According to leaks, Michael Myers will be added to the Fortnite Item Shop during Fortnitemares 2023 on Oct. 24 at 8 p.m. ET.

He's a big Manchester United fan, but iShowSpeed had no idea who a group of Newcastle United footballers were after they 'butchered' him during a late night Fortnite session. Three players took down iShowSpeed during his latest gaming stream, but despite being notable Premier League stars the content creator had no clue who he was up against. "Who the f*** is Harvey Barnes, bro?" iShowSpeed shouted after meeting a sticky end in the game. Harvey Barnes, as football fans know, is a talented winger on the fringes of the England squad who moved to Newcastle from Leicester in the summer. Viewers weren’t 100 per cent sure whether it was the real Harvey Barnes who had taken iShowSpeed down at first. However, he was joined by players with the aliases Anthony Gordon and Paul Dummett, who also play for Newcastle, which seemed to confirm things. "I’m creased some Fortnite pro players and Speed got butchered by Harvey Barnes, Paul Dummett and Anthony Gordon at 1am,” one social media user posted after seeing the incident unfolded. Another said: “Never thought i’d hear speed and xqc talking about harvey barnes lmfao.” One more added: “Speed getting his ass handed to him on Fortnite by Harvey Barnes is hilarious.” “A crossover we never knew we needed…” another wrote. It comes a few days after iShowSpeed attracted controversy after attempting a dangerous “coke and condom challenge” on his live stream. Sign up for our free Indy100 weekly newsletter How to join the indy100's free WhatsApp channel 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

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jun 20, 2023--

The push by many top car makers to go all-electric in the next decade or

By Akash Sriram OpenAI's staff has threatened to quit the artificial intelligence startup and join former boss Sam

Apple is working to fix for a mysterious and significant battery problem in the latest version of the operating system for its Watch, a report has claimed. Across a variety of forums including Apple’s own support pages, users have reported that their Watches are rapidly losing their charge. Some users report that even the Apple Watch Ultra – which is intended to run for up to 36 hours thanks to its larger case and battery – can fully use all its charge in three hours. The issue appears specific to be the latest update, numbered WatchOS 10.1. That arrived in late October and brought changes including the addition of the new Apple Watch’s headline feature. Now the company is reportedly working on an update that should fix those problems, according to an internal memo seen by Macrumors. Apple has not publicly confirmed that it is working on the update or when it might arrive. Apple has seemingly looked to fix at least some of the problems already. In the recently released iOS 17.1 update for the iPhone, it said that it had addressed “increased power consumption” when the two devices are paired, but that appears not to have fully fixed the issue. Apple is currently testing WatchOS 10.2, which might not be released for months. But the company sometimes pushes out smaller and less substantial updates to address bugs and other problems such as the the phantom battery drain. The issue might also be related to specific apps. Some users reported that uninstalling the app “MobyFace” – which allows people to customise their watch faces – helped stop the battery draining. Specific apps have caused problems for Apple devices in the past, presumably as a result of a conflict between the software and the devices operating system. Amid widespread reports that new iPhone 15s were getting hotter than expect last month, for instance, Apple suggested that at least part of the problem was with Instagram, though it was also able to fix some of those issues with a software update. Read More The Apple Watch has a major issue but Apple is working on a fix Something is happening with Apple’s Mac and iPads Apple just revealed a new MacBook Pro – with a new colour

Sony Group Corp. is gearing up for a push into cloud gaming in the coming months as it

The grounding of a luxury cruise ship off the coast of Greenland on Monday highlighted the irony of

By Jody Godoy and Luc Cohen NEW YORK (Reuters) -Caroline Ellison, the former co-head of Sam Bankman-Fried's hedge fund, testified

TOKYO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jul 20, 2023--

A legal expert at Europe’s top court has said a lower court committed “errors in law” when it threw out a decision by the European Commission which would force Apple to pay more than 13 billion euro in back taxes to Ireland. The non-binding opinion is seen as a significant setback to Ireland’s defence of its past tax treatment of the US technology giant. In 2016, following an EU investigation which launched in 2014, the commission concluded that Ireland gave undue tax benefits to Apple, which would be illegal under EU state aid rules. Ireland and Apple fought the commission on the matter and in July 2020, the General Court of the European Union annulled the decision. However, the European Commission subsequently appealed against the decision to the European Court of Justice (CJEU) saying the lower court’s ruling was legally incorrect. On Thursday, Giovanni Pitruzzella, an advocate general at the CJEU, agreed that the earlier ruling had contained “a series of errors in law”. He said the judgment should be set aside and referred the case back to the General Court for a new decision. While the opinion of the advocate general is non-binding, it is usually followed by the court and therefore could have significant implications for corporation tax bills. There was no sweetheart deal Finance Minister Michael McGrath The commission’s original position was that that tax rulings issued by Ireland to Apple in 1991 and 2007 substantially and artificially lowered the tax paid by the iPhone manufacturer in the country since the early 90s, in a way which did not correspond to economic reality. As a result, competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager said Ireland had granted illegal tax benefits which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other business over many years. The investigation found that Apple had paid an effective corporate tax rate of 1% on its European profits in 2003, down to 0.005% in 2014, 50 euro for every one million euro of profit. The process involved recording almost all sales profits of two Irish incorporated companies, which the commission said only existed on paper. The companies, fully owned by Apple, held the rights to use the firm’s intellectual property to manufacture and sell its products outside North and South America. The commission said this situation allowed Apple to avoid taxation on almost all profits generated by sales of its products in the entire EU single market. It said this was due to Apple’s decision to record all sales in Ireland rather than in the countries where the products were sold. The findings were disputed by the Irish State, which said all tax owed had been collected, and Apple, which had come under scrutiny in the US for its tax practices years earlier. At the time, Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook, branded the EU findings as “political crap”, maddening and untrue. The Irish Government, which was also used to defending a comparatively low 12.5% corporation tax rate, said Europe had overstepped the mark in attempting to dictate tax laws and enforce retrospective taxes decades later. Ireland and Apple fought the commission on the matter and in July 2020, the General Court of the European Union annulled the decision. The General Court found that the commission had not shown that there was an advantage deriving from the adoption of the tax rulings. However, the commission subsequently appealed the decision to the European Court of Justice with Ms Vestager saying the lower court’s ruling contained errors of law. On Thursday, the advocate general agreed the General Court had erred when it ruled that the Commission had not shown to the requisite legal standard that the intellectual property licences held by the two incorporated companies and related profits, generated by the sales of Apple products outside the US, had to be attributed for tax purposes to the Irish branches. The advocate general was of the view that the General Court also failed to assess correctly the substance and consequences of certain methodological errors that, according to the Commission decision, “vitiated the tax rulings”. It is the non-binding opinion of Mr Pitruzzella that it is necessary for the General Court to carry out a new assessment. The decision of the CJEU on the matter is expected next year and will have significant implications for how member states grant tax breaks to major firms. Apple has argued it has been paying tax on the profits in question in the US, while Ireland has seen it necessary to defend its reputation on taxation issues to protect foreign direct investment. Last weekend, Finance Minister Michael McGrath had said the advocate general’s opinion would be “significant” but added it is not the final step in the process. Mr McGrath said: “We are confident in our position in respect of the Apple case. “We take encouragement from the findings they have made so far, but it is a significant day.” He added: “There was no sweetheart deal. “This was the application of Ireland’s statutory corporation tax code.” In the interim, the 13.1 billion euro has been held in an escrow fund pending the outcome of the case. The money, with interest, is due to be entered into the Irish exchequer if the commission wins the case. However, other member states may make claims that they are owed some of the money. If the commission loses the appeal, the large sum will be returned to Apple. Read More Smartphones ‘may be able to detect how drunk a person is with 98% accuracy’ Ireland and Apple await major development in long-running EU tax dispute Guidance urges parents not to buy smartphones for primary school children William ‘blown away’ by futuristic technology from Singapore start-ups Return of original Fortnite map causes record traffic on Virgin Media O2 network NatWest creates new AI-powered chatbot capable of ‘human-like’ conversations

Rumble, a streaming platform created to ‘protect free and open internet’ in response to cancel culture, has grown exponentially in recent months, signing exclusive deals with creators and streamers such as Russell Brand and Andrew Tate. It's most recent deal to be reached is with Kai Cenat and IShowSpeed. The pair signed to Rumble to produce a handful of exclusive livestreams a month. Whilst the pair will still stream on YouTube and Twitch, the signing with Rumble comes after both streamers have faced numerous bans from YouTube and Twitch for content violations. Speed is currently facing a permanent ban on Twitch for ‘spam or deceptive practices’, despite Cenat trying to negotiate with Twitch to unban him. Cenat, who himself has faced bans from both Twitch and YouTube, has threatened to leave Twitch permanently if faced with another ban. The first exclusive live stream show will premiere on May 26, named The Kai ‘n Speed Show. The creators say they’re grateful to have full creative control on this new platform. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter Cenat is the fourth most subscribed Twitch streamer, with 5.2 million followers. Speed boasts 16 million subscribers on YouTube. The pair recently collaborated on a song together titled Dogs. The exclusive show follows a string of deals made between Rumble and creators. In September 2022, Rumble announced an exclusive show with Russell Brand after Brand claimed he was being ‘censored’ on YouTube for spreading Covid misinformation. During the announcement, Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski told users “Russell is known for his unfiltered opinions, and we are proud to serve as the technology platform where he can grow his audience.” Similarly, in late 2022, Rumble signed a $9 million deal with Andrew Tate after he was banned on both TikTok and YouTube. As a result of this long line of deals with controversial creators, Rumble has subsequently been associated for being a place for outspoken creators to flock to when they get banned from mainstream platforms. 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.