The earliest Plunder is coming back to Warzone in August 2023 is on Wednesday, Aug. 16 in the next Warzone playlist update.

Nineteen large platforms have to start complying with new rules as soon as Friday or risk big fines.

KAWASAKI, Japan--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 17, 2023--

DALLAS & TAIPEI, Taiwan--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23, 2023--

The NBA 2K24 pre-load times are all currently live, allowing players to pre-load NBA 2K24 on all Current and Next Gen platforms.

Nvidia’s AI chip exports to China are under threat, General Motors reaches deal with striking Canadian auto workers, and other news to start your day.

Micron Technology Inc. is poised to land about ¥200 billion ($1.5 billion) in financial incentives from the Japanese

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug 29, 2023--

The 2023 Warzone Halloween event should feature horror icons, Michael Myers, Annabelle, Pinhead, Count Dracula, and Frankenstein's monster.

A mother has destroyed her own gender reveal party after not wanting another girl. Gender reveals have long been the centre of controversy and debate. From extravagant reveals causing environmental damage, as well as some saying they enforce the gender binary. There have also been instances of parents storming off when the gender of the baby doesn’t turn out to be what they had wanted. And it appears as though this mum had a similar reaction. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter The mum drew criticism after pulling down party bunting, tearing her sash off and pushing tables and chairs after finding out she was having another daughter. In a video uploaded to TikTok the mum can be seen pulling down party bunting, tearing her sash off and pushing tables and chairs after finding out she was having another daughter. The TikTok features overlay text that reads:”‘POV: When you destroy your own gender reveal because you didn’t want another girl.” @aintyoukyb Yall I’m still in shock. #fyp #genderreveal #chicago #idkanymore The video has over 1 million views and many have weighed in on their opinions in the comment section and with some of the discussion even taking place over on Twitter. Some users said that the gender shouldn’t matter as long as it’s a “healthy baby.” Others said they felt bad for the unborn child, and some said they would have left the event if they were there because of the mum’s reaction. “The way my mouth just dropped!” Commented one user. Another added, “I’d grab my gift and walk straight to my car. That is ridiculous. However, some said they also had similar reactions when they faced gender disappointment, with one user commenting: “I acted a fool as well. It’s ok sis.’” “I have 3 girls and was wanting a boy so bad but truthfully I wouldn’t change it for anything,” said another user. Viewers shared their opinions on the matter on Twitter too: Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

They are 22 words that could terrify those who read them, as brutal in their simplicity as they are general in their meaning: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” That is the statement from San Francisco-based non-profit the Center for AI Safety, and signed by chief executives from Google Deepmind and ChatGPT creators OpenAI, along with other major figures in artificial intelligence research. The fact that the statement has been signed by so many leading AI researchers and companies means that it should be heeded. But it also means that it should be robustly examined: why are they saying this, and why now? The answer might take some of the terror away (though not all of it). Writing a statement like this functions as something like a reverse marketing campaign: our products are so powerful and so new, it says, that they could wipe out the world. Most tech products just promise to change our lives; these ones could end it. And so what looks like a statement about danger is also one that highlights just how much Google, OpenAI and more think they have to offer. Warning that AI could be as terrible as pandemics also has the peculiar effect of making artificial intelligence's dangers seem as if they just arise naturally in the world, like the mutation of a virus. But every dangerous AI is the product of intentional choices by its developers – and in most cases, from the companies that have signed the new statement. Who is the statement for? Who are these companies talking to? After all, they are the ones who are creating the products that might extinguish life on Earth. It reads a little like being hectored by a burglar about your house’s locks not being good enough. None of this is to say that the warning is untrue, or shouldn't be heeded; the danger is very real indeed. But it does mean that we should ask a few more questions of those warning us about it, especially when they are conveniently the companies that created this ostensibly apocalyptic tech in the first place. AI doesn't feel so world-destroying yet. The statement's doomy words might come as some surprise to those who have used the more accessible AI systems, such as ChatGPT. Conversations with that chatbot and others can be funny, surprising, delightful and sometimes scary – but it's hard to see how what is mostly prattle and babble from a smart but stupid chatbot could destroy the world. They also might come as a surprise to those who have read about the many, very important ways that AI is already being used to help save us, not kill us. Only last week, scientists announced that they had used artificial intelligence to find new antibiotics that could kill off superbugs, and that is just the beginning. By focusing on the "risk of extinction" and the "societal-scale risk" posed by AI, however, its proponents are able to shift the focus away from both the weaknesses of actually existing AI and the ethical questions that surround it. The intensity of the statement, the reference to nuclear war and pandemics, make it feel like we are at a point equivalent with cowering in our bomb shelters or in lockdown. They say there are no atheists in foxholes; we might also say there are no ethicists in fallout shelters. If AI is akin to nuclear war, though, we are closer to the formation of the Manhattan Project than we are to the Cold War. We don’t need to be hunkering down as if the danger is here and there is nothing we can do about it but “mitigate it”. There's still time to decide what this technology looks like, how powerful it is and who will be at the sharp end of that power. Statements like this are a reflection of the fact that the systems we have today are a long way from those that we might have tomorrow: the work going on at the companies who warned us about these issues is vast, and could be much more transformative than chatting with a robot. It is all happening in secret, and shrouded in both mystery and marketing buzz, but what we can discern is that we might only be a few years away from systems that are both more powerful and more sinister. Already, the world is struggling to differentiate between fake images and real ones; soon, developments in AI could make it very difficult to find the difference between fake people and real ones. At least according to some in the industry, AI is set to develop at such a pace that it might only be a few years before those warnings are less abstractly worrying and more concretely terrifying. The statement is correct in identifying those risks, and urging work to avoid them. But it is more than a little helpful to the companies that signed it in making those risks seem inevitable and naturally occurring, as if they are not choosing to build and profit from the technology they are so worried about. It is those companies, not artificial intelligence, that have the power to decide what that future looks like – and whether it will include our "extinction". Read More Opinion: Age gap relationships might seem wrong, but they work. Trust me Hands up if you trust Boris Johnson | Tom Peck Boris’s ‘ratty rat’ rage against Sunak could bring the Tories down | John Rentoul Opinion: Age gap relationships might seem wrong, but they work. Trust me Hands up if you trust Boris Johnson | Tom Peck Boris’s ‘ratty rat’ rage against Sunak could bring the Tories down | John Rentoul

You need to set up both a router and a modem if you want Wi-Fi internet in your home, but there are major differences between the two devices.