Blog

Reaching the top of the IT profession means treading a careful line between showing off and delivering results. Here’s how to do it.

A camera attached to the Polaris Dawn Crew Dragon spacecraft recorded some remarkable footage from 450 miles above Earth.

In What We’re Listening To, Engadget writers and editors discuss some of the recent music releases we’ve had on repeat. This installment has everything from jazz standards to The Jesus Lizard.

Lady Gaga – Harlequin

I wasn’t even a minute into Harlequin before I had the realization, Oh, I am going to become so annoying in my love for this. Unfortunately for everyone in my life (and doubly so because I’m singing along), I’ve had it blasting all weekend since the surprise drop on Friday. Gaga is a powerhouse, and as much as I adore her take on pop, I’m always blown away when I hear her do jazz. And Harlequin is brimming with it. 

Harlequin is a companion album to a soon-to-be-released movie (Joker: Folie à Deux) and almost entirely comprises cover songs — a combination that might typically put me off. But Gaga’s breezy versions of classics like “World on a String” and “Smile” are almost chilling. Her energy in tracks like “Gonna Build a Mountain” is through the roof. I could have done without “Oh, When the Saints,” but I’m really just nit-picking now. There are only two original songs on the album and they are completely different beasts, each impactful in its own way. “Happy Mistake” is a clear standout, and I’ll be softly weeping to that one for years to come.

Babe Haven – Nuisance

On the exact opposite end of the spectrum, I’ve been really into punk band Babe Haven’s most recent album, Nuisance, lately. It’s 25-ish minutes of queer femme rage and I can’t get enough of it. Check it out on Bandcamp. 

— Cheyenne MacDonald, Weekend Editor

The Jesus Lizard – Rack

Even laudatory reviews of comeback albums lean on expectations tempered with preemptive apology or pity praise. A comparison to headier days of musical urgency is inevitable; it stings for the same reasons as hearing “you look great for your age.” I wish there were some way to take stock of Rack without that baggage, because The Jesus Lizard doesn’t merely sound better than a band which took three decades off has any right to, it simply does not sound as though time has passed at all. 

Rack broods with baffling inconspicuousness amid their oeuvre. Sure, “What If?” doesn’t reach the slash and sprawl of earlier meanderings like “Rodeo in Joliet,” but “Lord Godiva” glides on the most Duane Denison of Duane Denison riffs, lightning and crude oil. The manic physicality of David Yow’s voice is unaltered — neither more harried after 60+ years of swinging at ghosts, nor attenuated by the effort. 

So many bands seemingly frozen in amber reemerge denuded, as though covering themselves. They’d be frantically recapturing their glory days, if they had the energy to do anything frantic anymore. Rack, through sheer ferocity, is instead a band continuing to do exactly what it always has, just as well as it always has, and sounding really fucking cool doing it.

— Avery Ellis, Deputy Editor, Reports

Sabrina Carpenter – Short n’ Sweet

There’s a part of me that hates keeping up with pop music, and that’s the part of me that cringes when I realize the last few albums I’ve listened to have been the ones by pop princesses Ariana Grande, Billie Eilish, Taylor Swift and more. That’s also the part of me that resisted listening to Sabrina Carpenter’s latest album for months (and probably the part of me that refused to watch the incredible Schitt’s Creek until this year).

I say all that only to explain why I’m so late to appreciate the goodness that is Short n’ Sweet. And the non-self-judgy part of me has unabashedly loved Carpenter’s new music and been asking all my friends if they’ve listened to her songs. When I talked to my various friend groups about her, what became clear is how there’s something for everyone, regardless of the variety in our tastes.

I’m a fan of R&B, hip hop and basically anything I can dance or sing to. The tracks “bet u wanna,” “Taste” and “Feather” have become highly repeated items on my playlist and yes, I did go back into her older discography for some of those titles. However, my current absolute favorite is “Espresso.” It’s got a catchy hook, clever lyrics and a groovy beat that delicately straddles the line between upbeat and lowkey. I love the wordplay and how, when woven with the rhythm and melody, it initially sounded to me like Carpenter was singing in a different language. And as someone who works in tech and is occasionally a gamer, I especially adored the use of the words “up down left right,” “switch” and Nintendo. Truly, rhyming “espresso” with “Nintendo” wasn’t something I would have expected to work, but work it did.

But back to the point I was making earlier: Even if that sort of chill dance club vibe isn’t your thing, there’s plenty in Short n’ Sweet that might appeal to you. I wasn’t as huge a fan of “Please please please,” for example, but I know friends who love it. And while “Bed Chem” and “Good Graces” aren’t hitting my feels the same way “Espresso” is, those two are among her highest played songs on Spotify. I’m also starting to warm up to “Juno.”

All that is to say, we all have different tastes. Maybe you’re more of a Chappell Roan fan. I like some of her latest tracks too, just not as much as I’ve enjoyed Carpenter’s. I also really enjoy the brilliance that is “Die With a Smile” by Bruno Mars and Lady Gaga, which is something I’ll be adding to my karaoke duet repertoire, but am already playing less frequently nowadays. If you have a preference for music from the likes of Ariana Grande, NewJeans and Doja Cat, you’ll probably have a good time with Sabrina Carpenter. And since I’m so late to the party, you probably have already.

— Cherlynn Low, Deputy Editor, Reviews

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/music/what-were-listening-to-harlequin-or-lg-65-rack-and-more-003037241.html?src=rss

Ready to ditch your cable box, but want to hang onto linear programming? You should take a look at Hulu Plus Live TV. Here’s everything you should know.

Jack Black tries (and fails) to teach Jason Momoa how to craft in the first official clip from next year’s A Minecraft Movie.

You can finally buy a graphics card thanks to falling GPU prices. Here’s how Nvidia, AMD, and Intel GPU pricing look in the first quarter of 2024.

Razer’s Kraken V4 Pro headphones are decked out in gamer audio luxuries, but their secret weapon is a haptics system that plays to the tune of in-game content.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed bill SB 1047, which aims to prevent bad actors from using AI to cause “critical harm” to humans. The California state assembly passed the legislation by a margin of 41-9 on August 28, but several organizations including the Chamber of Commerce had urged Newsom to veto the bill. In his veto message on Sept. 29, Newsom said the bill is “well-intentioned” but “does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions – so long as a large system deploys it.” 

SB 1047 would have made the developers of AI models liable for adopting safety protocols that would stop catastrophic uses of their technology. That includes preventive measures such as testing and outside risk assessment, as well as an “emergency stop” that would completely shut down the AI model. A first violation would cost a minimum of $10 million and $30 million for subsequent infractions. However, the bill was revised to eliminate the state attorney general’s ability to sue AI companies with negligent practices if a catastrophic event does not occur. Companies would only be subject to injunctive relief and could be sued if their model caused critical harm.

This law would apply to AI models that cost at least $100 million to use and 10^26 FLOPS for training. It also would have covered derivative projects in instances where a third party has invested $10 million or more in developing or modifying the original model. Any company doing business in California would be subject to the rules if it meets the other requirements. Addressing the bill’s focus on large-scale systems, Newsom said, “I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology.” The veto message adds:

By focusing only on the most expensive and large-scale models, SB 1047 establishes a regulatory framework that could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology. Smaller, specialized models may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models targeted by SB 1047 – at the potential expense of curtailing the very innovation that fuels advancement in favor of the public good.

The earlier version of SB 1047 would have created a new department called the Frontier Model Division to oversee and enforce the rules. Instead, the bill was altered ahead of a committee vote to place governance at the hands of a Board of Frontier Models within the Government Operations Agency. The nine members would be appointed by the state’s governor and legislature.

The bill faced a complicated path to the final vote. SB 1047 was authored by California State Sen. Scott Wiener, who told TechCrunch: “We have a history with technology of waiting for harms to happen, and then wringing our hands. Let’s not wait for something bad to happen. Let’s just get out ahead of it.” Notable AI researchers Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio backed the legislation, as did the Center for AI Safety, which has been raising the alarm about AI’s risks over the past year.

“Let me be clear – I agree with the author – we cannot afford to wait for a major catastrophe to occur before taking action to protect the public,” Newsom said in the veto message. The statement continues:

California will not abandon its responsibility. Safety protocols must be adopted. Proactive guardrails should be implemented, and severe consequences for bad actors must be clear and enforceable. I do not agree, however, that to keep the public safe, we must settle for a solution that is not informed by an empirical trajectory analysis of AI systems and capabilities. Ultimately, any framework for effectively regulating AI needs to keep pace with the technology itself.

SB 1047 drew heavy-hitting opposition from across the tech space. Researcher Fei-Fei Li critiqued the bill, as did Meta Chief AI Scientist Yann LeCun, for limiting the potential to explore new uses of AI. The trade group repping tech giants such as Amazon, Apple and Google said SB 1047 would limit new developments in the state’s tech sector. Venture capital firm Andreeson Horowitz and several startups also questioned whether the bill placed unnecessary financial burdens on AI innovators. Anthropic and other opponents of the original bill pushed for amendments that were adopted in the version of SB 1047 that passed California’s Appropriations Committee on August 15. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/california-gov-newsom-vetoes-bill-sb-1047-that-aims-to-prevent-ai-disasters-220826827.html?src=rss