Killing Satoshi, an upcoming biopic about the elusive creator of Bitcoin, will reportedly rely heavily on artificial intelligence to generate locations and adjust actors' performances, Variety reports. The film was announced in 2025 as being directed by Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity, The Edge of Tomorrow) and starring Casey Affleck and Pete Davidson in undisclosed roles, but its connection to overhyped technology was previously understood to begin and end with cryptocurrency.According to a UK casting notice viewed by Variety, the producers of Killing Satoshi reserve the right to "change, add to, take from, translate, reformat or reprocess actors' performances, using "generative artificial intelligence (GAI) and/or machine learning technologies." No digital replicas will be created of performers, but it sounds like plenty of other AI-driven tweaks are on the table. The production's use of AI will also extend to the setting of its shoots, per Variety's source. Killing Satoshi will be shot on a "markerless performative capture stage" and things like backgrounds and locations will be entirely generated by AI.You guess is as good as mine as to why a film about blockchain technology needs to be filmed this way, but Doug Liman has been connected with plenty of unusual projects in the past, including a rumored Tom Cruise film that was supposed to film on the International Space Station. Killing Satoshi will be far less practical in comparison, and walking a much finer line of what's acceptable in the entertainment industry. A major sticking point in SAG-AFTRA's 2023 contract negotiations was guaranteeing protections for actors who could be replaced by AI. Equity, the union representing actors in the UK, is currently negotiating protections for members that are concerned that AI could be used to reproduce their likenesses and voices and let studios use them without their consent.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/bitcoin-biopic-starring-casey-affleck-to-use-ai-to-generate-locations-and-tweak-performances-210657775.html?src=rss
An upcoming update to Steam includes a helpful improvement to game reviews. As part of the Steam Client Beta update Valve released on February 12, users will now be able to attach information about their hardware specifications when they post a new game review or update an old one.It's not uncommon to find negative reviews that complain about a game's performance, information that's hard to draw a conclusion from without knowing what kind of hardware the reviewer is using. With specs attached, the usefulness of complaints becomes a little bit easier to gauge. A game's sales performance and discoverability on Steam is heavily influenced by its review average, a data point Steam users sometimes manipulate for reasons unconnected to the quality of a game. Provided reviewers actually attach their specs at least in the beta, the feature is entirely optional Valve's mercurial reviews ecosystem could end up becoming more nuanced overall.Alongside the new option in reviews, Valve is also experimenting with a way for users to share "anonymized framerate data" with the company. When framerate sharing is enabled, "Steam will collect gameplay framerate data, stored without connection to your Steam account but identified with the kind of hardware you are playing on," Valve says. The feature is specifically focused on devices running SteamOS, Valve's Linux-based operating system for the Steam Deck and some third-party handhelds. The extra information could help the company's attempts to improve game compatibility using software like Proton.The beta update also includes bug fixes, and a tweak to how Valve collects feedback about whether a game should be Deck Verified. Now when Steam prompts you to confirm whether you agree with a game's rating, if you disagree, you can provide a reason as to why.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/pc/valves-latest-steam-beta-lets-you-add-your-pcs-specs-to-game-reviews-195038078.html?src=rss
The forthcoming Nintendo Virtual Boy accessory for Switch and Switch 2 can play VR-supported games, as reported by Video Games Chronicle. There are four available games to play, including Super Mario Odyssey, Super Smash Bros Ultimate, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker.
These aren't new VR builds of the games, rather they are the versions previously released for the Nintendo Labo VR set. This was a kit for the original Switch that allowed users to build a cardboard VR headset, among other items.
However, this is very good news for Switch 2 owners as Labo creations generally don't work with Nintendo's shiny new console. So this is the only way to experience the VR versions of the aforementioned four games. It's also worth noting that the Switch 2 upgrade for Breath of the Wild still includes the VR mode.
There are some caveats. The Virtual Boy accessory is available to purchase as a hardware unit or in cardboard. The cardboard version is much cheaper, at $25, and is actually the preferred method for playing these games in VR.
That's because the hardware version sits on a stand, like the original Virtual Boy, making it harder to move one's head around. The cardboard headset is free from those constraints. The hardware also includes red filters over the lenses, to better mimic the original experience, but these can be removed.
However, the hardware version is better for playing actual Virtual Boy games, as they were designed for a static headset resting on a table. You'll have to decide if that trade-off is worth $100. It's also worth noting that Virtual Boy games will not work with the original Labo VR headset, which is a bummer for OG Switch fans.
Both versions of the Virtual Boy accessories will be available on February 17, which is the same day several of the retro console's games head to the Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack subscription service. They can be purchased at the My Nintendo Store. We got a chance to try the headset and came away fairly impressed, though noted that the revamped accessory is "just as eccentric and ungainly as the original was three decades ago."
For those wondering what all the fuss is about, the Virtual Boy was an actual console released by Nintendo all the way back in 1995. It was one of the first mass-market VR devices and, as such, was decades ahead of the curve. It was cumbersome, the games were only in red and there was nothing by way of motion control. Americans only got 14 games before the console was discontinued.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/nintendo/nintendos-virtual-boy-accessory-lets-you-play-vr-mario-and-zelda-on-switch-2-172138483.html?src=rss
You've seen this movie before: A disheveled man (Sam Rockwell) busts into a restaurant, threatening to blow up the joint unless a crew of people joins him. Like Groundhog Day, he's been through this countless times before, and he immediately starts recounting otherwise unknowable details to convince the diner patrons. Like 12 Monkeys, he's from the future the timely twist in Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die is that, rather than a world-ending virus, he needs help preventing a humanity-ending AI from being born. Good Luck is more of a primal scream than a thoughtful articulation about where everything went wrong. There's a bit of "old man yells at cloud" energy here (director Gore Verbinski is 61, and screenwriter Matthew Robinson is 47), but it fits the film's satirical tone. Looking around at the world today, who doesn't wish they could warn their past selves about the tech industry and the new ruling class it helped breed. Rockwell's character eventually wrangles a ragtag crew of future saviors: Mark and Janet (Michael Pena and Zazie Beetz), a married couple of high school teachers; Susan (Juno Temple), a distraught mother; and Ingrid (Haley Lu Richardson), a sad woman wearing a princess dress. There's also Asim Chaudhry's Scott, who mostly serves as comic relief, but doesn't get any real backstory like the others. Good Luck wastes no time fleshing out its present near-dystopia in episodic chapters. It turns out Mark and Janet are also on the run from smartphone-obsessed high schoolers, who spend their days scrolling through endless TikTok-like feeds. Susan is forced to confront a horrific situation around her son (I won't get into specifics here, but it's a distinctly American phenomenon). And Ingrid is literally allergic to Wi-Fi and smart devices, which makes it hard to fit into the modern world. Each of these scenarios play out like mini Black Mirror episodes. Everything is heightened to the absurd, and all the problems can be traced back to unchecked technological encroachment and capitalism. Nothing subtle there. The glimpses of an apocalyptic future are even less so all we see are destroyed cities, people trapped in VR headsets (which place them in an AI-generated reality) and robots hunting down anti-AI humans. Sam Rockwell in Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die.Briarcliff EntertainmentGood Luck is at its best when it's simply having fun. As Rockwell and crew make their way to their final destination a child who is about to invent true AI they encounter pig-faced assassins, Stepford-esque parents and an adorably horrific kaiju. Even when faced with half-baked scripts, Verbinski always manages to impress visually (think back to the creepiness of The Ring, or the wildly entertaining set pieces in Pirates of the Caribbean). That's as true as ever here, where the final scene evokes the hyper-tech chaos of Akira.As much as Good Luck, Have Fun, Dont Die, evokes classic sci-fi, it still cant hold a candle to the sheer terror of seeing AI unleash a nuclear bomb in Terminator 2. And despite its zanines, it doesnt reach the madcap heights of Gilliams Brazil or 12 Monkeys. But if youre sick of having AI products shoved down your throat, and you think the notion of true AI is a farce, its a fun way to channel your rage.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/good-luck-have-fun-dont-die-rails-against-ai-in-style-154437854.html?src=rss
Meta has backed away from highly controversial facial recognition tech in its products and services before, but seemingly not so far that it isnt willing to have another crack at it. A new report from The New York Times claims Mark Zuckerbergs company wants to add facial recognition to its lineup of branded smart glasses at some point this year.
The NYT spoke to four anonymous people with knowledge of Metas plans, who told the publication that the feature is codenamed "Name Tag" internally. As youd expect, it would let people wearing Meta-powered Oakley or Ray-Ban glasses identify people and "get information about them" using AI.
Such technology naturally carries huge privacy and ethical risks, which is reportedly why Meta was hesitant to unveil Name Tag at a conference for the blind last year. It also may have shelved plans to include facial recognition in the first version of its smart glasses, which launched in 2023.
In an internal memo from Metas Reality Labs viewed by the NYT, Meta said that the current political instability in the US presents a good opportunity for it to push ahead with its plans. "We will launch during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have their resources focused on other concerns," it said.
With the smart glasses market expected to become more competitive in the coming years, Meta seemingly believes facial recognition would give it an edge on rival products from the likes of OpenAI. As for how it would work, the company is considering its options. It could recognize people the wearer is already connected to via one of Metas apps, or potentially display information from public Instagram accounts. The NYTs sources said that universal facial recognition, effectively allowing you to look up the identity of anyone you walked past, would not be possible.
Meta shut down Facebooks Face Recognition system, used when tagging people in photos, in 2021, following widespread public backlash over privacy concerns. Three years later, it brought it back, this time as a tool for Instagram and Facebook designed to detect scam ads that use the faces of celebrities and other public figures. Last year Meta rolled out the feature beyond the US, so Facebook and later Instagram users in the UK, Europe and South Korea could also use it on their accounts.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/meta-is-reportedly-working-to-bring-facial-recognition-to-its-smart-glasses-144721330.html?src=rss
Every once in a while, a product comes along that sparks a bit of joy in our jaded hearts. This is what happened with the Kodak Charmera, a $30 tiny toy camera that was nearly impossible to get ahold of in the first couple of months after its release, selling out immediately over waves of blind box restocks. Despite the gimmick of it all, the Charmera was just too cute for some of us to resist, and we sprang when they finally started becoming more readily available.
A few of us on the Engadget team have one now, and even with all of its shortcomings, we kind of love this thing. Here's what two of our writers think about it.
Lately, it feels like a chore to carry around a full-frame mirrorless camera. My Nikon definitely feels like the right tool to precisely capture a moment in time with fast autofocus and plenty of image resolution. Other times, that perfect moment is more casual, like catching up with friends over dim sum or killing time while you're snowed in at a cabin in Vermont. In these cases, there's no reason to carry around a hulking camera and lens to snap a flawless photo that I have to edit later. Instead, something light, discreet and playful feels like the right tool for the occasion.
Jackson Chen for Engadget
That's where the Kodak Charmera comes in. It's a toy camera with a 35mm lens with a fixed f/2.4 aperture and a 1/4-inch sensor. In other words, the photos this thing takes are about equivalent to what you would get with a crappy flip phone from the 2000s that also plays Snake.
Kodak is clearly trying to wring out the longing for nostalgia within all of us, and has nailed it with the Charmera, which is even inspired by its old-school disposable Fling cameras. It's definitely not as good as the smartphone in your pocket, but there's something disarming about snapping a quick shot with a tiny block of plastic that's lighter than your keys.
Playing around with the Charmera for a few weeks gave me a healthy reminder that the sillier and more transient parts of life don't need the technical prowess of an expensive camera. Obviously, the Chamera produces photos of terrible quality at 1.6 megapixels and can't really capture anything fast-moving or in low light, but it's undeniably fun and hard to resist shooting with. And sometimes, you and your friends are just doing wildly unserious things and you want a camera that matches that energy.
Jackson Chen, Contributing Reporter
Every time I pull out the Kodak Charmera in public to snap a few pictures, I'm immediately met with a barrage of questions and squeals of delight from full-grown adults: "What is that?"; "Is that a camera?"; "Does it really take pictures?"; "Can I see it?" It is the kind of accessory that doubles as a conversation starter, an effect that's turned out to be as joyous as taking pictures with the camera itself. I've been trying really hard to spend less time on social media and my phone in general lately, and having a two-inch camera clipped to me has made for a pretty fun shift in how I document the day-to-day.
As the resurgence of compact digital cameras has shown us, a lot of people are yearning for a time of simpler tech when we had personal devices that could do useful things, like take decent photos and connect us to our friends, but didn't consume our lives entirely. Companies like Camp Snap have shaped their entire brands around recapturing that magic, and some consumers have shown that they're willing to sacrifice in areas like image quality in exchange for a taste of it, too. The Kodak Charmera isn't the kind of product you go into purchasing with high expectations. It is clearly a toy that is only going to be capable of so much.
Cheyenne MacDonald for Engadget
As Jackson noted, the low-resolution 1,440 x 1,080 pictures look about on par with those you'd have taken on a flip phone 15 or 20 years ago. In the right lighting conditions with a clearly defined subject, they're not so bad. But selfies, portraits and nature photos will generally look washed out. It can record videos too and you should set similarly low expectations for these.
Despite all that, I've been pleasantly surprised by how much I'm enjoying the Charmera experience. Its crunchy photos are just good enough to feel like they're successfully preserving a moment in time. And being so tiny, it's really convenient to bring everywhere. It even came with me to CES. The Charmera takes a microSD card (sold separately), allowing for tons of storage and easy transferring. There are a bunch of built-in filters you can apply, oo, which have been fun to play around with.
If I want high-quality photos, this isn't the camera I'm going to reach for. But it's great for low-stakes situations when all I care about is taking some pictures I can look back on fondly later. Consider me charmed. Cheyenne MacDonald, Weekend Editor
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cameras/the-ridiculously-tiny-kodak-charmera-captured-our-hearts-and-lots-of-shoddy-pictures-140000245.html?src=rss
Meta went to court this week in two major trials over alleged harms facilitated by its platform. In New Mexico, the state's attorney general has accused the company of facilitating child exploitation and harming children through addictive features. In a separate case in Los Angeles, a California woman sued the company over mental health harms she says she suffered as the result of addictive design choices from Meta and others.In both cases, Meta has disputed the idea that social media should be considered an "addiction." On the stand this week, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri said that social media isn't "clinically addictive," comparing it to being "addicted" to a Netflix show.In opening statements in the New Mexico trial, Meta's lawyer Kevin Huff went further. He told the jury that "social media addiction is not a thing" because it's not in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the handbook used by mental health professionals in the US."According to the American Psychiatric Association, they don't recognize the concept of social media addiction in the same way as addiction to drugs and alcohol," Huff said during opening arguments that were broadcast by Courtroom View Network. "What you see on the screen is what's called the DSM, which is basically the official manual for recognized mental disorders. The American Psychiatric Association studied this and decided that social media addiction is not a thing."But the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has never said that social media addiction doesn't exist. The organization provides information and resources about social media addiction on its website. "Social media addiction is not currently listed as a diagnosis in the DSM-5-TRbut that does not mean it doesnt exist," the APA said in a statement to Engadget.Dr. Tania Moretta, a clinical pyschophysiology researcher who has studied social media addiction, agrees. "The absence of a DSM classification does not mean that a behavior cannot be addictive, maladaptive or clinically significant," she told Engadget. That argument, she said, "reflects a misunderstanding" of how psychiatry professionals define and classify conditions. "Diagnostic manuals formalize scientific consensus; they do not define the boundaries of legitimate scientific inquiry. Many maladaptive behaviors and clinically significant symptom patterns are studied and treated well before receiving official classification."Meta's critics have long claimed that the company has profited from addictive features that hook children and teens. The trials in Los Angeles and New Mexico are just the start of several court battles over the issue. The social media company is also facing a high-profile trial with school districts in June, and lawsuits from 41 state attorneys general. Moretta said that social media addiction is a field that requires more study, but that there is already evidence that it can have harmful effects on some people. "At present, from a scientific perspective, there is documented evidence that social media use disorder is associated with both psychophysiological alterations, including changes in reward/motivational and inhibitory/regulatory systems, and clinically significant negative impacts on functioning (e.g., sleep disturbances, psychological distress, impairment in social, academic, or occupational domains)," she said. "The key question is not whether all social media use is addictive, but whether a subset of users exhibits patterns consistent with behavioral addiction models and whether specific platform design features may exacerbate vulnerability in predisposed individuals."Both trials are ongoing and expected to last the next several weeks. In New Mexico, jurors have already heard from former employee turned whistleblower Arturo Bejar and former exec Brian Boland, both of whom have publicly criticized the company for not prioritizing safety. In Los Angeles, Mosseri's testimony has wrapped up, but Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is expected to testify next week. The trials will also feature extensive internal documents from Meta, including details about the company's own research into the mental health impacts of its platform on young people.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/meta-really-wants-you-to-believe-social-media-addiction-is-not-a-real-thing-130000257.html?src=rss
One good thing about virtual private networks (VPNs) is that when they don't work, the problem is almost always solvable without technical training. Although it's aggravating when your VPN randomly drops your connection, the chances are good that you can handle the issue yourself without getting tech support involved.If your VPN is repeatedly disconnecting from the server, I recommend dealing with the problem immediately. When you have your kill switch on as good cybersecurity habits dictate, VPN drops will kick you off the internet. Without that feature enabled, it'll expose your real identity and location online. Thats not a big deal if youre just aiming to, say, stream an international sporting event, but it could be an existential issue if youre using the VPN as a workaround against government censorship. Either way, you can address the issue by working through the eight troubleshooting steps below and checking whether they've solved your problem.8 reasons your VPN keeps disconnectingI've organized these root causes in ascending order of how much effort the solution takes. Try the easier fixes before moving on to the more complex or expensive ones.1. You're using the VPN on too many devices at onceMost VPNs limit the number of devices you can connect at the same time on a single subscription. Some services, like Surfshark, claim to offer unlimited simultaneous connections, but they'll still cut you off if they see signs of abuse. Generally, you can install the VPN on as many devices as you like; it just can't be actively running on more than the limit.If you're trying to connect to the VPN on a new device and it repeatedly disconnects, check how many other phones, computers or smart TVs it's already running on. Pay attention to devices where you have the VPN set to auto-connect on startup, as you may have missed that it's running. Disconnect from the VPN on one of those devices and try again on the new one.2. Your VPN server is slow or overloadedThe problem often rests with the VPN server you're trying to connect to. Providers regularly shut down servers for routine maintenance. Sometimes, a server is technically online, but it's under such a heavy user load that it can't maintain a connection. It's also possible that the server is so physically far away from you that the connection keeps timing out.In cases like these, the answer is simple: use another server. Pick a different server by disconnecting the VPN and reconnecting to the same location. If the new server has the same problems, try another location, assuming you don't need an IP address in a specific country.3. You're using an unstable VPN protocolAs I explained in my article on how a VPN works, a VPN protocol is the set of instructions at the heart of everything a VPN does. Not all protocols are the same. For example, OpenVPN over TCP prioritizes speed over connection stability, causing more frequent disconnections. It's also possible for certain networks to block some VPN protocols but not others (see #8).If changing servers didn't help your unstable connection, try switching protocols. WireGuard, OpenVPN over UDP and IKEv2 are best for stability. You can almost always find the protocol options in the Settings page of your VPN app.4. Power-save settings are interferingA VPN almost always runs in the background. In some cases, a device's battery saver settings might shut down the VPN to stop the battery from draining. See if turning off power-save mode stops your VPN from disconnecting randomly (and maybe plug in your device while you're at it).5. Your internet connection isn't stableYour VPN needs to pass traffic through an ISP like any other online app it just encrypts that traffic first. If you don't have a good internet connection, you won't have a good VPN connection. When you notice your VPN randomly disconnecting, check whether you have problems with your home internet connection. Resetting your modem by turning it off for at least 10 seconds may solve the problem, but you can also just wait for your internet to improve with time.6. Another program is interfering with the VPNOther security programs are a frequent cause of VPN disruptions. If you connect to an office VPN, for example, you likely won't be able to have a personal VPN running at the same time. Likewise, if you use an antivirus program or have a firewall on your device, it may be blocking your VPN from connecting. See if you can configure the firewall to allow traffic through a port used by a VPN protocol.7. Your software is out of dateIf none of the fixes have worked so far, you can often solve your connection problems by updating all the software involved. For optimal security, you should be installing updates the moment they're available anyway, so this will protect you even if it doesn't directly solve your VPN problem.Update your VPN client and your operating system, then try connecting again. If you're still having problems, try updating your router. You can reach its control panel by entering its default IP address into the URL bar of your browser. Update it as well, then try once more.8. Your network or ISP is blocking VPN trafficThere's a chance that your problem originates with your network or ISP, not on the VPN or any device you own. Some networks, especially at offices and schools, automatically block any VPN traffic they detect. These restrictions can even be imposed by entire countries, most infamously in China.Should this turn out to be your problem, turn on any obfuscation features that may be built into your VPN. Using an obfuscated protocol, connect to a server outside the location being censored, then use the internet as normal. This will be much more difficult if you're in a country where VPNs are illegal or restricted, but there's still hope if you can safely send an email, contact a VPN provider and ask if they'll send you a configuration directly. Proton VPN is one company that's officially willing to do that.If you still find your VPN disconnecting mid-session, you may have a rare problem that doesn't show up on this list. Contact your VPN's support staff and do what they recommend. If possible, chat wih a live support technician so you can tell them what you've already tried.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/vpn/why-does-my-vpn-keep-disconnecting-130000620.html?src=rss
A few days ago, a Redditor posted in the community for DoorDash drivers that they received an offer to close a Waymo vehicles door. The job paid a guaranteed fee of $6.25 with a $5 extra on top of it after the DoorDasher verifies that it has been completed. Waymo has confirmed to 404Media and TechCrunch that, yes, it is indeed paying Dashers to shut the doors of its self-driving cars. And it makes sense because, well, theres nobody to do it otherwise if a passenger accidentally leaves it open. The Alphabet subsidiary and DoorDash told the publications that its currently running a pilot program in Atlanta, wherein if one of its vehicles doors is left ajar, nearby Dashers are notified. Waymos self-driving vehicles cant leave if one of its doors remains open, so the company is framing the program as a way to enhance its fleets efficiency. Waymo told 404Media that the program started earlier this year and that payments are structured to ensure competitive and fair compensation for Dashers.To note, this isnt the first time the two companies have teamed up. In October 2025, Waymos self-driving cars became a delivery option for DoorDash customers in Phoenix, Arizona. To get a Waymo delivery, customers will have to choose opt in to autonomous delivery during checkout and to physically retrieve their order from the cars trunk when it arrives. This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/doordashers-are-getting-paid-to-close-waymos-self-driving-car-doors-122711640.html?src=rss
