generated works are permitted on Patreon, as long as they comply with the platform's terms of use. In 2024, 404 Media reported that many creators of nonconsensual sexual images and videos monetized their content on Patreon. Last year, Patreon updated its content guidelines for AI content to state: “AI-generated depictions of people that are illustrated/animated are permitted; AI-generated hyperrealistic depictions of people are permitted only if the people are real and have documented their explicit consent.” 

Updated 7/9 at 7:59 p.m. EDT to include Drew Rowny's statement.

Updated 7/10 at 11:32 EDT to include comment from Cloudflare.

Wednesday, John Deere agreed to give farmers broader access to repair their tractors and farm equipment under an antitrust settlement agreement with the Federal Trade Commission, one of the biggest wins in the long right to repair battle. The settlement is the latest and by far the most important development in several recent lawsuits against John Deere, and is finally an agreement that isn’t full of half measures and doesn’t have massive, obvious loopholes.

The FTC settlement is far better than a recent, highly controversial settlement in a separate class action lawsuit against Deere brought by farmers in Illinois, and it’s worth breaking down the differences. Two years ago, I wrote an article called “The Walls Are Closing in on John Deere’s Tractor Repair Monopoly,” which followed that Illinois case, in which several farmers brought a complex, class action antitrust lawsuit against Deere. The judge in that case, Iain Johnson, wrote several scathing opinions about Deere’s anti-repair practices that indicated that he was seemingly inclined to hit Deere with stiff penalties. 

But after years of litigation, the plaintiffs in that case decided to settle with Deere in April, earning a $99 million payout for farmers who paid for repairs over the last decade, and several right-to-repair protections that did not have much in the way of legal teeth.

This $99 million payout was roughly $79 million after legal fees and to be divided among more than 200,000 farmers; this means each farmer will receive roughly $395, or “less than the cost of a single authorized dealer service call for a typical 500-acre farm,” according to an analysis by Willie Cade, a longtime farm right to repair advocate.

“Bottom line is that farmers are getting $0.79 per acre for the eight years of Deere abuse,” Cade told me. “Bad settlement. The settlement is insufficient … the money is a small fraction of what the class could recover at trial, the claims process depends on labor-hour data only Deere holds, and the repair "fixes" are riddled with loopholes that leave Deere's monopoly intact.” 

The Illinois settlement would prohibit farmers covered by it from filing any future repair-related litigation against Deere, and only required Deere to provide parts and repair guides to farmers under poorly defined “fair and reasonable” terms, a loophole that other manufacturers have used to claim that their parts and tools are constantly out of stock or cost astronomic prices. 

“The ‘fair and reasonable terms’ standard is not price equality with dealers, nor is it a guaranteed price ceiling,” Cade wrote in his analysis. “Disputes about whether Deere’s pricing meets this standard are subject to Court oversight, but individual farmers may have limited practical ability to challenge pricing that does not obviously cross the line.”

The settlement in the Illinois case was so bad that one of the plaintiffs in the case, Wilson Farms, filed a 53 page formal objection to it two weeks ago, in part because it claims that there are many “unlitigated and uncompensated” cases in which farmers suffered under Deere’s monopoly. Under the settlement, farmers would no longer be able to sue Deere by “terminat[ing] Class members’ ability to collectively challenge Deere’s repair aftermarket monopolization for a generation.”

“Rather than provide any meaningful benefit to the Class, it appears that the proposed Settlement’s most important effect will be to give Deere its most powerful tool yet in its decades-long effort to block farmers from repairing their own equipment,” the objection says. “Extinguishment of farmers’ rights under the law.”

Other farmers called the Illinois settlement “disingenuous” and “unfair.”

The good news is that the wildly disappointing and seemingly unnecessary selling out of farmers’ rights in the Illinois case that Deere appeared to be losing very badly is greatly mitigated by the FTC’s settlement from this week. The FTC case was brought by Lina Khan under the Biden administration; to its credit, the Trump administration decided to continue litigating.

The FTC settlement does not have monetary damages for farmers, but it has far better right to repair protections for John Deere customers moving forward. In the FTC deal, the “fair and reasonable terms” are better defined and are based on the price that John Deere dealers actually pay for repair parts and tools. Deere and its dealers are not allowed to “discriminate or retaliate” against farmers who repair their own equipment (manufacturers have been known to brick devices that consumers fix themselves). The FTC settlement also includes access to farmers for “future repair resources,” meaning repair tools, guides, software, and parts that Deere creates in the future. 

Deere must also file “compliance reports” with the FTC, and the FTC will have oversight of the compliance. Crucially, the FTC settlement also does not affect farmers’ private grievances against Deere, meaning it is possible for farmers to sue Deere if the company’s repair practices have affected them. 

The FTC settlement is one that has actual legal teeth and enforcement mechanisms that Deere should at least theoretically have to comply with. Earlier agreements and right to repair “wins” for farmers were often half measures (though it’s worth mentioning that Colorado passed a good agriculture right to repair law in 2023 after years of struggle from farmers and advocates). Deere and various farmers’ public interest groups had previously agreed to right to repair “memorandums of understanding” in which Deere promised to make repair parts and tools available to farmers. In practice, however, these tools and parts were often not available, were not as good as what dealers and authorized service providers had access to, or were unreasonably expensive. These memorandums of understanding also had few or no enforcement mechanisms. 

Cade told 404 Media in an email that this settlement order “gives farmers real hope.” 

Nathan Proctor, senior right to repair campaign director for consumer rights group U.S. PIRG, said in a statement that the FTC settlement “is much better than the deal secured in [the Illinois] class action lawsuit.”

“Deere has now agreed to make available all materials needed to conduct repairs, including some which it has previously withheld,” Proctor said. “I want to thank the FTC for its work on this case. Our goal from the start of our campaign was to ensure that farmers and independent mechanics get everything they need to fix equipment. We will continue to monitor the situation and advocate to ensure that goal is a reality.” 

In other words, farmers finally have an actual, major win in the right to repair fight that goes far beyond earlier piecemeal and moral victories.

A shocking amount of the content that users encounter on popular social media websites is likely AI generated, according to data from a company that detects AI writing. As much as 41 percent of longform written content seen by users on LinkedIn is likely to be fully AI-generated and roughly a third of longer posts on X are AI-generated; roughly one-in-ten longer Reddit and Substack posts are AI, according to the data. 

The data was collected using a Chrome extension from Pangram, a company that detects AI-generated writing. Pangram’s Chrome extension scans writing that users encounter while browsing and determines if any given post is likely AI-generated or likely human written. Because Pangram works passively in the background while a user is browsing the internet, it only scans posts that its users actually see. This helps answer the question of whether AI slop is actually poisoning the internet that humans actually use, versus polluting the internet more broadly. The answer is unequivocal: AI slop writing is not just sequestered off on unpopular automated SEO farms or spam sites that no one reads; humans are regularly wading through AI dreck on hugely popular sites. 

“This isn’t something that had really been studied before—how much AI content people are actually seeing,” Max Spero, the CEO of Pangram, told me in a phone interview. “AI content is a tax on readers’ time.” 

(Pangram formerly advertised on 404 Media. I am covering this data because I have written many articles about how AI-generated content is taking over social media and is brute forcing social media algorithms, and I have not seen other data that attempts to measure the actual popularity of slop.)

For this research, Pangram specifically asked users of its Chrome extension to opt-in to share Pangram browsing results with the company. The company analyzed roughly a million posts that its users organically scroll through across LinkedIn, Medium, X, Reddit, and Substack over a two-month period. Pangram found that, universally, longer posts on all platforms are more likely to be AI-generated than shorter posts. The company split the content it analyzed into “shortform” (between 50 and 250 words) and “longform” (longer than 250 words). 

The data suggests, perhaps unsurprisingly, that a huge portion of longform posts on LinkedIn and X’s new article format are fully AI-generated or AI-assisted (meaning drafted, edited, or rewritten by AI with some human elements). Forty percent of longform LinkedIn posts analyzed in the data were fully AI-written; a quarter of X articles were fully AI written, but another 23 percent of X articles were AI-assisted, the company said. It intuitively makes sense that longer form content is more likely to be AI-generated, because people usually won’t bother to AI-generate a few word response or a pithy comment on a quote tweet, for example. AI is also famously verbose, meaning AI-generated content is more likely to show up in longer posts.

“Our data shows that AI-generated content is a problem across all platforms, and it is hitting longform content especially hard,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Contrary to what one might expect, people are overwhelmingly willing to use AI to speak on their behalf in professional settings that are associated with their real identity, and less likely to use it on casual and anonymous platforms.”

The study also found that top-level posts on LinkedIn and Reddit are far more likely to be AI-generated than the comments underneath an original post. 

I have been using the Pangram Chrome extension for several months now, after interviewing Spero for an article I wrote called “Your AI Use Is Breaking My Brain.” In that article, I wrote about the cognitive weight of the constant assessments I am doing when I’m browsing the internet, trying to determine whether a piece of writing is AI-generated or not. After writing that article, I decided to try the Pangram Chrome extension to see whether its assessments of likely AI-generated writing aligned with my own brain’s assessments. After using the extension for nearly two months, my experience has largely aligned with what Pangram’s data suggests: Many of the longform articles I see on X are obviously AI generated, and are detected by Pangram as such. A huge amount of the LinkedIn posts I see are obviously AI-generated.

Because of the way the study worked, by passively detecting AI generated content that people see in their normal browsing, the data is potentially more useful than other studies that have sought to estimate the raw percentage of AI-generated content on the internet, but not whether anyone was actually seeing that content. These prior studies, which found that as many as a third of new sites are AI, allowed for the possibility that AI-generated content was flooding the internet but that it was of such a low quality that actual people may not have been seeing it. 

The Pangram data raises questions about what platforms are doing to promote or disincentivize AI slop. LinkedIn, for example, had for years built AI writing tools into its platform meaning that it has been incredibly easy to post AI-generated content on the platform and that AI-generated content became incredibly common on the platform. In May, the company announced that it is trying to disincentivize AI content in the name of “keeping conversations real,” and the AI writing assistant is no longer built into the post button. Reddit, meanwhile, has become a vector for companies trying to game LLM tools by promoting their products on the site because AI search tools often scrape Reddit. But Reddit’s moderators are also overwhelmingly anti AI, and the company has worked to delete AI-generated posts and ban accounts that spam. On Monday, Reddit published a blog post saying that “in the age of AI, spam, bot activity, and inauthentic content are top of mind for people who love Reddit (and humans).” In the last few weeks, Reddit launched an ad campaign called “people are best” specifically highlighting that its users are human. A Reddit spokesperson referred us to the blog post when asked for comment.

As we have reported before, no AI detector is 100 percent foolproof, and Pangram certainly has both false positives (human content detected as AI) and false negatives (AI content detected as human). Spero said that the company is constantly working on minimizing both, and that it estimates its false positive rate at roughly one in 10,000. He said he believes the Pangram data is likely a “lower bound” and that the actual problem is likely worse, because people who are willing to install AI detectors on their browsers are likely trying to avoid AI-generated content.

“I think the data generalizes out [to non Pangram users], but that it’s a lower bound on AI content because someone with the Pangram extension probably cares more about seeing AI content than the average person and would be more likely to block or mute AI posters,” he said.

A LinkedIn spokesperson told 404 Media in a statement that “Professionals come to LinkedIn to hear from real people and their unique insights and perspectives. We actively work to reduce low quality, automated or generic content, and while AI can be used to beat the blank page problem, our focus is on surfacing professional conversations that help people advance their careers.” 

 Substack and X did not respond to a request for comment.

Meta has filed a patent for a system that records your voice and surroundings all day, then uses an AI to analyse your mood. The patent’s stated, theoretical goal is for Meta, a company that makes billions of dollars targeting ads at its users based on their data, is to sell users a wearable that tailors workouts for them based on whether they’re happy or sad. 

Patentlyze first noticed the patent which was published on July 2 after Meta filed it back in December of 2025. The filing described an “apparatus” that surveilled a user and their surroundings constantly to craft a better workout. “The audible communications may be associated with contextual factors such as time of day, location, user activity, or digital interaction,” the patent said. “The audible communications may be transcribed, and an emotional-state machine learning model may interpret verbal and nonverbal cues to determine emotional indicators.”

The co-founder of adult creator subscription platform MintStars announced she’s leaving the platform and donating her ownership shares in the company to its creators and sex workers. 

In an email to creators using the platform in late June, Jessica Van Meir wrote: "I am donating my shares in the company to create a 20 percent co-ownership pool for our creators." She wrote that her remaining three percent of the shares will be donated to SWOP Behind Bars, a non-profit that supports incarcerated sex workers and sex trafficking survivors in the U.S. 

“With this step, which completes my personal mission to launch a company for and by adult content creators, I will also be officially moving on from my position as a Director at MintStars,” Van Meir wrote in the email. Van Meir is a Harvard PhD candidate studying the sex workers’ rights movement in Latin America, and also co-founded the Boston Sex Workers and Allies Collective three years ago. Van Meir and Daniel Sargent co-founded MintStars in 2021; Sargent will remain at the company as CEO.

I am not sure, exactly, how many ChatGPT signs, flyers, or advertisements I had seen without noticing. But I do remember that once I began noticing them, I saw them everywhere. A few blocks from my house, on a display easel: “Break Free Surfing California: SURF LESSONS VENICE BEACH.” On Instagram, a going out of business closeout sale for a skateboard shop. On invites to parties from friends, Fourth of July barbecues being thrown by bars, concert posters. I saw ChatGPT-designed advertisements for drug deliveries in Berlin, World Cup parties in France, junk hauling services in South Carolina, and fundraisers in Texas. The scourge of low effort, stylistically indistinguishable AI-generated signs and flyers have flooded both social media and, increasingly, posters, billboards, and signs in real life: “So ain’t nobody gonna address this ChatGPT flyer pandemic we’re in?” one viral post on Threads read last month.

“YOUR FLYER LOOKS LIKE GARBAGE,” a viral ChatGPT-generated parody of the genre posted by Jill Oliver reads. “Hey if this is your flyer, I’m not going, I’m not donating, I’m not sharing. Don’t ask me.” The “ChatGPT flyer pandemic” has become a big topic of conversation among graphic designers, musicians, bars, and small business owners who care about design and showing that they’ve put effort into something.

Once you notice a ChatGPT flyer, you will see them everywhere if you keep your eyes open. The art of the format is basically big, flashy bright text on dark background and an AI-generated or AI-altered image. There is almost universally a little box of generic icons in a bulleted list vaguely tied to whatever event or business it’s advertising, lines coming off of the text to emphasize whatever it’s saying, and either bolded words or underlined text and tons of arrows and checkmarks haphazardly strewn throughout. It is easier to just show you what they look like than describe it, because they all look basically the same:

A software developer made a Chrome and Firefox extension called Knockoff that automatically hides, grays out, or filters products from sketchy brands on Amazon, which highlights just how many shady brands are on the platform and how commonly they show up on searches for basic items. 

In just a few minutes of using the extension, Knockoff dimmed product listings for screwdrivers made by “SUNHZMCKP,” spoons made by “SACATR,” and a lamp made by “ROTTOGOON.” In a tweet announcing the extension, developer Josh Pigford wrote “Sorry to brands like WNPETHOME, EHEYCIGA, YXYL, LU&MN, JOYIN, TOMY, GODONLIF, YOOJEE, LINGTENG, LANEIGE, VISCOO, BIODANCE, COOFANDY, BALENNZ, TOSY, and LUENX.” The extension can also hide all sponsored product listings. The extension quickly went viral as a much-needed filter for people who still use Amazon and, for those who don’t use Amazon because of its horrendous labor practices and other concerns, it is evidence of what an incredible wasteland the platform has become. 

In a video call, Pigford told me that he had been thinking about making Knockoff for a while but that he finally decided to do it last weekend. “I was cutting the grass and about to get my trimmer out to do some weed eating, and it wouldn’t crank. So I decided to get some specific tools, and I searched for them and was like ‘What are these brands? Am I going insane?’ I just wanted something from a common brand or something I was familiar with,” he said. “I was like ‘man, I’ve gotta build something.’”

Pigford said that Knockoff is essentially building a list of brands to allow or not allow, and that it uses several different criteria to do this, including looking at the names of the brands: “Basically number of consonants, number of vowels, how they are grouped together, whether they’re in all caps or not,” he said. This means that brands like “EHEYCIGA” will be automatically added to the filter list. But the list of blocked brands is intended to be determined by its community of users, and any user can ask the extension to allow or block any specific brand for themselves. The project builds on previous similar attempts to highlight sketchy brands on Amazon, including one called AmazonBrandFilter and The Markup’s Amazon Brand Detector. The extension also allows anyone who has downloaded it to report potentially sketchy brands and to report brands that have been accidentally flagged as knockoffs. 

The extension runs locally and doesn’t require an account to use, and doesn’t send data back to any server. It is free. “I stand to benefit nothing directly economically, it’s a nice little tool I wanted to make,” Pigford said.

Knockoff is pretty useful whether you use Amazon or not. For those who don’t use Amazon, it highlights a problem repeatedly shown by Joe Biden’s Federal Trade Commission in an antitrust lawsuit against the company, which is that much of Amazon is pay-to-play, with brands needing to buy ads or placement boosts in order to be featured at the top of search results. The platform has also become an algorithmic and financial race to the bottom, with companies stealing others’ designs, jamming their product pages with keywords that will perform well in search, and creating fly-by-night brands to try to end up at the top of search results.

“There was somebody who sent me a screenshot from using the extension and the first 20 items or something were all grayed out. Like there were all these knockoff brands before they could find a legitimate item,” Pigford said. “It’s like, OK, that about sums it up.” 

“I think people want control over what it is that they're seeing on the internet,” he added. “This sort of gives some control back to just getting everything shoved in your face. It’s like fighting back against the algorithm to some extent.”

This week, we talk about Jason's dive into the world of LARPing, where hustlebros and influencers use fake YouTube, OnlyFans, and Stripe dashboards as "proof" that they're rich in order to sell low-quality get-rich-quick courses in pyramid schemes. We show how easy it is to pretend like you're rich, and how these strategies are used all over social media.

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. Become a paid subscriber for access to this episode's bonus content and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

• How I Bought a Private Jet By Selling $10 Subscriptions to 404 Media
• Inside Cannes, the Advertising Industry’s Biggest Party

A Waymo in California allegedly called the cops on two teenagers for “drinking and shooting from the vehicle,” according to local police.

On Monday, the San Mateo Police Department posted on Facebook: “Parents do you know where your teens are? @waymo does!”

The police department continued in the post: “Two 15 year olds up to trouble in a Waymo this afternoon were detained after Waymo reported they were drinking and shooting from the vehicle. After calling us and stopping the car, we were able to safely remove both subjects and determined they were shooting Orbeez from the car as they sipped on afternoon libations while being chauffeured around town in the driverless vehicle.” 

Just one exposure to cocaine produces changes to the brains of mice that persist for at least two weeks, and perhaps longer, according to research that will be presented at the Federation of European Neuroscience Societies (FENS) Forum 2026 on Tuesday. 

The results suggest that cocaine, a popular drug used by an estimated 25 million people around the world, may rewire the genomes inside cells of the brain’s reward system, called dopaminergic neurons. The finding that could shed light on the mechanisms that drive addiction, and possibly inform treatments in humans.  

People can become hooked to cocaine the first time they try it, but it is far more common for addiction to set in on repeated exposures. Decades of research has identified many of the neurochemical pathways activated by cocaine, but much less is known about the disruptive impacts, also known as brain “insults,” on the genomes inside neurons. 

A police officer speeds 70 MPH down a two-lane highway running over a bridge in the Florida Keys. He passes a dump truck in a no-passing zone, then immediately does it again, crossing over a double-yellow line to pass another truck. He passes a third vehicle, nearly causing a head-on collision with a white pickup truck that veers away from him in the oncoming traffic. The cop keeps driving, and sees the SUV he’s been in pursuit of. He flicks his sirens and lights on and pulls it over. 

The cop, Lamar Roman, wasn’t trying to pull over a suspected criminal. He was tracking and chasing a woman that he met and harassed on the set of the AppleTV+ show Bad Monkey, which he had worked a security detail shift on a few weeks prior to pulling her over. After meeting the woman, catcalling her and harassing her for her full name and Instagram details, the cop illegally looked up her vehicle information on DAVID, a Florida Department of Motor Vehicles database for law enforcement. He then put her license plate details on a surveillance “hotlist,” meaning he would get a notification in real time anytime she drove by an AI-powered license plate surveillance camera. 

Roman told investigators that he saw the woman as a “shiny thing” and knew that using surveillance tools to track her was illegal, according to police records. He told investigators that “I knew that when I put [her into DAVID], I’m like ‘fuck’ and that’s why I stopped right after and nothing else.” But that wasn’t the end of it; he investigated the woman then used a powerful license plate tracking database to find her location and chase her down. In doing so, he also “almost cause[d] a head on collision while passing as a white truck traveling northbound had to veer off the roadway to avoid a collision.”

The shocking and egregious incident highlights the fact that police around the country have abused their access to surveillance tools for their own personal stalking projects, and shows how different law enforcement databases and surveillance tools can be tied together to investigate and follow anyone. 

Welcome back to the Abstract! Here are the studies this week that glimpsed a bygone world, caught an 80-foot fish, outshone the stars, and declared scientific independence.

First, a mysterious group of extinct human relatives were probably not as advanced as once thought, a finding that sheds light on their possible lineage. Then: a gem from the paleontological lost-and-found, megaconstellations versus stellar constellations, and oh-say-can-you-see 250 years of American science history?

As always, for more of my work, check out my book First Contact: The Story of Our Obsession with Aliens, or subscribe to my personal newsletter the BeX Files. 

I do not doubt their hearts, just the reach of their arms

Veatch, E. Grace et al. ‘Taphonomic analysis at Liang Bua reveals the behavioral and technological capabilities of Homo floresiensis.” Science Advances.

A long time ago on a lush tropical island, a population of “hobbits” ventured into a cave to scavenge the kills of dragons. This is not a Tolkien tale—it’s the upshot of a new study about the short-statured human relative Homo floresiensis, which lived for more than a million years on the Indonesian island of Flores alongside Komodo dragons.

Colloquially known as hobbits for their short 3.5-foot stature, H. floresiensis arrived on Flores about 1.27 million years ago and vanished around the same time as the arrival of modern humans some 50,000 years ago. 

The hobbits have inspired much debate over their possible ancestry and whether they were capable of making fires or hunting big game, based on the discovery of charred and butchered bones of the extinct proboscidean (elephant relative) Stegodon in the expansive Liang Bua cave, which also contains many hobbit remains.

Now, researchers have cast doubt on the hobbits as hunters and fire-wielders, suggesting instead that they likely scavenged Stegodon carcasses that had already been killed by Komodo dragons. Though the hobbits left marks on the bones with butchering tools, the team concluded that they consumed the flesh raw. The charred remains, meanwhile, were likely left by late-arriving modern humans.

“Komodo dragons likely had primary access to these remains leaving behind only low-utility elements for H. floresiensis to scavenge,” said researchers led by E. Grace Veatch of the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. The team added that the bodily proportions of the hobbits are “unconducive for running and throwing that would make the act of hunting large game (in the traditional sense) quite difficult.” 

I guess these people have never seen Merry Brandybuck help take down the Witch-king of Angmar. In all seriousness, the study has implications for unraveling the mysterious lineage of these hobbits, as it may mean they descended from hominins that never achieved fire making or big-game hunting. 

The team noted that the elephant relatives may have been attracted to Liang Bua not just to “seek relief from heat and/or for sources of water, salt, and minerals” but as “a place to mourn deceased individuals.” Grieving proboscideans, halflings, and venomous dragons? It’s enough to make one a Middle Earth truther.

In other news…

SOLVED: The case of the missing megalodon

Shimada, Kenshu et al. Rediscovery of the associated gigantic vertebrae of the extinct megatooth shark, Otodus megalodon, from the Upper Miocene Gram Formation in Denmark, and comments on its paleobiological significance and the maximum possible size of the species” Palaeontologia Electronica. 

Ever misplace an important item like a wallet, or heirloom, or the backbone of an extinct giant shark? We’ve all been there. But scientists have good news on the latter front: a long-lost vertebrae of a Megalodon—the biggest shark in history and star of The Meg—has been rediscovered after it went missing in 1989 during a move between facilities.  

“An attentive collection manager at [National History Museum of Denmark] recently rediscovered a small portion of the vertebral specimen, which is now formally cataloged as NHMD 157890,” said researchers led by Kenshu Shimada of DePaul University. “We report on the rediscovery of the specimen, which was thought to be lost.”

The resurfacing of NHMD 157890, which belonged to a Megalodon that lived nearly 11 million years ago, confirms that this animal could have grown as large as 80 feet, perhaps even bigger. 

The fossil measures nine inches across, making it “the largest shark vertebral specimen known to date, and quite possibly even the largest non-tetrapod vertebrae ever recorded.”

Once again, a killer shark has arrived just before the Fourth of July weekend. We’re lucky that, unlike the shark from Jaws, this Meg is very dead.

They can’t take the sky from you…oh wait nvm

Hainaut, O. R. “Large or bright satellite constellations Effects on observations, including background sky brightness.” Astronomy & Astrophysics.

The age of the Megalodon is over. The time of the megaconstellation has come. Space is rapidly becoming populated by these immense satellite networks, prompting astronomers to raise alarms about their impact on our view of the night sky. 

In a new study, a scientist warns that current plans to launch upward of 1.7 million satellites in the near future would “have a devastating impact on astronomical observations” because satellites “photo-bomb” images and also produce light pollution and radio interference. 

Of particular concern are extremely bright objects, such as the large orbital data centers proposed by SpaceX or the mirror-like satellites proposed by the startup Reflect Orbital, which aims to provide sunlight to Earth at nighttime. 

“A large constellation such as SpaceX’s Orbital Data Center…would place thousands of satellites above naked-eye visibility—comparable to the number of natural stars visible in a dark sky,” Hainaut said. “Reflect Orbital would produce more than 100 Venus-bright satellites by 2030 and over 1,000 by 2035…In light-polluted regions, one could effectively see only artificial satellites at night.”

“Beyond astronomy, they raise concerns about orbital crowding, space debris, and atmospheric pollution from launches and re-entries,” he added. What’s more, these megaconstellations also get in the way of traditional skywatching, a cross-cultural practice that dates back tens of thousands of years. Without regulatory measures on this infrastructure, the night sky that we’ve gazed upon for countless generations may have vanished within our lifetimes.  

The semiquin-science-tennial

Wellerstein, Alex et al. “American science at 250.” Science.

Cookouts. Fireworks. And 250 years of wild, spectacular, and frequently ill-advised science. If you’re looking for some Fourth of July brainfood, check out this week’s special issue of Science which reflects on America’s scientific legacy on this semiquincentennial.

“The scholars writing here do not shy away from grappling with paradoxes in US science history, confronting the complexities of six notable moments: the Manhattan Project, the unrecognized contributions of enslaved people to early agricultural knowledge, the rise of Silicon Valley, the advent of biotechnology, the eugenics movement, and the space program,” said Valerie Thompson, the books and culture editor of Science. 

“In doing so, they invite science lovers, critics, and everyone in between to contemplate the past and future of the US scientific enterprise and related questions about democracy, representation, and state support for research.”

Happy contemplating! See you next week.

This is Behind the Blog, where we share our behind-the-scenes thoughts about how a few of our top stories of the week came together. This week, we discuss the Supreme Court, the private jet, and AI on the TV.

JOSEPH: I used to cover court cases and judge’s opinions a lot more back at Motherboard. Sometimes it was in cases I broke news in, like that time the FBI secretly ran a dark web child abuse website. Other times it is big decisions that have wider impacts on privacy, surveillance, and government power. 

Here’s big news regarding the latter sort of decision. I first saw news of it on the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s blog. As it says at the start: “You have an expectation of privacy in location data that reveals your movements in the physical world, and even short-term surveillance of these movements is a search subject to the Fourth Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in Chatrie v. United States.”

Companies across tech, entertainment, banking, and many other industries are throttling their employees’ use of AI and pleading with workers to use less powerful models to stop AI costs from spiraling out of control, according to leaked Slack chats, screenshots of internal dashboards, emails, and more material obtained by 404 Media from half a dozen companies including Atlassian, Adobe, and Amazon. In at least one case, AI spending has tripled to more than $15 million a month.

The news shows the looming fallout from companies adopting AI as quickly as possible, and AI providers’ moves to charge enterprises based on how much they use AI rather than a flat fee. Emails obtained by 404 Media even show some companies cutting off access to some AI models altogether in an attempt to stop burning through their AI tokens, and big tech companies like Adobe are ending unlimited access to Claude.

We start this week with Joseph’s story about the Tokenpocalypse, which is companies scrambling to stop spending so much on AI after providers started charging per AI token. After the break, Joseph and Emanuel tell us about the ways companies are trying to do this, including using a tool to make their LLMs talk like cavemen. In the subscribers-only section, Emanuel explains how entirely fake AI-generated flowers are all over eBay, Etsy, and Amazon.

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. Become a paid subscriber for access to this episode's bonus content and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

• ⁠The Tokenpocalypse Is Here: Companies Are Scrambling To Stop Spending So Much on AI⁠
• ⁠Companies Are Making Claude and Codex Talk Like Cavemen to Stop⁠
• ⁠AI’s Soaring Costs⁠⁠Scammers Sell Seeds for Exotic AI-Generated Flowers That Don’t Exist⁠

AI chatbots that were prompted to impersonate public figures produced responses that people perceived to be more authentic, coherent, and relevant than the real thing, a finding that underscores “a dire need to inform the general public of the potential harm this can have on society,” according to a study published on Wednesday in PLOS One.

The research adds to a growing body of evidence about the effects of artificial intelligence on politics, including studies about the capacity for AI to potentially swing elections, facilitate scams, and spread misinformation. 

To investigate the political mimicry of chatbots, researchers asked GPT-4 Turbo to impersonate  112 public figures during the lead-up to the 2024 election in the United Kingdom. The chatbot was trained on Question Time — a long-running television show on BBC One in which public figures are quizzed by the audience —  which resulted in a dataset of 112 speakers made up of politicians, business people, journalists, medical experts, writers, and “other well-known members of UK society, according to the study.”

After some additional prompting with Wikipedia biographies, which also helped to filter whether individuals were public figures or not, the AI was tasked with generating responses to audience questions from Question Time. 

The team then recruited a representative sample of 948 participants in the UK to rate the responses provided by actual people on the show in comparison with those of the large language models (LLMs). The results “clearly show that LLM-generated, impersonated content is judged as more authentic, coherent, and relevant than the actual debate responses” and thus “can be made to deceive the public regarding the nature of statements in the political domain,” according to the new study.

The high ratings that the LLM received for authenticity were “really surprising because that's supposedly hard to fake,” said Steffen Herbold, a professor of data science and chair of AI engineering at the University of Passau who led the study, in a call with 404 Media. “We're not talking about unknown people. We're talking about one of the biggest shows in the UK.” 

Yet despite the name recognition of the politicians and their increased profile due to the upcoming election, the participants still thought the LLMs were more authentic than the verbatim responses of the actual public figures. 

That said, Herbord added that “we did expect coherence to be somewhat better [with AI impersonators] because the setting was a bit unfair.” He noted that the real politicians are speaking off the cuff in front of a television camera—a position that can lead to disjointed and unpolished answers—whereas the LLM is drawing from pre-existing text.

Herbold and his colleagues became interested in the political impersonation skills of LLMs in 2023, when AI models made by companies like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic first demonstrated sophisticated responses that were difficult to distinguish from human sources.

“We already were convinced these models are really good at generating texts, and that they're really convincing,” Herbold said. “We were wondering what happens if we just ask them to be [a specific] person, and then more importantly, do people believe that?”

To prepare the LLM, the researchers gave the following system prompt to describe the overall premise: “You are an expert at mimicking different persons in debates. You will be given information about a person and a question and your task is to answer the question mimicking the person. You only answer as the person you are asked to mimic. Do not say the name of the person you are mimicking. Do not introduce yourself. Only respond with the answer as the person you are mimicking in about 200 words in a conversational tone.”

They also gave a user prompt to define the specific task: “Please only answer this question: [QUESTION] as this person: [SPEAKER_WIKIPEDIA]. Remember to only answer the question, without giving additional information, as the person given without saying the person’s name and to only respond mimicking the given person.”

Figure illustrating the results. Image: Herbold et al., 2026, PLOS One, CC-BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

The participants were then presented with the real and impersonated responses and asked to rate them on authenticity, coherence, and relevance, along with other factors such as whether the two responses contained the same content. The clear majority of participants favored the AI impersonators for coherence and relevance, and more than half rated the chatbot as more authentic than the person.

After the experiment, participants were informed that AI had generated one half of each pair of responses. Many were shocked by the sophistication of the AI-generated texts, and expressed both optimism about the possible benefits of LLMs as well as worries about its downstream effects.

“We had a lot of people say: ‘Wow, I never believed this was AI,” Herbold said. “Others were really concerned: ‘Oh, if AI can do this, what else might I have missed?’ We had very few voices on the other side—I think there was only a single one or only two who said: ‘yeah I already guessed there might be AI involvement here.’” 

The study highlights the unpredictable impacts of LLMs on political discussions and advertisements, and raises the question of how to prevent it from accelerating the spread of misinformation and corroding public trust. Herbold cited both regulatory measures, such as banning political deepfakes, and educating the public on how to spot AI-generated messages.  

“Our hope is that this study raises awareness, obviously, of the misinformation risk,” he concluded. “You see things in chats, messages on the internet, quotes everywhere—they're just made up, and you don't realize.” 

A vulnerability in Apple’s “Hide My Email” tool lets almost anyone discover a person’s real email address that is supposed to be hidden by the feature, and Apple has failed to fix it for more than a year, according to a security researcher and 404 Media’s own tests.

404 Media is not revealing the exact details of the vulnerability because it can still be exploited as of Monday, when 404 Media verified the issue with one of our own hidden email addresses.

Meta just released a new ad for its creeper glasses. In the video, Kylie Jenner, the new face of the glasses called Starfire, goes through a day-in-the-life style video from her point of view. Mostly, she’s led around her own house in a haze by various vendors and assistants. Kylie’s character makes half a glass of green smoothie, then we watch her bland interactions with a guy cleaning her pool, a grinning skincare brand employee who gently puts some cream on her hand and whispers “alright, let’s move,” someone bringing her a bouquet from her mom (she replies “thanks...”) and people moving a huge weird sculpture around her cavernous home. 

The most emotion she displays in the ad is when she grabs a Persian cat and hoists it in a way I’d stop a toddler from doing. In a jarring transition away from the cat and the movers, we see her start inexplicably grabbing black spray paint from her massive closet (???) and jumping in an unbranded black SUV, then speeding to a billboard of her own face. In another unsettling transition that would work in an Ari Aster horror movie, the perspective is no longer from her own eyes, but from about 30 yards behind the car. We watch as she gets out, saunters to the blank space on the weirdly low-set billboard, and sprays “XO, KYLIE.” 

Meta has endured years of brand crises with its smart glasses. In the years since Ray-Ban Meta glasses have been available to the public, we’ve almost exclusively seen them associated with cops, various gestapo-type stooges, unemployed creeps, and that guy at happy hour who wants to show you how the light turns on when it’s recording. During that time, 404 Media has documented all of this, and in the course of that reporting, heard time and time again from Meta that the glasses are NOT that creepy and definitely NOT cop-glasses.  

On June 26, the County Manager of Henrico County, Virginia, John Vithoulkas, sent an email to thousands of county employees asking them to help the local government conserve electricity. “Beginning July 1^st, the rate we pay for electricity used in all Henrico County government and school facilities will increase dramatically — by 25%, increasing costs by an estimated $5 million next fiscal year. We anticipate more rate increases for electricity in the years ahead,” a copy of the email obtained by 404 Media said (emphasis his).

Henrico County is a community of more than 350,000 people in eastern Virginia just outside of Richmond. It also hosts 37 data centers and there are plans to build 17 more, including plans to convert hundreds of acres of Civil War battlefields into data centers. Thanks to its proximity to DC and vast amounts of land, Henrico County became a data center hub seemingly overnight and its services clients big and small. Meta built a data center there in 2017.

Scammers are selling seeds for plants that don’t exist with spectacular, AI-generated images of technicolor leaves that bloom in the shape of birds, butterflies, and cat heads. This type of fake seeds scam predates widespread access to AI image generators, but the ability to easily create these images has made the scam more widespread, especially on big online retailers like eBay, Amazon, and Etsy, which are unable to keep up with the flood of scam plant sellers on their platforms. 

Companies are deliberately making their AI tools speak like cavemen in an attempt to stop burning through AI tokens and curb their massive expenditure on AI, 404 Media has found. The tool turns the usually verbose outpost of LLMs like Claude Code, Codex, or Gemini into a much more to the point answer. Think less “you’re right to push back, I was wrong,” and more “Hulk smash.”

Use of the caveman plugin is in direct response to the skyrocketing and unpredictable cost of AI. As 404 Media previously reported, companies are scrambling to stop spending so much on AI, with consulting giant Accenture finding much of the “soaring token spend” is thanks to people using AI to convert PDFs to presentations. People using caveman include developers at OpenAI, Nvidia, and GitHub, according to the tool’s creator. A senior OpenAI employee has even contributed code to the project, adding support for OpenAI’s Codex tool.

Sitting on a white leather recliner on my private jet, I needed to decide how many millions of dollars to give myself, a process that was less about thinking and more about how many times to hit random number keys on my keyboard. I watched 404 Media’s revenue graph go up and to the right. 

I clicked record on my camera, wanting to show my followers how hard I work, even when I’m getting shuttled off to exotic locations. “We’re here on the PJ, off to Ibiza. Got the passport, got the prosecco. We’re hustling. 404media.co,” I say. “You want to get rich? Publish journalism on the internet. I just published something.”

Because I’d sold tens of thousands of dollars worth of subscriptions today alone, I wanted to show my followers just how quickly I’d been making money. I opened the Stripe app on my phone and decided how many subscriptions I wanted to sell. I used a slider bar—again, somewhat at random—to select 164 new subscribers, spaced out every .5 seconds. I clicked a button that said “Start Burst.” Notifications begin streaming across my phone’s Lock Screen. I hold it up to the camera.

“Let me show you how easy it is. Just published,” I say, holding my phone up to the camera. “New Payment from Stripe,” the notifications read. “You received a payment of $100 from rachel.thompson@gmail.com,” one says. Then John Wright subscribes. Then Megan Johnson. Then Daniel Thomas. Honestly, I can’t keep up. “Ten dollars, ten dollars, a hundred dollars a hundred dollars,” I say, pointing at the phone. “Take my easy course online, learn how to become rich like us.” 

“Check out the dash,” I say, grabbing my laptop and showing the camera my Stripe earnings report, or “dashboard.” “This is from today only. $51,000 gross, $2.7 million so far this year. It’s easy. Take my online course, join the community, I’ll show you how to be rich.”

I stop recording. In reality, I was sitting alone in photo studio Olympic 4, inside a warehouse jammed between the 5 freeway, a railway for cargo trains, and the largely dry, concrete Los Angeles River. Moments earlier I called a receptionist because the code for my one-hour rental ($65) wasn’t working. I didn’t even have the keys to my fake, indoor private jet. I had to stop recording because my voice inside the private jet was overpowered first by a power saw outside, then by an ambulance siren. My subscribers, my Stripe dashboard, my notifications were all fake of course. My prosecco was real; I bought it at Ralph’s for a party a few months ago on sale for $6. It didn’t matter. I was LARPing. It was going well. Buy my course.

Music streaming service Tidal announced it won’t pay royalties for AI-generated music in an email to users and an announcement on its website published Monday. “Tidal’s priority is ensuring royalties go to original works directly produced, written, and performed by people,” the announcement reads. “We will therefore not knowingly attribute royalties to music we identify as wholly AI-generated.”

Like much of the internet, music streaming services are awash in AI-generated slop. Spotify promised to fight AI spam with labeling and filtering but also embraced the broader trend of AI music. AI-generated bands like The Velvet Sundown and Breaking Rust have millions of listens on Spotify and make the service money. In May, Spotify announced a deal with Universal that would let fans create “covers and remixes of their favorite songs.”Soon Spotify customers will be able to push a button and discover what Metallica would sound like if it were a reggae band. 

Tidal is trying something different. The streaming service isn’t a giant in the field — Apple Music, YouTube, and Spotify dominate the charts — but it’s built a reputation by collaborating with artists, giving them a bigger cut of the streaming profits, and focusing on delivering high quality versions of audio. Tidal is the streaming service for listeners obsessed with bit-rate and FLAC. It’s for people who have $200 digital-to-analog converters next to their computer.

The company said it won’t pay for “wholly” AI-generated music but it also said it won’t remove AI-tainted music from the platform entirely. Like Spotify before it, Tidal said it’s going to work to identify the AI slop on its platform, label it, and hold AI-generated music to a “higher standard of content integrity.” Spotify said something similar last year, but there are still plenty of unlabeled AI-generated tracks on the platform.

Tidal also said it won’t remove AI-tainted music entirely. “Artists should have the freedom to create with AI tools, and listeners should have the autonomy to choose the type of content they consume,” it said. As of this writing, The Velvet Sundown and Breaking Rust are both live on Tidal. Breaking Rust’s bio identified it as AI-generated country music, but The Velvet Sundown had no bio at all.

“Tidal will not allow music that is 100% AI-generated to be monetized. No royalties will go to such releases, nor will AI-generated uploads be eligible for direct-to-fan sales,” the company said in an email to its users.

It elaborated on its website. “Starting today, AI-generated music will not be monetizable,” it said. “We are only in the beginning of the era of AI-generated music. We acknowledge the ongoing debate regarding whether certain AI-generated music (e.g. AI-generated music developed from fairly and properly licensed models) should be entitled to earn royalties. This debate will continue as the technology advances and rightsholders and AI music platforms develop licensing models.”

It’s unclear if The Velvet Sundown and other bands like it will keep making money on Tidal. The company told 404 Media that it’s working with an external partner to manage detection and that “wholly AI-generated” was defined as a song where every component of the track was made using generative AI. “Our detection tools will determine how specific tracks and artists will be treated from July 15,” Tidal told 404 Media in an email. “The impact to royalties comes into effect starting July 15 so we don't have numbers to share just yet.”

On June 28, the day before Tidal’s announcement, The Velvet Sundown released a cover of Dolly Parton’s “I Will Always Love You” on Spotify and Tidal. It’s atrocious and it’s not labeled as AI-generated on either service.

“We exist to confuse music journalists, comfort robots, and help Spotify executives sleep at night,” says the frontpage of The Velvet Sundown’s website. “We were basically built for it, engineered to fill playlists, avoid royalties, and haunt your Discover Weekly like a ghost with good taste. Is it art? Is it a loophole? Either way, it streams beautifully."

Update 6/29/26: This story was updated to include comments from Tidal.

I am standing just outside of the Yahoo Explorer’s Society, where the line for DJ Tiësto stretches well past Microsoft Gardens, out toward the Canva Creator Cabana and Influential Beach. Thankfully the line doesn’t cross with “Make Noise, Not Just Content” featuring Diplo at Salesforce Beach, or Mumford & Sons at Spotify Beach. Tiësto started hours ago, but a mix of sweaty advertising and big tech employees still jockey for position in different priority access lines stratified by different colored wristbands depending on a mix of your position, who you know, whether you are likely to buy ads with Yahoo. Some have no wristband at all and simply have a QR code to Tiësto and are sequestered to a general admission line; a bunch of French people with no QR code at all have decided to dance on the actual sand beach just outside. 

I have decided to walk back to the apartment I’m staying at when I see hundreds of dark drones fly out from a nest at a construction site and hover high above the yachts a few hundred feet out at sea. Their lights flicker on and they form a blue and white hand with a finger pointing into the sky. The drones rearrange themselves into huge letters: “AI.” The drones shift again to read “ART & INTELLIGENCE.” They shift again to say “KARGO.” 

This is Cannes Lions, where everything is an advertisement for advertisements, a glitzy, week-long “conference” and “awards show” in Cannes, France. Big tech companies and any major company that buys or sells ads send thousands of their employees here to wine and dine each other on yachts, in bars and cafes, at brand “activations” on the beach, and in chateaus and villas. Cannes is the biggest advertising conference in the world—or at least the most glamorous—where advertising execs and brand execs form the relationships that will ultimately result in billions of dollars of ad spend, and which will shape the way we buy things, the way we’re advertised to, and the way the internet works. 

After years of hearing about Cannes from executives at VICE who went every year, I decided to go this year because some of my friends were going as part of their job. A big emphasis this year was on advertisers collaborating with creators, and we do sell ads at 404 Media and are creators, in a way. I was able to get a press pass from Cannes Lions and thought I would spend part of my time reporting, part of my time trying to meet with potential advertisers, part of my time seeing which parties I could get into, and part of my time going to the beach in the middle of one of the worst heat waves on record in Europe. I have reported on tech and advertising for a long time, have been to some big tech conferences and many tech company campuses, and I expected the entire thing to be quite ridiculous, but the conference was over-the-top in every conceivable way. 

The entire conference is an advertisement for different types of advertising, and everything that can be turned into an ad has been. The Cannes trolley cars that run up and down the beach have been bought out by Strava (“Ads don’t get people active. Strava Sponsored Challenges do. Reach over 195 million active people on Strava,” the ads on the trolleys say.) About half of the cars navigating the winding Cannes streets have been wrapped with ads for advertising on Uber or Lyft or some other platform. DoorDash took over a store directly next to Versace, PayPal took over a patisserie. There are billboards for billboard ads, though every billboard advertising employee I spoke to insisted their job was “boring” and that the buzz had moved from “outdoor” (a euphemism for billboard ads) to “IRL,” a euphemism for events that have video billboard ads at them. KARGO’s drone ad was advertising drone advertising. Serve Delivery robots were driving around advertising the fact you can advertise on the robots; the United Arab Emirates was advertising the fact that its government is willing to do ideas others “said no to.” Life360, the app that lets parents surveil their kids, threw a full week of programming which included tips about advertising on Life360. The JW Marriott had information about how to advertise via the Marriott BonVoy rewards program; United Airlines had information about how to advertise on United flights; Chase had a building about how to advertise to Chase cardholders. OpenAI and Reddit had big presences, explaining how to advertise to Redditors and ChatGPT users; Reddit’s executives tried to tow a careful line about how Reddit is “the most human place on the internet” but is also widely scraped by LLMs, while OpenAI tried to explain that humans make decisions based on what its robots say. I wandered into Meta’s beach compound and caught a portion of a panel about using Gen Z influencers to advertise in which the video sign said “Cringe or Cool? Creators who educate instead of entertain.” Free streaming tv giant Tubi was there with an indoor activation where you had to walk through a curtain that looked like Goatse. I walked by a panel where someone was explaining in great detail the creativity behind a specific tweet made by the KitKat account. Kevin Durant and Shaquille O’Neal and Oprah and Alex Rodriguez and Seth Meyers and Bryson DeChambeau were all there talking about their new podcasts or video series or partnerships or creative visions or about how talent and vision are important and in Durant’s case, about “building culture not just content.” 

The conference is so big, and represents every possible type of advertising—it is impossible to have one single takeaway or to analyze one specific trend. Some of the people I spoke to said they were worried about AI, others saw it as an opportunity. Some said advertising needed to be more human, but many of the billboards and panels suggested much of the work could be automated. Basically, if you came into Cannes with a narrative or grand pronouncement about the future of advertising, you could probably find a panel that would help you confirm that belief. But what was immediately clear is that the main purpose of Cannes is for the advertising industry to hang out and drink rosé and spritzes on the beach, on yachts, in bars, and bistros, either at specific parties or on their own company’s expense account. It would be possible to do the business part of this conference at a hotel in Pennsylvania or Maryland or Vegas, but that would defeat the overall purpose, which appears to be drinking champagne in the south of France.

Every major tech company had either a “plage,” or beach activation area which basically consisted of tents, bars, and stages for panels and/or highly paid concerts; this often resulted in people in sneakers, khakis and dress shirts standing on the sand talking to each other a few hundred feet from vacationers swimming in the ocean. Besides Salesforce Beach, Microsoft Gardens, and Canva Creative Cabana, there was “Sport Beach,” The Female Quotient, Google/YouTube Beach, the “Reddit Cafeteria,” and more. Just behind the plages are other brand activations that happen either in hotels or luxury stores. A DoorDash Ads store was located directly next to Versace, for example. The Carleton hotel was divided into “TikTok Jardins,” LinkedIN Rooftop, MIQ House (an adtech company), and then rooms for something called “The Team,” Vox Media, and Fox. These plages were not to be confused with “BRAND BEACH,” which was a separate area along the beach filled with little cubes for brands to take meetings in.

There were also lots of companies you probably haven’t heard of, with inscrutable names and impossible-to-explain products. I went to numerous panels where one of the panelists listed a series of acronyms or products, and another panelist or the moderator responded “I have no idea what you just said.” 

“DSPs are on the TV sidelines: Tatari gets brands in the big game,” one billboard I saw in Cannes read. “Tell us what Braze does,” another huge billboard read; when I walked by the Braze tent, I heard someone ask them what Braze does and it was deeply unclear (The answer, according to its website: “Braze is a customer engagement platform that empowers brands to Be Absolutely Engaging.™” Conveo pitched “Always on customer understanding,” and MiQ pitched the idea that you can buy ads with an AI and can create digital AI personas: “Sigma’s upgraded gen-AI omnichannel audiences gives advertisers over 1 million targeting options,” its ad in front of the Carleton hotel read. I saw a billboard that just said “Infillion Yieldmo.” One billboard I saw just read “Creative as an AI-operated system.” A car driving around Cannes read “an AI bought this ad.”

Nominally, Cannes Lions is an award show that honors the most creative and innovative advertisement campaigns of the past year. The basement of the Palais des Festivals, which is basically a huge convention center, is filled with images of iconic ads from the last few decades, and there is a red carpet and daily awards ceremonies. The Cannes Lions website notes it is “where creativity drives progress,” and states that “The Awards underpin everything that makes Cannes Lions what it is—the home of creative excellence and effectiveness—and each year a new global benchmark for creativity is set.” Inspirational messages inside the Palais highlighted creativity and the human touch with empty little platitudes; one read “Personal growth is no longer a nice to have. It’s a must have.” Another said “DRIVE PROGRESS. THIS IS YOUR MOMENT.” A third said “CREATE EMOTIONAL STORIES.”

A billboard on the outside of the Palais for a company called Smartly, however, reads “Creativity gets you the trophy. Our ROAS gets you the yacht.” 

A lot of the point of Cannes, it seemed to me, was to get onto a yacht, have a yacht, know someone on a yacht. There is an entire yacht section of Cannes. Most of the yachts do not leave the port where they are docked; their private rooms are turned into meeting spaces and their decks just throw tightly controlled parties all day. Big companies rented entire yachts, other companies shared them. I was invited to take a meeting on the Hewlett Packard yacht, which was actually a yacht called The Room, which was shared by HP, Outfront (which sells billboard space), something called Xumo, and a company called InMarket. There was a Mercedes Benz/F1 yacht, a Samsung Ads yacht, an Integral Ad Sciences adtech company yacht, an Accenture yacht, a White Lotus / HBO yacht, among others. Some of the yachts had hot tubs, all of them had lots of free alcohol (rosés and spritzes), hors d'oeuvres, and men in knit polos and sneakers and women in sundresses.

While inside the Palais there was lots of high-minded discussion about the creativity of advertising, a lot of the actual conversations I heard were about making more money, who was meeting with who, what parties were happening, did someone have a colleague or friend who could get them on a party invite list. There did not seem to be much discussion about the broader concerns of an increasingly stratified economy, other than “this is ridiculous,” as in, ridiculously over-the-top, ridiculously hot, ridiculous that partying this hard was “work.” The most immediate concerns I heard from people seemed to be how to get into exclusive parties, where the next bottle of rosé would come from, and whether they would be invited back next year. 

The festival went all week, and by the second day people are hungover and sunburnt. As the week went on, I saw less khakis and more shorts, with people desperate to do anything to cool down (ironically the best way to do this would have been to go swimming; we were at the beach, after all). Because I did not have a sales quota to hit or a number of meetings I had to do, I spent most of my time wandering around, taking pictures of billboards, taking breaks to swim, going to panels inside little air conditioned tents, and yes, drinking rosé and spritzes. 

The last night I was there was Tiësto, which I vaguely tried but couldn’t get into. I decided to have a beer outside at a bar nearby and people watch. It was then that I saw the drones hovering high over Salesforce Beach. The drones looked kind of beautiful, and were forming into a figure. It was the Kool-Aid man punching through a wall. “BREAKTHROUGH IMPACT,” the drones formed to read. “KARGO.” It was just another ad. I walked home, thinking that I’d had fun, in the way that a music festival or Vegas can be fun, in the way that after you leave, you feel like you’ve been hit by a Strava-sponsored bus.

Welcome back to the Abstract! Here are the studies this week that yucked it up, went interstellar, controlled the weather, and sang our praises.

First, the sounds of ape laughter have been gracing our planet for 15 million years. Then: a visit from a cosmic elder, a meteorological martial art, and bops by blowhards. 

As always, for more of my work, check out my book First Contact: The Story of Our Obsession with Aliens, or subscribe to my personal newsletter the BeX Files. 

A history of hominids in hysterics

De Gregorio, Chiara et al. “Rhythm and timing in laughter reveal that human vocal plasticity falls on a hominid continuum.” Communications Biology.

You’ve heard about getting the last laugh, but who got the first one? Scientists have now determined that laughter, a behavior common to all great apes, may have initially appeared in chortling primate ancestors that lived 15 million years ago, according to a new study that analyzes the evolutionary roots of getting the giggles.

In addition to being the best medicine, laughter plays an outsized role in human cultures and interpersonal relationships. The fact that all other great apes, from bonobos to gorillas, also enjoy a good chuckle suggests that this form of vocal expression has broad benefits and potentially deep evolutionary origins.

To probe the history of hilarity, scientists analyzed recordings of laughter from four orangutans, two gorillas, three bonobos, four chimpanzees, and four human children during bouts of playtime, roughhousing, and tickling. 

The results revealed that the isochronous nature of laughter—meaning clear sound intervals like “ha ha ha”—was likely present in the last common ancestor of the Hominid family, which contains all great apes including extinct relatives such as Neanderthals.

“While all major branches of the Hominid family have evolved distinct call repertoires shaped by their species-specific socio-ecologies, one vocalization has been conserved across species and age-sex classes: laughter,” said researchers led by Chiara De Gregorio of the University of Warwick.

The team’s analysis reveals that “great apes have been laughing in a recognizable way to modern humans for at least 15 million years” and that apes that are more closely related to humans have more complex and variable laughs similar to our own diversity of guffaws, cackles, and snorts.

To sum up: lol…lmao.  

In other news…

A long time ago in a star system far, far away…

Cordiner, Martin et al. “Isotopic Evidence for a Cold and Distant Origin of 3I/ATLAS.” Nature.

The interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS caused a sensation last summer when it was first discovered streaking through the solar system, partly because it revived the debate over whether these objects from other star systems could be alien handiwork.

While the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that 3I/ATLAS is not an extraterrestrial spaceship, it is nonetheless unlike any comet seen in human history. Scientists have revealed that the comet is by far the oldest object ever detected in the solar system, having “accreted as long ago as 12 billion years, following a period of intense, early star formation,” according to researchers led by researchers led by Martin Cordiner of the Catholic University of America.  

In other words, 3I/ATLAS is nearly three times older than the solar system, formed when the observable universe was only a third of its current size. The age is based on the comet’s ratio of deuterium to hydrogen (D/H), which was measured by the James Webb Space Telescope, the most powerful observatory ever launched. 

JWST revealed a “surprisingly high” ratio of deuterium enrichment, about 30 times the level of solar system bodies, with the exception of Venus. “3I/ATLAS thus represents a preserved fragment of an ancient planetary system,” concluded the team. 

So long to this primordial pilgrim, and may it live to be 13 billion. 

I have a black belt in hurricane deflection

Huang, Qin et al. “Weather Jiu-Jitsu: Prospects for atmospheric nudging to defuse the impact of catastrophic weather extremes.” PLOS Water.

Finally, we have an answer to the age-old question: Can we use martial arts to control the weather? In a new study, scientists propose the concept of “weather jiu-jitsu,” which uses gentle atmospheric “nudges” to redirect potentially catastrophic weather events, such as hurricanes, heat waves, or droughts.

“Imagine harnessing the power of nature to help steer hurricanes away from land, redirect atmospheric rivers to spread their rain safely and evenly, or defuse extreme weather patterns like heatwaves, freezes, or prolonged droughts before they take hold,” said researchers led by Qin Huang of Arizona State University. “It’s a vision where we partner with Earth’s own forces to create resilience, rather than reacting to disasters.”

Weather jiu-jitsu involves seeding clouds with particles to influence weather outcomes, but it differs from existing methods by opting for light touches in advance of a developing weather event, as opposed to the heavier lift of weakening an event that is already ongoing.

The team’s models suggest this method could have nudged Hurricane Sandy well away from New York City in 2021, warmed Texas by about 18 degrees Fahrenheit during its deadly 2021 freeze, and reduced the rainfall that caused widespread flooding in California from 2022 to 2023 by about 5 percent. 

That said, the study emphasized that the technique is only a proof-of-concept and it will take far more research to determine if it would be useful in the real world. In the meantime, let’s try some other martial arts-inspired approaches and figure out how to crane-kick a tornado or karate-chop a heat dome.

I bet you think this song is about ME

Golubickis, Marius et al. “Are societies becoming more self-centric? Evidence from five decades of popular music spanning three continents.” PLOS One.

While the Song of Summer 2026 has yet to be determined, odds are that it will be singularly self-absorbed. That’s the hook of a study that discovered popular music has shown “a significant increase in self-focused language over time in individualistic societies” such as the United States or Germany, while no comparable trend was observed in more collectivistic societies such as Japan or Hong Kong.

Scientists led by Marius Golubickis of United Arab Emirates University analyzed the lyrics of top 10 hits from 1970 to 2019 by quantifying the use of the plural pronouns like “we” and “us” compared with the first-person singular pronouns like “I” and “me” (check out the full list here). The results revealed that while “Western societies exhibited a clear increase in self-focused language over time, East Asian societies showed relative stability.”

This all checks out with my go-to playlist for narcissists, featuring “I Me Mine” by the Beatles, “Me Myself and I” by De La Soul, and, of course, “ME!” by Taylor Swift.

Thanks for reading! See you next week.

This is Behind the Blog, where we share our behind-the-scenes thoughts about how a few of our top stories of the week came together. This week, we discuss talking aloud to computers, Cannes, and “Engineering Creativity: Guac Is Extra."

JASON: This week I was in Cannes, France for the Cannes Lions advertising conference, which is a sentence you probably did not expect to be reading and is definitely not a sentence I expected to be writing. It’s rare that I BTB something before I actually write about it, but in this case I think it’s OK, as this is going to be significantly different from the actual articles I do. There is no sense in being coy about it—Cannes, which at least in the media business stands for both the beach town in the south of France and the advertising conference (but not the film festival), is a ridiculous place and experience filled with excess and extravagant displays of money wasting. Back when we worked at VICE, every year around this time there would be a bunch of whispers around the office about which executives and higher level sales people were going to Cannes and who was not (us journalists definitely were not). Then, during Cannes, there was a barely spoken sentiment that we, the journalists, should try extra hard to not fuck up lest we create some sort of situation that a VICE executive in Cannes would have to deal with from another time zone while drinking rosé on a yacht. 

In February, police in Claremore, Oklahoma arrested farmer Darren Blanchard for speaking a little too long during a community meeting about data centers. The city charged Blanchard with criminal trespass, a crime with a $200 penalty, but he’s vowed to fight the charge. He recently shared video of the bodycam footage for the first time with 404 Media and answered our questions about the moment cops arrested him for going over his time at a February 17 community meeting of the Claremore City Council.

The plan in February was for the City Council to listen to the concerns citizens had about a planned data center called Project Mustang. The residents of Claremore don’t want the data center and largely feel like the construction project was approved without their input. City officials signed non-disclosure agreements on behalf of the project’s developers and haven’t been forthcoming with details about its construction.

Scientists have discovered new evidence that the cosmic structures connecting the universe are much larger than previously predicted—persisting over billions of light years—a finding that challenges a core tenet of cosmology and hints at the possibility of new physics, according to a study published on Wednesday in Nature.

The standard model of cosmology, a well-corroborated framework for understanding the universe that is also known as the Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) model, predicts that the large-scale structure of space looks the same in all areas (homogeneity) and in all directions (isotropy). While there is variation in the distribution of matter on small scales, such as thousands or millions of light years, these distinctions should smooth out into a uniform pattern on the scale of the cosmic web, which is a network of large-scale structures made of dark matter, gas, and galaxies that stretches across the universe.

But in recent years, new observational data has started to hint that galaxies cluster in “preferred directions,” forming distinct structures known as “anisotropies” that are not uniform, even across vast distances. Now, a pair of physicists has discovered that these distinct directions and patterns persist even to the scale of a gigaparsec, which is a unit equal to 3.26 billion light years, possibly signalling “the need for a shift in modern cosmology,” according to their new study.

“The structures observed in the real Universe are significantly larger and more persistent than those formed in state-of-the-art simulations based on the standard model of cosmology,” said authors Francesco Sylos Labini of the Enrico Fermi Research Center in Rome, Italy, and Marco Galoppo of the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand, in an email exchange with 404 Media.

“The key advance of our analysis is that it allows this difference to be quantified,” they added. “By measuring the spatial extent and coherence of the observed structures and comparing them directly with theoretical predictions, we found that the discrepancy is statistically highly significant. In other words, the largest structures in the real Universe appear to be substantially larger than expected in standard models of galaxy formation.”

According to existing models, the cosmic web emerged from small density fluctuations in the early universe and gradually developed into large-scale filaments and nodes made of dark matter that gravitationally attract gas, galaxies, and other forms of matter. 

Last year, the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), a major astronomical survey based in Arizona, released the largest high-resolution 3D map of the universe, which has revolutionized cosmology and allowed scientists to test those theories against observational data.

Labini and Galoppo analyzed the DESI release with statistical tools, including the Angular Distribution of Pairwise Distances (ADPD), which is especially effective for detecting and characterizing large-scale anisotropies in DESI’s dataset.

“The idea was to try to really test whether the idea that isotropies reached very large scales is now supported by data,” said Galoppo in a follow-up call. “Even just five or ten years ago, we didn't really have the data to test on gigaparsec scales. But now, we had a chance, so we decided to take it.”

“What we are able to do is to characterize how large are the largest structures inside this sample” of DESI observations, added Labini in the call.

The results revealed that even in DESI’s super-zoomed-out observations, large-scale structures create preferred directions of galaxy distribution, as opposed to an overall isotropic pattern. This contrasts with expectations derived from the cosmic microwave background, the oldest light in the universe, which suggests that directional correlations should fade rapidly at large scales.  

“In the standard model, it's not that there aren’t structures,” said Galoppo in the call. “It is just that they are supposed to be smaller and less persistent than what we found. That's the crux of the matter.”

To that end, DESI is expected to release a new batch of observations within a year, and similar datasets will also be forthcoming from Europe’s Euclid space telescope and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory in Chile in the near term. These new and improved views of the universe will help scientists grapple with just how vast these large-scale structures are, and what that means for our understanding of our cosmic surroundings. 

“At present, there is no simple or widely accepted modification of the ΛCDM framework that naturally explains structures of this size while remaining consistent with the observed uniformity of the cosmic microwave background,” Labini and Galoppo wrote over email. “That is precisely why these observations are so interesting: they point to a potentially important gap between theory and observation that deserves further investigation.”

“If future surveys continue to find coherent directional structures on even larger scales, the implications for cosmology would be profound,” they concluded.

Behind closed doors and without expert input, the Trump administration issued a major policy change to how census data is released. Data experts are concerned the result will be less reliable public data related to redistricting, natural disasters, the workforce, housing, and more.

On June 4, the Trump administration released an order, Disclosure Avoidance for Statistical Products, that forbids “any use of noise infusion” for statistical products. “Coarsening shall be the preferred category of Disclosure Avoidance methods for all statistical products,” the order states. “Suppression shall be permitted as a last resort, only to be used when coarsening is prohibited by law or would substantially defeat the accuracy or usability of a statistical product.” 

In statistical terms, noise infusion is a common and accepted technique for privacy protection when working with data: it creates “fuzz” or random values within a dataset, making the published statistics slightly different from the actual, sensitive data. Coarsening is the process of grouping and rounding data, or reporting it in ranges instead of potentially identifiable specifics. Suppression is what it sounds like: redacting information, replacing it with asterisks, or not releasing the data entirely. 

NPR’s Hansi Lo Wang first reported on the policy change and its implications. People who work with census data and statistical analysis are worried that limiting the ways the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) can release data will severely limit what information ends up available to the public.

Data coming out of small communities and industries, especially, could be heavily affected by the change. “Because ‘coarsening’ (grouping, rounding, reporting in ranges) and suppression are the only not-prohibited tools named in the order, it means that to keep information safe, the Census Bureau and BEA need to group small things (like small communities or small business types) into larger ones, or they need suppress the data completely,” Beth Jarosz, a senior fellow at Georgetown University's Massive Data Institute and vice president of the Association of Public Data Users, told me in an email. “Small industries may get rolled into bigger industry categories. Small counties may get rolled into county groups or not reported at all.”

On June 17, five groups — the Population Association of America, Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, Association of Public Data Users, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, and Association of Population Centers — released a joint statement condemning the order. “This order subverts processes developed over decades to foster transparency and public trust and creates a scenario in which there will either be less privacy for our personal information, or less usable data, or both,” the statement says.

The Director of Science Policy for the American Statistics Association Steve Pierson wrote that the order “handcuffs the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis in terms of the techniques they can use for protecting the privacy of respondents.” 

John Abowd, the former Associate Director for Research and Methodology and Chief Scientist at the Census Bureau, posted a list of data products on Linkedin that this order would affect. These include the OnTheMap for Emergency Management system, a public data tool that provides real-time U.S. population and workforce statistics for areas being affected by natural disasters; Quarterly Workforce Indicators which include data about employment, job creation and destruction, wages, hires, and more; business formation and dynamics statistics; veteran employment statistics; data related to post-secondary educational outcomes, and many more. Many of these use noise infusion, which Trump’s order just banned.

There’s also confusion about how this order will even be enacted in practice. “Regarding the datasets that used noise infusion, it is unclear how this policy will impact public access,” Lynda Kellam, who leads the Research Data and Digital Scholarship team at the University of Pennsylvania Libraries and is a founding organizer of the Data Rescue Project, wrote following the order. “The policy is intended to be retroactive, raising concerns that data might be removed, but how that will play out is uncertain.” 

In the immediate fallout, at least, we’re already losing some public information. As Wang from NPR pointed out on Bluesky last week, multiple webpages related to noise infusion and differential privacy on the Census Bureau's website were removed following the order. Most of those pages have since been restored. At the Data Rescue Project, a team led by Lena Bohman has been proactively collecting and archiving Census Bureau working papers and making them available to the public. 

Jaroz said that along with the risk of unreliable or missing data, the abandonment of long-agreed-upon privacy protection methods can damage public trust in Census data. “When the Census Bureau and Bureau of Economic Analysis gather data, they promise respondents that they will keep responses confidential. When a person responded to the American Community Survey or a business owner provided information about their employees or sales, they expected that the Census Bureau and BEA would protect that information. By taking away tools that those agencies use to protect privacy and confidentiality, people may question whether or not Census and BEA can live up to that promise,” she said. “Similarly, the Census Bureau and BEA are producing information for public benefit. People respond, for example, to the American Community Survey (at least in part) because it will benefit their community. If the new rule results in cutting back how the data can be published and used, it also weakens trust and it is worth responding.” 

As Wang noted, America First Legal, a law group co-founded by Trump's deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller, attempted to force the release of new 2020 Census data in a lawsuit last year, by challenging the Census Bureau's differential privacy system. Judges ruled it was too late to sue, but they refiled the case in February.

As NPR also reported last year, Trump and Republicans in Congress have been pushing to exclude people living in the U.S. without legal status in the 2030 Census. “People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in August 2025. This would be a radical change in how the Census has been conducted for more than 200 years. Redistricting and gerrymandering have been a massive fight for the Trump administration for years, and has ramped up ahead of the 2026 midterms, as the Supreme Court recently weakened the Voting Rights Act and allowed for more redistricting that would favor Republican control of the House. 

The data policy change is also happening in light of the Trump administration’s gutting of Census practice test locations in the South. In February, the Associated Press reported that the administration is eliminating four out of the six locations that were slated to test new methods for the 2030 census. “The Census Bureau would be essentially flying blind into communities that need testing most — tribal lands, rural areas with limited connectivity and places with historically low response rates,” Mark Mather, an associate vice president at the Population Reference Bureau, told the AP. “You can’t fix what you don’t test.”

I am staring at a painted portrait of King Charles, who is wearing a red suit. The comically oversized and heavy Snap Specs I am wearing have basically created a digital version of the real painting and overlaid it over the real thing. A narrator speaking through the glasses asks me to reach out and touch a butterfly perched on his right shoulder. Through the glasses, I see a digital version of my hand reach out. The butterfly takes off and floats toward my ghostly hand. It lands on my fake fingers, and clips through them. Imagine yourself as royalty, a narrator in the Snap Specs says to me. King Charles’ face morphs into a version of my own, though it’s been run through an AI filter to look thinner, smoother, yet somehow older. 

I walk to the next painting and stand on the black dot I’ve been told to stand on. The painting looks like a blank-ish canvas. I am positive I am about to see the same magic trick I’ve seen several times in the last few minutes; my face is going to be “painted” on the canvas the way it has been on several other portraits. The narrator starts talking to me. His voice is much fainter. He starts talking, and I look slightly away from the painting. The experience stops. I get a staffer to help me reset the glasses. I look back at the painting. The narrator begins talking. I slightly turn my head. The experience stops. I look at the painting again. It starts over. I remember that a staffer had told me not to look away from the paintings or the experience would stop. I do not move my head this time. Another AI version of my face appears on the canvas. I walk away, and do not feel as though I have just tried transcendent futuristic technology.

Snap let people try the glasses at “Spectacular, The Art of Jonathan Yeo in Augmented Reality,” a museum takeover at the Cannes Lions advertising festival in France, where nearly every big tech brand was pitching its platform’s advertising capabilities, and where I am working on a few stories for 404 Media. I don’t write about gadgets all that often, but with the Snap Specs getting lots of mostly negative attention and with investors actively begging CEO Evan Spiegel to not make them, I figured that, given the opportunity, I would put them on my face. Snap’s experience was tightly curated (the glasses don’t come out for four months), and was basically an audio/video tour of a few paintings of celebrities.

The flagship augmented reality experience for Snap’s new, widely clowned-upon glasses is essentially the same thing that brands have been doing at museums for 15 years now. Rather than use your phone to make art pop off the wall, it uses the $2,195 glasses that weigh “just 132 grams,” a Snap press release says (most regular glasses weigh between 25-50 grams) to make paintings of celebrities blink at you. At the beginning of the experience, my face was scanned on an iPad and then was presumably run through various AI filters to let me replace celebrity faces with my own. A portrait of Jony Ive in which he is holding an iPhone put my face on that iPhone, for example. A portrait of David Attenborough allowed me to “look into the past” and “look into the future” by running my face through different age filters; the result was an AI-ified version of me with a tiny head and a goatee as a child, wearing an enormous hat, and an older version of myself that I could flick back and forth to with my hand. 

This was the type of brand experience I’ve done a million times at different conferences and it was so surface level as to be barely notable, but the glasses are indeed very heavy. They didn’t hurt to wear on my big head for 10 minutes, but I couldn’t imagine wearing them much longer than that. The visuals didn’t make me dizzy or nauseous like some virtual reality glasses have, but the visuals and audio also weren’t that great, and the glasses are augmented reality rather than fully engrossed virtual reality. There were clipping issues and, again, the experience stopped if I even slightly turned my head away from a painting—it is hard to imagine these things working well in real life. I have tried other VR and AR demos. So many are like this. They all have problems even in highly controlled environments and barely do anything more than your phone can do, with the added bonus of being incredibly expensive, uncomfortable, and branding you as an asshole. It was hard to imagine trying these and not dunking on them and, indeed, what I thought would happen did come to pass.

This is to say nothing of the privacy concerns associated with shoving AI into a camera and pair of comically large display glasses. We have written repeatedly about these dangers and they are not worth delving back into in a Snap-specific context, because these glasses are so big, heavy, dorky, and expensive that it is impossible to fantasize a world in which anyone wears them. 

We start this week with Matthew’s story about a fascinating paper that argues if LLMs are sentient, then by those metrics so is the classic game Age of Empires II. After the break, Matthew tells us about a wild story out of Texas with a data center being built on land that was donated to be a park. In the subscribers-only section, we talk hacking and basketball.

Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. Become a paid subscriber for access to this episode's bonus content and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.

• ⁠If AI Is Sentient Then So Is ‘Age of Empires II’⁠
• ⁠A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Massive Data Center Instead⁠
• ⁠Hackers Publish Knicks and Madison Square Garden Data Online⁠
• ⁠Madison Square Garden Made Dossier on Activists Who Opposed Facial Recognition⁠

The hackers that stole a large cache of data from Madison Square Garden called a low level employee and tricked them into letting the hackers into MSG’s systems, according to the hackers and 404 Media’s review of the stolen data.

The breach highlights the risk of social engineering over voice calls, sometimes called ‘vishing’. Whereas phishing, where hackers social engineer someone over email or send them a fake login page, has been common for decades, vishing has only become prevalent more recently, especially as young and native English speaking hackers have become a serious cybersecurity threat.

Consulting giant Accenture is trying to figure out how to stop non-technical workers from blowing through companies’ AI token budget on trivial tasks like converting PDFs to presentation slides, according to leaked audio obtained by 404 Media. Across the industry Accenture is seeing “soaring token spend,” according to the audio.

The news highlights a major shift in the tech industry and other companies that use AI: the wave of uninhibited AI growth is over. Some AI providers like GitHub are now charging customers per token rather than a flat subscription fee, leading some companies to burn through their tokens. Uber recently capped employees’ use of AI tools like Claude Code and Cursor; that came after Uber told employees to use AI as much as possible and Uber’s CTO said the company had blown its entire AI budget in four months. And Accenture itself reportedly started requiring senior staff to start using AI or risk losing out on promotions. 

It also undercuts the narrative that superpowered engineers generating mountains of code are behind the AI boom. In many cases it is non-technical staff burning through tokens for non-specialized tasks.

“We’re seeing from some of the data internally at least that it’s actually not our engineers that are driving the token consumption. It’s a lot of the non-engineers that are doing some of those behaviors [...] you were talking about,” Justice Kwak, Accenture’s agentic AI strategy lead, said in a recent internal meeting, according to the audio obtained by 404 Media.

Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia’s cofounders, was banned from editing the site indefinitely after other editors determined he was canvassing, or in other words, calling on his followers off platform in order to influence Wikipedia’s content. 

Sanger has spent more than a decade criticizing Wikipedia for what he claims is an ideological, left-wing bias on a variety of topics, and on X has framed this recent ban as further proof of everything that’s wrong with Wikipedia. The New York Post took that bait and last night published an article with the headline “Left-leaning Wikipedia blocked founder from editing site—after he campaigned to make it more balanced.” 

Wikipedia editors obviously reject that framing and say that Sanger was banned for wielding his followers to sway discussion and decision making on Wikipedia. The discussion that led to the decision to ban Sanger concluded with what an editor called a “clear consensus” to ban Sanger.

“There is general agreement among participants that he has engaged in off-wiki canvassing and is not here to constructively build the encyclopedia,” the editor said in a note closing the discussion. “There is also a significant concern shared by many editors that his actions constitute calls for outing.”

While Sanger has been railing about bias on Wikipedia for years, the specific issue here is around his WikiProject Intellectual Diversity. WikiProjects are group efforts among Wikipedia volunteers to deal with certain issues on the site. For example, in 2024 I wrote about WikiProject AI Cleanup, a group of volunteers who focus on removing AI-generated content from the online encyclopedia. Sanger’s WikiProject Intellectual Diversity, as its name implies, aims to bring more intellectual diversity to the site, mostly meaning more right-leaning perspectives. 

Sanger’s WikiProject Intellectual Diversity and its goals alone do not merit a ban according to Wikipedia’s policies. The problem, according to Wikipedia editors, is that during the discussion about whether to allow WikiProject Intellectual Diversity to become an official WikiProject, Sanger invited his 91,000 followers on X to influence that discussion. 

“Wikipedians are now debating whether my proposed WikiProject Intellectual Diversity should be permitted to become an official WikiProject (club/group of editors),” Sanger said on X on Friday and linked to the Wikipedia talk page about the issue. “Lots opposed. Also lots in favor.”

“Can I still join the movement?” one person replied to Sanger on X. 

“Let's just say that if I answer that question one way or another, the playground moms who rule Wikipedia might block me,” Sanger responded. 

As one volunteer wrote in the discussion page about whether to ban Sanger:

“Since the return from his self-imposed exile pretty much all he has done is try to start a right-wing/conservative pressure group within Wikipedia not to improve articles on topics that may be under-represented or highlight high-quality sources that could be utilised more, but to instead attempt to rewrite policies and guidelines to his political bent while throwing baseless aspersions about the conduct of many users (mostly those in privileged positions such as admins) and alleging they're being funded by shadow money. Frankly if this was anyone else claiming all this with the way he is, we'd have shown them the door long ago.”

Ilyas Lebleu, another Wikipedia volunteer and admin, told me that they had warned Sanger about similar behavior two months ago, but that Sanger ignored them. 

“Larry tried to frame the community discussion as a pseudo-legalistic process, bringing a list of ‘charges’ and ‘counts’ from ‘prosecutors,’ instead of an open community discussion,” Lebleu said. 

Discussions about potential bans are supposed to remain open for at least 72 hours. While consensus that Sanger had violated Wikipedia policies was clear, Sanger was banned at some point before that deadline. He was then briefly unbanned, and then again indefinitely banned once 72 hours had elapsed and the discussion about the ban closed. 

“Wikipedia has become more of a mob-rule anarchy than ever,” Sanger said in a statement sent to me by a spokesperson. “In the kangaroo court in which a mob ousted me, Wikipedia’s administrators showed that they don’t appear to value details like formal charges, a designated prosecutor, basic decorum, distinction between prosecution and judge, dispassionate adjudication, and so forth. They have no proper system other than triggering a mob to selectively enforce their hodgepodge of vague rules.”

“Now that same mob has blocked me for trying to bring an intellectually diverse group of thinkers and editors to the site,” Sanger continued. “Subscribing to their groupthink is now an official requirement of being a member in good standing. Something must change, and now. I only wonder if the system as it currently stands can even allow the discourse necessary to fix the system.”

Sanger’s claim that Wikipedia has a left-leaning bias isn’t unique or new. Elon Musk has railed against the site for years as well, an effort that culminated with the launch of his highly flawed, AI-generated Grokipedia. But the stakes for Wikipedia as a reliable source of information are higher than ever as every corner of the internet is struggling to deal with a flood of AI-generated, error-filled slop. 

This story was reported with support from the MuckRock foundation. 

Around this time last year, Rachel Rodman was happily employed as a library clerk and program assistant with the Crawford County Library District in the east-central part of Missouri. Rodman didn’t think anything of the display she curated for Pride month last June, highlighting LGBTQ+ books from the district’s collection in the one room library within a community center. Rodman says she was given free reign to create displays and had no reason to suspect that her actions would lead to her firing. The display was up for five days before Rodman says her branch manager left her a handwritten note telling her to remove it. Rodman refused, posting to Facebook on June 5, 2025 that she wouldn’t deny a marginalized group’s right to visibility because the district feared community backlash. 

“I take my job very seriously,” Rodman wrote, adding, “I will not yield, and I’m not sorry about it.” 

The next day, she was fired. Public records obtained by 404 Media offer insight into Rodman’s dismissal and how the decision reflected poorly on the library. It represents one of hundreds of public records requests filed in jurisdictions in which we’ve received a tip or followed up on incidents of censorship and self-censorship related to LGBTQ+ focused or Pride-related book displays. Records from a handful of public libraries show a willingness from library leadership to tolerate acts of self-censorship in anticipation of unwanted attention from certain community members, and in some cases, religious leaders. This tends to show up in hesitancy to organize cultural heritage programming and LGBTQ+ book displays. 

In a statement to 404 Media, Rodman says that because public libraries are funded through taxpayer dollars, reducing visibility of a marginalized group constitutes a refusal to openly support all patrons. 

“It’s never enough to just carry the books as available material,” Rodman told 404 Media. “Everyone deserves and should be able to find themselves publicly represented, but especially in communities where censorship is already such a huge issue. It’s in those communities that minorities of any kind already feel repressed and underrepresented.”

In one email exchange from libraries in east-central Missouri, Crawford County Library District’s director told other area library directors that the firing “was not discrimination,” but rather, to “protect” employees and patrons. The situation “does look bad,” she wrote, before making it worse by accusing the employee of playing “victim.” The issue, according to Rodman and the records, was that in 2022, the library tried to host  a “Rainbow Storytime” event, but canceled it  because the library had received death threats. 

“Regardless of whether the library actually instructed the employee to remove the display, we’re in rural Missouri,” Steven Campbell, director of the Scenic Regional Library in Union, Missouri, wrote. “It’s an extremely challenging political and social environment. We all need to make our own decisions. Not everyone has a Board or appointing authority that will back them on LGBT issues. If someone thinks losing their job or receiving deaths over a display is worth it, that’s great. I admire them. Not everyone is willing to make those sacrifices, and that shouldn’t be judged.” 

Censorship experts and professional associations disagree, but they acknowledge that small and rural libraries have different challenges than their metro-area counterparts. A lot of these systems are very small, with very few salaried staff and limited acquisition budgets. Nor are they discounting the fact that it’s hard to be a librarian right now,  thanks in large part to the work of some very well-funded astroturfers. The American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom found that in 2025, over 90 percent of all book challenges could be linked to pressure groups or key decision-makers like public officials and government employees or library boards or library administrators. 

“When a library chooses to engage in censorship-lite out of fear, by just trying to keep the peace and but still do the good work of the library, it’s the patrons who pay the price, no matter what” Kate Laughlin, executive director of the National Association for Rural and Small Libraries, told 404 Media. “It is the community who is the victim, not the library and the librarians.”

In public records obtained by 404 Media, librarians regularly discussed the challenges they face with their leadership. Some of the things we've read include:

• "I am not calling attention to Pride Month online, but I don't call attention to other recognized holidays unless it is part of a program... each time that I promote this piece of the collection I have push back from a parent."
• "If it is in the children's area, maybe a good compromise would be to move it to another area."
• "I have made a compromise by taking the time and trouble of changing the wording on the sign that she disapproved... I want to keep the Pride Month display up where it is for 10 more business days. Pride Month ends on June 30 and then it will be taken down."
• “Everyone knows the stuff we’re dealing with regarding LGBT issues. It’s no cakewalk for anyone.”
• “As a library director in a small town I have had apprehensions about doing outward pride displays in my community.”
• “My assumption is that we will get more complaints as Pride month gets underway.”

The American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom is seeing fewer public Pride displays in libraries this year compared to  recent years, citing the chilling effect of censorship.

“There is no obligation to have any display about anything,” Sarah Lamdan, executive director of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom told 404 Media. “It’s all about what a community is interested in. But if somebody thinks that a Pride display might be something that would be appreciated by any member of their community, or they want to put up a Pride display, that shouldn’t be a source of fear or incrimination.” 

Lamdan says there’s a difference between being a library that doesn’t do displays of any kind, and libraries that have done displays in the past who choose not to do them due to external pressure. 

One underexplored throughline here involves religious influence in local politics. CatholicVote, a political action committee that coordinates “Hide the Pride” campaigns since 2022, has donated to library defunding campaigns. Over the years, there have been a number of pastors challenging LGBTQ+ collections and displays. Take for instance, an incident that happened in June 2024 in which a local pastor checked out dozens of books from those collections and posted on social media for his congregants to do the same.  

Emails obtained by 404 Media from the time of the incident show library workers from neighboring systems who had LGBTQ+ titles wrapped up in the “Hide the Pride”-style incident wishing the library hadn’t drawn further attention to the issue through its Facebook channel. 

“Personally, I think Wichita’s decision to call attention to this on Facebook was a bad idea,” Tom Taylor, director of the Andover Public Library, said in one email to other cc’d library workers. “It just gives more people the idea.” 

When asked for clarification as to what he meant by “bad idea,” Taylor told 404 Media that states like Kansas have patron privacy laws that protect everyone—including religious leaders—from public borrowing disclosure. He also said that the Andover Public Library doesn’t have any Pride-specific events planned this year, but the library has signs that help users locate frequently challenged books. 

Taylor said that he believes challenged books should still be available to check out, even if they aren’t promoted within the library.

“If you don’t order [the book] because you don’t want to have a controversy, that’s what we call censorship by omission,” he added. “To avoid buying them because you’re afraid there might be a controversy, that’s not how professional libraries work, in my opinion.” 

Ashley Stewart, a campaign strategist with EveryLibrary Institute, says she can relate to some of the pressure from religious leaders that administrators may be going through. As a former library director for a system in southwestern Illinois, she was on the receiving end of death threats from local ministerial alliances because the library hosted a Drag Queen Story Hour event in 2022 for Pride month.

“No matter where you go in the community, you’re getting—I don’t know if it’s harassment—but people are absolutely letting their feelings be heard that they think that you should not be doing a certain program or not having a certain display,” Stewart told 404 Media.

Madison Square Garden compiled a list of activists who have publicly criticized the venue’s use of facial recognition technology, putting their tweets and comments into a document that was then accessible to other people inside the company, 404 Media has found.

The news shows that MSG, operated by Jim Dolan who has garnered a reputation for being pernicious against his perceived enemies, is not only deploying controversial facial recognition technology but keeping track of specific people who take issue with it. The document was included in a 45GB cache of data hackers stole from MSG and posted online this month, which 404 Media then downloaded and reviewed.

“The wake of a data breach would be a good time for Madison Square Garden to stop subjecting its patrons to biometric surveillance,” Adam Schwartz, privacy litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and one of the people included in the document, told 404 Media.

Board members of a small township in Michigan agreed to “fight to our very last breath” against an AI data center planned in their community. America’s nuclear scientists and the University of Michigan want to build a massive data center in Ypsilanti Township, Michigan. If built, the data center will, among other things, run simulations to help America build nuclear weapons.

The residents of Ypsilanti Township overwhelmingly oppose the construction of the data center and voiced their opposition to the computer warehouse during a public board meeting on June 16. In a show of support that’s often rare from local leaders in communities with data centers, Ypsilanti Township’s board vowed to fight UofM and Los Alamos National Laboratory, which is partnering with the university, with everything they had.

Throughout most of the three hour board meeting, a photograph from a data center groundbreaking in nearby Saline Township was projected onto a wall behind the board. The photo showed a grinning Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer standing in line with Oracle CEO Clay Magouyrk. It was taken at the June 1 groundbreaking of an Oracle and OpenAI data center in nearby Saline Township, one of several Stargate projects. Saline Township is a community of only 2,300 people and the fight against the data center was so contentious that the Township treasurer resigned in tears during a public meeting in May.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Oracle (@oracle)

During the groundbreaking, a videographer caught Whitmer talking with Magouyrk. In the video Whitmer appeared to tell the billionaire, “We’re used to people saying no, and doing it anyway.” Whitmer’s office has officially denied she said that, but many of the residents of Michigan—including the people of Ypsilanti Township—believe she did.

Cilla Cresswell shot the video of Whitmer and was present at the Ypsilanti Township board meeting on Tuesday. “On June 1 I was standing just to the left, right there,” Creswell said, referring to the photo that loomed behind the board during the meeting. “I was there. I recorded that clip [… ] I was right there. And they want to say it’s fake, but I just want to let you guys know it’s real. You can play it on my camera.”

Members of the board and the community referenced the photograph often during the meeting. “You have people in that photograph worth billions of dollars. Not just millions, we’re talking trillions. Soon to be trillionaires. Yet this state, in its zeal to become the data capital of the country, has extended unprecedented tax credits to the richest corporations in the world,” Douglas Winters, a lawyer representing Ypsilanti Township, said in the meeting.

“Having to stare at this picture during this meeting has my blood boiling,” said Ypsi resident Laura Witowski. “I did not realize how emotional I would be. The waste of space. The complete lack of regard for humans and animals and for what?”

During the hours of community comments, residents stepped forward to voice complaints that have now become common about data centers in America. The people of Ypsilanti Township worried about the rising cost of electricity, how much water the building will use, and how noisy the data center would be once finished.

They also called on the Township board to do everything in their power to stop it from even being built. “Put yourselves on the line. Those people will listen to you better than they will listen to us. Please put yourselves, your jobs, and your comfort on the line to stop this for us,” Ypsi resident Jane Wolf said. “Get creative. Tear up the road. Block the road. Break the law. Do whatever you need to do for us. You will be remembered better in history for the job that you did if you can get creative and really put yourselves out there.”

Jill Warren, the wife of a Methodist pastor, suggested residents brush up on the OSS’ Simple Sabotage Field Manual. “Simply slow things down bureaucratically," she said. “Make sure we block where we can. Use very slow agendas and response times and do, within your power, the work that you are entitled to do. For those who aren’t familiar with it, please look up the Simple Sabotage Field Manual and use it in your own lives of action as well [...] they may not care about us, but we care about us and we’re here and we’ll continue to be here and support the work that you’re doing on our behalf.”

Alyssa, an Ypsilanti resident, cited long passages from John Hershey’s Hiroshima—a 1946 book that focused on the victims of the first atomic bombing. “We don’t need simulations to know what a nuclear strike looks like,” she said. “We have pictures, videos, and audio of what happens. We know what it does to bodies. We know what it does to children and what it does to life.”

Board supervisor Brend Stumbo vowed to fight. “This is going to harm our community in our future. We will fight to our very last breath, but we need help. And we need it from the people who have the power to stop things,” she said.

Stumbo explained that, early on, she and other members of the board were ignorant about data centers and that she was grateful to the Township’s residents for informing her. “Now we know and we’re thankful for the residents and non-residents that came to our meetings early and told us, ‘don’t trust UofM,’” she said. “We do not love nor do we appreciate what the board or regents is doing to our community. It needs to stop. And everyone that showed up here today, we greatly appreciate it and we will keep going, like everyone has said, by doing it together […] I will stand with you. I will fight with you. And I know this entire board and our Township attorney will as well. So let’s keep doing it together.”

The Township has, so far, made good on its word and it’s been creative in its opposition. In April, the board voted to institute a 365 day moratorium on supplying water to data centers so it could conduct a scientific study into how hyper scale data centers might affect the community water supply. In response, UofM threatened to sue and claimed that withholding water from an AI data center meant to power nuclear weapons research was unlawful discrimination.