The Indie Game Awards has stripped Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 of two major awards, including Game of the Year and Debut Game. This is due to developer Sandfall Interactive’s use of generative AI, as reported by Mashable.

This looks to be fairly cut and dry. The awards ceremony clearly states in its FAQ that any game that uses generative AI in the development process would be “strictly ineligible” for nominations. It was recently revealed that Sandfall did indeed use generative AI while making Clair Obscur.

The company says it was only for placeholder textures that were later removed, but a few squeezed past the QA process and made their way to the final game and, as such, the internet. The Indie Game Awards is clear about disallowing any use of generative AI and, so, here we are.

“In light of Sandfall Interactive confirming the use of gen AI art in production on the day of the Indie Game Awards 2025 premiere, this does disqualify Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 from its nomination,” the organization wrote. “While the assets in question were patched out and it is a wonderful game, it does go against the regulations we have in place.”

Six One Indie, the company behind the ceremony, deserves a smidge of the blame here. These awards were initially handed out last week and we’ve known about the whole Clair Obscur AI thing for months. It says it didn’t discover Sandfall’s use of AI until December 18, the day the winners were announced. A Google search on December 17 likely would’ve helped. It is worth noting, however, that Sandfall did previously agree that no generative AI was used during development as part of the submission process. 

In any event, the second-highest scoring titles in each category now gets the award. This means that Blue Prince is now Game of the Year and Sorry We’re Closed snags Debut Game.

Despite this AI controversy, Clair Obscur had a record-setting night at this month’s The Game Awards. It won just about everything it was put up for, including Game of the Year. It also made our list of the best games of 2025. The developer announced that it had sold 5 million copies back in October. That number is surely much higher by now.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/the-indie-game-awards-snatches-back-two-trophies-from-clair-obscur-over-its-use-of-generative-ai-164730842.html?src=rss

The video games industry in 2025 finds itself caught between the familiar forces of consolidation and job losses that have plagued creative industries, and a newer development: governments and the ultra-wealthy have begun treating games as tools of political influence. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund closed a $55 billion deal for EA this year and acquired Niantic, the makers of Pokemon Go, in March.

Microsoft’s 2023 acquisition of Activision already signaled the direction of travel. The workforce has borne the costs of this consolidation. More than 5,000 jobs have been lost in the industry this year, and several studios have shuttered, including Monolith Productions. The instability has pushed unions into greater prominence: United Videogame Workers formed in the US and Canada in March as part of the Communications Workers of America, and the firing of 30 staff from Rockstar Games in the UK brought the IWGB Game Workers Union into the spotlight.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has posted AI-generated images of the president as Halo’s Master Chief and used Pokemon and Halo memes to recruit for ICE.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

When Spike Jonze’s movie Her dropped back in 2013, I thought it was a great work of total fiction. Who would actually befriend an AI bot, let alone fall in love with them? Fast forward 12 years, and I couldn’t have been more wrong. Not only do people love chatting with AI bots, they are actually developing deep connections with them. I still don’t get it, but I can’t deny it: People like these chatbots a lot.

Part of what people like about conversations with generative AI is the “personality” of each bot—or, at least, its perceived personality. After all, ChatGPT isn’t a monolith: You can adjust the bot to sound wildly different than it does on someone else’s app, which raises some questions for me regarding these curated companions. But I digress: This article isn’t necessarily a critique of how people are attaching themselves to ChatGPT; rather, I’m sharing the news that OpenAI is now giving you more control over how the bot sounds and responds in your conversations.

Curate your perfect AI companion

On Friday, OpenAI announced new controls for ChaGPT’s “Personalization.” In a post on X, the company revealed that users can now adjust their chatbot’s “characteristics,” or, in other words, its overall personality. These are adjustments to the personality types that OpenAI has already let you choose from, which include one of eight options: “Default” (preset style and tone); “Professional” (polished and precise); “Friendly” (warm and chatty); “Candid” (direct and encouraging); “Quirky” (playful and imaginative); “Efficient” (concise and plain); “Nerdy” (exploratory and enthusiastic); and “Cynical” (critical and sarcastic).

But no matter which of these personalities you pick, you now have four “characteristics” to adjust to fine-tune the overall experience. There’s “Warm,” “Enthusiastic,” “Headers & Lists,” and “Emoji,” with the option to have more or less of each, or the default amount, as OpenAI sees fit. For Warm, you can either have ChatGPT be friendlier and more personable, or more professional and factual. With Enthusiastic, you can choose the bot to have more energy and excitement, or be calmer and more neutral. “Headers & Lists” lets you choose between clear formatting and lists, or more paragraphs. And, of course, you can control whether ChatGPT uses more emoji, or fewer, depending on your sense of fun and joy.

As usual, you can take advantage of custom instructions to guide ChatGPT’s personality in a direction you like, especially when the presets don’t give you those options. For example, if you’d like ChatGPT to talk to you like a pirate, or if you want it to end every response with a certain catchphrase, here’s your chance to influence the bot.

I’m really not someone who uses ChatGPT outside of testing it for coverage, so I can’t speak to whether these additional controls are useful. But if you want to try making your version of ChatGPT your ideal “AI companion,” the controls are at your disposal. You’ll find these options wherever you access ChatGPT. You can either access it from Settings > Personalization, or from the Personalization shortcut in the ChatGPT menu.

An investigation by the New York Times into Uber’s background checks and safety procedures for its drivers found a patchwork approach that opens the door for violent felons to drive for the ride-hailing platform.

Uber outright rejects applicants convicted of murder, sexual assault, kidnapping and terrorism. However, in 22 states, the Times found Uber can approve applicants convicted of many other offenses including child abuse, assault and stalking, if the convictions are at least seven years old. The extensive investigation also found that in 35 states, these checks are based largely on where someone has lived in those seven years, meaning convictions from other locations could be missed.

In 2017, Massachusetts conducted an audit of ride-hailing drivers in the state and ended up banning more than 8,000 drivers (about 11 percent) who were previously approved. Lyft, for its part, does not allow drivers with previous violent felony convictions regardless of how long ago the conviction was.

In a document from 2015 reviewed by the Times, Uber executives discussed a strategy to “shift the conversation about safety from background checks to [less costly] initiatives proven to reduce incidents.” A 2018 email from Uber’s then head of safety communications described the company’s background check policy as “a bare minimum.”

The Times compiled half a dozen examples of serious cases where Uber drivers with past violent convictions were later accused by passengers of sexual assault or rape. Two of those cases resulted in criminal convictions.

Between 2017 and 2022, Uber’s US operations received a report of sexual assault or sexual misconduct among almost every eight minutes, according to the company’s own internal data. Uber said 75 percent of these reports were for “less serious” incidents such as flirting or making comments about a rider’s appearance, and claimed that 99.9 percent of its rides take place without incident.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/uber-allows-violent-felons-to-drive-on-its-platform-investigation-finds-162721155.html?src=rss

BrianFagioli writes: Samsung is bringing Google Gemini directly into the kitchen, starting with a refrigerator that can see what you eat. At CES 2026, the company plans to show off a new Bespoke AI Refrigerator that uses a built in camera system paired with Gemini to automatically recognize food items, including leftovers stored in unlabeled containers. The idea is to keep an always up to date inventory without manual input, track what is added or removed, and surface suggestions based on what is actually inside the fridge. It is the first time Google’s Gemini AI is being integrated into a refrigerator, pushing generative AI well beyond phones and laptops.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

I’ve been getting relentless Instagram ads for AI-powered home gyms lately. You’ve probably seen them, too—sleek wall-mounted screens with impossibly toned instructors, testimonials promising “the future of fitness,” and before-and-after transformations that make it all look effortless.

The smart home gym equipment market is booming. According to Business Wire, the industry was valued at $3.2 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $4 billion by 2030. The numbers show plenty of people are investing in fitness technology that offers personalized, convenient, and effective home workouts. Fitness is yet another way to feed the AI beast, transforming boring old equipment into highly sophisticated systems capable of delivering real-time feedback, tracking performance, and adjusting workouts to each user’s needs. It all sounds impressive—revolutionary, even. But here’s the thing about fitness trends: It takes a lot more than the latest technology to make them stick.

After months of watching these ads follow me around the internet, I got curious enough to actually dig into what these things are and whether they’re worth the hype, and if the math really adds up for most people.

Fitness trends rarely have staying power

Whatever your fitness goal is, the way to get it done is going to be time-tested and probably not too glamorous. Look at Tae Bo, Zumba, shake weights, even the world of Crossfit—most fitness fads don’t have staying power once the novelty wears off. 

Sure, exercise science evolves, but not nearly as fast as whatever trendy gadget cycles through the cultural zeitgeist. In this way, we see “fitness” get reduced to a consumer product—something to be purchased, used briefly, and then tossed aside when something shinier comes along. In 2025, spin classes are out, while Pilates and strength training are in, and that Bowflex is probably collecting dust in your mom’s basement. 

In fact, in 2024 both Bowflex and American Home Fitness, two companies that bet big on the home fitness boom, filed for bankruptcy. In more recent history, Peloton once seemed unstoppable. Now, Peloton’s revenue declined 2.8% in 2024 to $2.71 billion, marking its third consecutive year of declining revenue. What was once a cultural phenomenon now struggles to retain members and justify its premium pricing.

For something to stick in fitness, three questions matter: Is it affordable? Does it work? Will you personally keep coming back to it?

AI home gyms might work, and you might keep coming back, but that first question is where things get complicated.

What exactly is an AI home gym?

AI home gyms are digital fitness systems that combine hardware with software to create a personalized workout experience at home. The most well-known is probably Tonal, but there’s also Tempo, Speediance, Amp, and others.

Here’s how they typically work: Tonal, for instance, is a wall-mounted unit about the size of a large TV that uses electromagnetic resistance instead of traditional weights. You pull cables attached to adjustable arms, and the system can provide up to 200 pounds of resistance digitally. Built-in cameras and sensors track your movements, and the AI adjusts the weight in real-time based on your form and performance. A screen displays instructors leading classes, tracks your reps and sets, and the system learns your strength patterns over time to suggest when you should increase weight or modify exercises.

Other systems work differently—Tempo uses free weights with 3D sensors that watch your form, while some use smart cables or connected dumbbells—but the core promise is the same: sophisticated technology that monitors your workout, corrects your form, tracks your progress, and adapts to your fitness level, all from your living room.

The benefits of an AI-powered home gym

Smart home gyms do offer legitimate benefits, including compact convenience, personalization, time savings, structured workouts, and potentially better injury prevention through form monitoring. And for many, devices like Tonal, Amp, and others are here to stay. “As a professional home gym equipment tester,” says Jose Guevara of ShreddedDad, “I’ve seen more of these continue to pop up not only in full training stations, but also in specific equipment, like cable machines, dumbbells, and sometimes a combination of both. They’ll never have the longevity of weight plates or barbells, but there is an audience for them.”

According to Guevera, these systems appeal to “those people who need guidance and want a done-for-you system where they can choose on-demand workouts where they can just follow along and not have to think about what to do for their workout.”

There is an audience for these products, just as there’s an audience for Peloton bikes and high-end boutique fitness studios. But to me, the relevant question isn’t whether they work for some people—it’s whether they’re the revolutionary solution to home fitness they’re marketed as, or just another expensive piece of equipment that most people will use enthusiastically for a few months before the novelty wears off.

Still, another Tonal user told me that comparing these AI systems to a Bowflex machine from the 1990s is like comparing a surgical robot to using a rusty scalpel. But this analogy assumes your body is a machine where the logic of “endless innovation” holds up. A smart gym isn’t exactly a medical solution. It’s an accessory, a luxury good that depends on who can afford it. I don’t think the problem with working out at home has never been that we lacked sophisticated enough technology. The problem is that working out is hard, consistency is harder, and no amount of AI can fundamentally change that human reality. There are some things you just can’t hack. 

Running the numbers on an AI home gym

There are hefty upfront costs for these products. Take Tonal, one of the leading AI home gym systems. It’s around $4,300 for the unit itself, $295+ for mandatory professional installation, plus bundled smart accessories. Then comes the recurring monthly membership fee of around $60 for full access to classes and features. All told, you’re looking at roughly $5,300 in the first year, followed by $720 annually for the subscription.

Compare that to traditional gym memberships. According to a 2023 report, the average monthly cost of a gym membership is $58, which works out to about $696 per year. Budget options like Planet Fitness run as low as $15 to $23 per month, or $180 to $276 annually. Even mid-tier gyms like LA Fitness typically cost $40 to 56 per month.

So, to break even on a Tonal, compared to a mid-range gym membership at $50/month:

Year 1: Tonal costs $5,300. A gym membership costs $600. You’re already $4,700 in the hole.

Year 2: You pay $720 for Tonal’s subscription. The gym still costs $600. You’re now $4,820 behind.

Year 3: Another $720 vs. $600. Now you’re $4,940 in deficit.

By Year 5: You’ve spent $8,180 on Tonal versus $3,000 at a gym.

It would take roughly eight years of consistent use before Tonal becomes cost-competitive with a traditional gym membership. Eight years. That’s assuming the hardware doesn’t malfunction, the company doesn’t go under (remember, Bowflex and Peloton couldn’t sustain their models), and you actually use it consistently for nearly a decade.

And the subscription costs are real. Unlike traditional weights that work whether or not you’re paying a monthly fee, many digital fitness products require a subscription as long as you want to access workouts. “I’ve seen some of these companies also go out of business,” Guevara says, “so if that happens, you’re stuck with a product that doesn’t function if their software is not kept up with.” We’ve watched other companies’ subscription traps effectively brick your hardware.

Now, proponents will argue that you save on commute time and costs. Fair enough. But for the Tonal investment to be “worth it” financially, you’d need to use it at least three to four times per week for those eight years straight. If you weren’t driving to a gym you pay $50/month for, are you sure you’ll consistently use your smart gym for years and years once the novelty wears off? 

There’s another unspoken cost to at-home convenience, akin to people who struggle with WFH setups: the absence of gym culture. Don’t underestimate the power of casual human interaction, personal trainers who can physically adjust your form, accountability from workout buddies, the ritual of leaving your house to exercise, or maybe even the silent camaraderie of shared suffering. If you’re like me, that separation between home and workout space is a major psychological boost. 

The bottom line

The best exercise is the one you’ll actually keep doing. If you run the numbers and a Tonal makes sense for your budget and workout habits, great. Personally, as AI creeps into every other corner of my life, I find a lot of comfort in my workouts as a rare screen-free activity. 

My gripe with AI home gyms is when they’re marketed as must-have solutions, instead of what they are: luxury goods, something available only to those with disposable income and spare square footage. On a grand scale, given their current costs, AI home gyms look like a passing trend to me. And two years from now, when the next fitness innovation promises to finally solve at-home workouts, I bet someone will write this same article all over again.

Beverly Hills High School has deployed an AI-powered surveillance apparatus that includes facial recognition cameras, behavioral analysis software, smoke detector-shaped bathroom listening devices from Motorola, drones, and license plate readers from Flock Safety — a setup the district spent $4.8 million on in the 2024-2025 fiscal year and considers necessary given the school’s high-profile location in Los Angeles.

Similar systems are spreading to campuses nationwide as schools try to stop mass shootings that killed 49 people on school property this year, 59 in 2024, and 45 in 2023. A 2023 ACLU report found that eight of the ten largest school shootings since Columbine occurred at schools that already had surveillance systems, and 32% of students surveyed said they felt like they were always being watched. The technology has a spotty track record, however.

Gun detection vendor Evolv, used by more than 800 schools including Beverly Hills High, was reprimanded by the FTC in 2024 for claiming its AI could detect all weapons after it failed to flag a seven-inch knife used to stab a student in 2022. Evolv has also flagged laptops and water bottles as guns. Rival vendor Omnilert flagged a 16-year-old student at a Maryland high school reaching for an empty Doritos bag as a possible gun threat; police held the teenager at gunpoint.

Not every school is buying in. Highline Schools in Washington state cancelled its $33,000 annual ZeroEyes contract this year and spent the money on defibrillators and Ford SUVs for its safety team instead.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Scammers frequently target shoppers who are looking for a good deal or a rare find (or both). As holiday sale season winds down, the Better Business Bureau is warning buyers about a scheme in which fraudsters charge you for “out of stock” goods and fail to refund your money.

The out-of-stock purchase scam is simple: After you buy a product online, scammers send you a notification that said item is no longer available, cancel your order, and tell you that you’ll get your money back. Obviously, the refund never arrives, and no one ever responds to further inquiries.

As the BBB points out, in most cases, the item you thought you bought probably never existed in the first place—rather, scammers are selling fake stock, charging customers, and vanishing in hopes you won’t notice that you didn’t receive your refund. Some consumers who submitted reports to the BBB Scam Tracker said that they did receive products, but items were of poor quality or not what they ordered, and no refund was ever issued.

Spot out-of-stock purchase scams

These fake purchase schemes may have the usual red flags, like prices that are too good to be true, especially those promoted on social media. Personalized items are ripe for scams, as are hard-to-find products or collectibles. If you find an amazing deal from a company or seller you don’t recognize, search the name with “scam” and read reviews on Google and Reddit to identify patterns of suspicious activity (or poor-quality products).

You should also be wary of websites that aren’t secure—those that don’t start with HTTPS or have a lock icon in the browser bar—as these are more vulnerable to hackers looking to intercept credit card info and other personal data. Legitimate vendors collect payment securely.

Shop with a credit card

Shopping scams are a good reason to use a credit card for online purchases, as they offer protection against fraudulent charges. If you don’t receive a refund from a seller, you can file a chargeback—while this isn’t as simple or swift a process, it is likely you’ll get your money eventually.

Always keep receipts, order confirmations, and any communication with sellers in case you need to make a claim for a scam purchase.

Paramount Skydance isn’t giving up on obtaining Warner Bros. Discovery just yet. The company has amended its $108 billion offer to include Larry Ellison’s “irrevocable personal guarantee” equaling $40.4 billion. Ellison is the founder or Oracle and a backer of Skydance, created by his son David Ellison, Paramount Skydance’s CEO. 

On December 17, WBD formally recommended shareholders reject Paramount’s offer. WBD had already accepted an $82.7 billion offer from Netflix, set to close some time next year following regulatory approval. “[The board] has unanimously determined that the tender offer launched by Paramount Skydance on December 8, 2025 is not in the best interests of WBD and its shareholders and does not meet the criteria of a ‘Superior Proposal’ under the terms of WBD’s merger agreement with Netflix announced on December 5, 2025,” WBD stated. 

The Paramount deal included backing by sovereign wealth funds in places like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. But the Ellisons previously said that, if the other funders dropped out, they would “backstop the full amount of the bid.” That wasn’t enough of a guarantee for WBD. 

Now, Paramount has returned with the irrevocable personal guarantee and an agreement that the senior Ellison won’t “revoke” or “adversely transfer” the Ellison family trust’s assets while the transaction is pending. WBD had stated that a personal guarantee was the only fix to Paramount’s inadequate offer. 

Paramount might have taken this step, but not with a smile on its face: “None of these concerns, nor the demand for a personal guarantee, were raised by WBD or its advisors to Paramount in the 12-week period leading up to WBD agreeing to the inferior transaction with Netflix, Inc.,” the company stated about its updated offer. 

“Our $30 per share, fully financed all-cash offer was on December 4th, and continues to be, the superior option to maximize value for WBD shareholders. Because of our commitment to investment and growth, our acquisition will be superior for all WBD stakeholders, as a catalyst for greater content production, greater theatrical output, and more consumer choice,” David Ellison stated. “We expect the board of directors of WBD to take the necessary steps to secure this value-enhancing transaction and preserve and strengthen an iconic Hollywood treasure for the future.”

Paramount’s updated offer also includes publishing the trust’s assets, more flexible transaction terms and an increase from $5 billion to $5.8 billion of its “regulatory reverse termination fee” — in line with Netflix’s. 

Paramount’s offer will expire on January 21, 2026. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/paramount-has-an-updated-warner-bros-discovery-bid-144348321.html?src=rss

Colin Angle, the founder of iRobot who built the company from his living room over 35 years and sold more than 50 million Roomba vacuums, watched his creation file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy earlier this month after what he describes as an “avoidable” regulatory ordeal that killed Amazon’s $1.7 billion acquisition bid. In an interview with TechCrunch, Angle recounted the 18-month investigation by the FTC and European regulators that preceded Amazon’s January 2024 decision to abandon the deal. The process consumed over 100,000 documents and a significant portion of iRobot’s discretionary earnings. Angle said the deal should have taken “three, four weeks of investigation” given iRobot’s declining market position — 12% and falling in Europe, where the leading competitor was only three years old.

During his deposition, Angle said he walked the halls of the FTC and noticed examiners had “printouts of deals blocked, like trophies” on their office doors. He entered the process “looking for a friend” and instead encountered the question: “Why should we ever let them do this?”

Further reading: WSJ Editorial Board Says Lina Khan Killed iRobot.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.