It’s early days yet, but if you rely on vendors’ software for your RAID enclosure, you probably need to find out what their macOS 27 plans are.

We’ve had macOS 27 for all of four days at this point, and there may already be a show-stopping problem for folks that hang on to RAID enclosures. We’ve found several that just don’t work under macOS 27.

For example, I’ve got a Thunderbolt 3 LaCie 12Big enclosure that I’ve had for a while. It runs fine in Tahoe, on a Mac mini home server that I’ve had for years.

That LaCie 12Big doesn’t work at all in macOS 27. I’ve tried fresh installs of the software, different cabling, updating a Mac in place that it worked on in macOS 26, nothing works.

All of my dumb enclosures work and mount fine. SoftRAID as it stands now from OWC works fine in macOS 27 to set up a new array on those dumb enclosures.

This has happened before, of course. Talk to Drobo and Pegasus enclosure owners about when Apple changed how it handled device drivers a few years ago. It’s just worth mentioning that it’s happening again.

To get in front of this, I’m not talking about RAID arrays with DIP switches, other physical ways to configure the drives, arrays set up with Disk Utility, or Network Attached Storage devices. This is about vendors that sell enclosures that need special software to run on macOS.

Who’s at fault, and why is this happening?

I wish I had a good answer for you. Apple does like changing things, like how it’s done something with the boot selector in macOS 27. So there’s something there.

Also, macOS 27 also ships with no Intel code remaining, which could affect drivers compiled for Intel-only targets.. That may have something to do with it too.

Beta cycles are intended for developers to update their software to the new macOS. They exist for testing things like this.

But in our experience in the past, some things made by third party vendors get left behind.

Our advice as always stands. If you have mission critical hardware, this is not the time to try out the betas. And, if you’ve got enclosures that rely on older software, like my LaCie 12Big, it’s time to contact the vendor to see what’s going on.

And come up with a plan if there won’t be support in macOS 27.

It’s the latest case to raise alarms about ChatGPT’s lack of safeguards for suicidal behavior.

from the vampire-squid-strikes-again dept

To lose one speech-suppressing SLAPP suit may be regarded as thoughtless. To lose two looks like you’re a censorial hack.

Last month we wrote about how supposed “free speech warrior” Matt Taibbi (who spent years misrepresenting the work of people who study disinformation as inherently censorial, while getting pretty basic facts wrong) had lost his speech suppressing SLAPP suit against author Eoin Higgins. In that case, he argued that some rhetorically hyperbolic metaphors used on the book’s cover defamed him. The court pointed out that’s not at all how defamation works.

Taibbi, who also claimed he somehow had to sue to “protect free speech” (also not how it works) apparently wasn’t satisfied with just a single SLAPP suit. He also had sued congressional Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove in a separate action, claiming that her calling him a “serial sexual harasser” (and entering into the record two articles to support that claim) during a congressional hearing was defamation. If you’re interested, the two articles that were entered into the record were the Chicago Reader’s “Twenty years ago, in Moscow, Matt Taibbi was a misogynist asshole—and possibly worse” and the Washington Post’s “The two expat bros who terrorized women correspondents in Moscow.“

The hearing in question was yet another in a ridiculously long line of congressional hearings (multiple ones where Taibbi has appeared peddling nonsense) about the supposed “censorship industrial complex,” a mostly made-up concept pushed by political hacks trying to shield online trolls and bullies from ever facing consequences from private actors for breaking the clearly stated policies of online platforms.

Kamlager-Dove chose to question Taibbi’s credibility. You could argue she could have focused on the factual problems with his continued confused claims about how disinformation research and trust & safety work — but she went for the more salacious (and widely reported) claims about his time in Moscow from a few decades ago, along with a characterization that reads as a clear opinion based on disclosed facts, which (by definition) cannot be defamatory.

As you may be aware, things said in Congress tend to be protected by the speech and debate clause of the Constitution. Taibbi’s lawyers claimed that because Kamlager-Dove reposted videos of her remarks on social media, that somehow took them outside the clause’s protection. For her part, Kamlager-Dove pointed to the Westfall Act which (as we’ve discussed in the past) allows the government itself to substitute in as a defendant in cases filed against government employees if the lawsuit was based on government work they were doing. In defamation cases, this is fatal: once the federal government substitutes itself in as defendant, the case collapses, because you simply can’t sue the federal government for defamation thanks to sovereign immunity.

Here, the case fails on those grounds exactly. Judge Evelyn Padin finds that the Westfall Act does apply, effectively dooming the case. Taibbi’s lawyers tried to argue that Kamlager-Dove’s statements weren’t part of her job as Congress… because her comments were “partisan communications” and were for “self-aggrandizement on Twitter” rather than serving her constituents. Except politicians making self-aggrandizing partisan communications is (unfortunately) part of their job these days.

Representative Kamlager-Dove’s Statements and republications, however, are precisely the kind of conduct that is “a central part of the job for members of Congress.”…. Indeed, a “primary obligation of a [m]ember of Congress in a representative democracy is to serve and respond to his or her constituents.” …. As the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee holding the Hearing. Representative Kamlager-Dove’s remarks mentioned “taxpayer time and resources” and “foreign policy” topics that are important to members of Congress and that are top-of-mind for their constituents….

Republishing the statements online does not change the analysis. Taibbi claims that the “republications on X, BlueSky, and [Representative Kamlager-Dove’s] website were not legislative work, [and] occurred outside the legislative setting.” …. But members of Congress routinely engage with the public on social media and on the internet as part of their jobs…. (“There is no meaningful difference between tweets and the other kinds of public communications between an elected official and their constituents that have been held to be within the scope-of-employment under the Westfall Act.”). As Taibbi concedes, Representative Kamlager-Dove was simply “talking to voters on Twitter.” …

Thus, while the judge doesn’t get a chance to dismiss the censorial SLAPP suit for being a censorial SLAPP suit, the court does make it pretty clear you can’t sue over this kind of thing.

Two SLAPP suits filed to silence critics. Both dismissed. This is a guy who built his recent brand on the Twitter Files and the “censorship industrial complex” — and who has been a key cog in helping the government suppress speech in the process. He’s now spent quite a lot of time trying to use the courts to shut people up for criticizing him — and failing at that, too.

Filed Under: defamation, free speech, matt taibbi, slapp, slapp suit, sydney kamlager-dove, westfall act

• Hybrid meetings can leave remote workers feeling excluded, Jabra study finds
• Unsuitable and dated setups cause regular meeting delays and technical failures
• Better meeting room kit and clear meeting purposes could improve engagement

Around half of remote participants say they’re forgotten, talked over or excluded during hybrid meetings, a new study from Jabra has revealed, indicating that hybrid in-person and remote meetings might not be as effective as we’d thought.

The issue is particularly evident when multiple participants are in a physical room, with others joining online. But more than that, women (16%) and junior workers (26%) are more likely to feel they’re being excluded.

I am going to start where no good teacher should start, with a $10 word: epistemology. It refers to a branch of philosophy that explores how we know what we know – something scholars like John Dewey argued is deeply tied to experience, not just information.

This word takes me back to my doctoral graduation when my father-in-law said with good-natured humor, “Well, Ev… there’s a lot of [stuff] you can’t learn from a book.” At the time, I didn’t know what to say, but any teacher worth their salt will tell you: he’s right.

Pre-service teachers – myself included – often lament that they didn’t really learn to teach until the rubber-meets-the-road experience of student teaching or that first job. This is the challenge of teaching pre-service teachers. I’ve been doing it for a handful of years now, and I see a trend – the TikTok way of knowing in education. It’s got me wondering how we adapt our practices based on my experience during my recent final exams with pre-service teachers.

The TikTok way

For example, I ask my students to make two tangible items to try and circumvent AI. One item is a teacher creed. I hand out “fancy” paper and tell them to create something they might read every teaching day – something to remind them not if, but when teaching gets hard. These are heartfelt, colorful creations. They write things like, I will show up with a good attitude. Even on my worst day, I will be someone’s favorite teacher. I cringe a bit, knowing how more seasoned educators might scoff but that is perhaps why I assign them – to bottle that early hopefulness in a landscape that often doesn’t often create it for new teachers.

The second item is to create “One One-Pager to Rule Them All!” Students make non-linear, doodle-style notes throughout the semester, and this final asks them to zoom out and represent everything essential we’ve learned through a map of connections, images, and ideas.

I love this assignment because I can see who is connecting the dots and who is simply regurgitating the text. I sit with each student for five to seven minutes as they “show and tell” the work. As they read their creeds, I am heartened and sometimes even tear up. And in conversation after conversation this semester, I heard the same phrase, almost as a confession mid-conference:
  “I know it’s not research-y, but in a TikTok I saw…”
  “I know it’s not the best source, but I saw a reel that said…”
  “This guy I follow always says…”

Each of these notes expanded or connected my own thinking about course content. Some couldn’t be backed in my mind of research, but others could. So, instead of arguing, I asked questions: Who created that content? What might their motivation be? Why does it matter to you? This kind of questioning reflects what Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan Lytle describe as “inquiry as stance” – an orientation where teachers are active investigators of knowledge.

An epistemological shift

We are in a shift in epistemology. Future teachers are learning not only through peer-reviewed research or textbooks, but also through short-form video, personality-driven content, and lived teacher experience shared in real time – what media scholars like Henry Jenkins describe as a more participatory culture of knowledge. This is democratizing, the dismantling of the silo that has long held educational research out of reach. But this is also destabilizing.

During my first years of teaching, I cried in my car a lot. If I had had the megaphone of TikTok influencers celebrating how they left education, or even my own content microphone, I’m not sure I would have made it through to my later years of teaching that are still hard but more grounded and fulfilling.

Admittedly, some positions are ones to leave. Yes, at times educator working conditions are not what they should be but how do we help pre-service and early-career teachers move through the baptism-by-fire years while being bombarded by voices – many from people who have left the profession and now narrate it from the outside? Some of the content is helpful. Some of it is not. And all of it is loud.

I wonder if our teacher preparation programs are keeping pace with how knowledge is actually being formed. It leads me to my favorite teacher question, “So what? What do we do now?” How long do we hack away at the plant growing up the wall, and when is it time to embrace the aesthetic of a vine-covered building as something worth studying?

Instead, what if instead we become weavers of stories? What if we help students craft their own and build connections of knowing? What if we engage lived experience not as secondary to research, but as a complementary form of knowing? When have we had so much access to real-time teacher voices about things that happened to them in the classroom that day?

Just because something is visual, narrative, click-baity, and social doesn’t mean it is missing the mark or doesn’t engage a pedagogical question worth exploring. This TikTok wondering is happening whether we embrace it or not, so what if we see it as a new charge to help future teachers engage these voices critically, rather than pretending they don’t exist?

Here are some ideas I’m playing with. I’m curious what you might add.

Ed Content Fridays. Students bring in content that connects with the week’s readings and learning from their own scrolling. Discuss it in a Spider-Web format that employs elements of a librarian CRAAP test to help students develop habits of mind around credibility and content creator motivation.

Use a C3WP writing strategy that engages reels and posts to kick off class. Start with what students know as a free write and then bring in content to have them expand their arguments and defend thoughts with research from our shared text.  If students bring it in, they find it interesting, and we can require a citation connection to the course text or researchers.

Like/Share/Subscribe. Share strong online content that sings from reputable sources with students. Syllabi and course hubs can be places to curate rich content collaboratively.

Have students create their own content. CapCut on a desktop or Edits on a phone are surprisingly easy plug-and-play tools to make short form videos, and we can up the academic requirements with or without student posting. Thoughtful content can grow out of our rich history of educational research, bringing rich, thoughtful voices in among the pervasive ranting. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be about the work of educational reform and that a good rant doesn’t have its place, but this new way of knowing and sharing knowledge is sitting in our desks waiting for us to light the fire.

Yes, my step-dad is right, there is so much we can’t learn from a book, but maybe there is still so much we can learn from our own students in their own ways of knowing, even if we don’t fully understand them ourselves. What if our ways of knowing weave together, creating something beautiful?

Congress is reviving one of the most significant antitrust bills Apple has faced in years, reopening a fight over the App Store and platform control that the company helped spend millions to defeat during previous congressional sessions.

Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, reintroduced the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) on June 10. It revives a bipartisan effort to limit how dominant technology companies favor their own products and services.

The bill targets the largest online platforms and seeks to restrict conduct that supporters say gives those companies an unfair advantage. Apple and other technology giants spent years fighting earlier versions of the legislation because of its potential impact on their businesses.

The proposal would prevent dominant technology companies from favoring their own products and services. Lawmakers describe those practices as self-preferencing and argue they can disadvantage competitors.

Critics argue Apple uses its position as the operator of iOS and the App Store to benefit its own services over competing products. The legislation could directly affect the App Store and Apple’s control over the iPhone ecosystem.

Apple has consistently argued that its policies help protect user privacy, security, and the integrity of its platforms. In a statement provided to AppleInsider, Apple said it “strongly disagree[s] with the Senate’s consideration of European-style regulation” and argued the legislation would undermine privacy, security, and child safety protections while making it harder to do business in the United States.

The company also said importing Europe’s “failed policies” would not increase competition. The reintroduction marks the latest chapter in a legislative battle that has stretched across multiple sessions of Congress.

Earlier versions of AICOA advanced through the Senate Judiciary Committee but never reached a final vote despite bipartisan support. The bill came closer to becoming law than many technology reform proposals.

The debate around AICOA has changed since Congress first considered the legislation. Apple has already made significant App Store changes in Europe to comply with the Digital Markets Act.

The European law imposed new requirements on how large technology platforms compete and operate. The DMA and AICOA take different approaches to regulation.

Both aim to limit how dominant technology companies use control of their platforms to benefit their own products and services. For Apple, the DMA offers a real-world example of the kinds of changes lawmakers have sought through AICOA.

The company argues AICOA would mirror key elements of Europe’s Digital Markets Act, which required the company to make significant App Store changes in the European Union. According to Apple, the DMA has weakened privacy protections, increased security risks, and created a more difficult environment for product launches and platform development.

Why Apple fought the bill

Apple was among several technology companies that opposed the legislation during its previous runs through Congress. It argued that some provisions could make it harder to maintain privacy and security protections on its platforms.

Industry groups representing large technology companies also warned that the legislation could have unintended consequences for integrated products and services.

Supporters argue dominant platforms have too much control over businesses that depend on them. They say existing antitrust laws haven’t done enough to address those concerns.

Major technology companies spent heavily to stop AICOA and related antitrust legislation. Previous reporting found that Apple, Amazon, Google, and Meta collectively spent more than $100 million on lobbying and advocacy efforts tied to the proposals.

Trade groups also joined the fight, and industry-backed advertising campaigns helped amplify the opposition. The legislation ultimately stalled despite advancing through committee and attracting support from both parties.

Why the legislation matters now

The bill’s return doesn’t guarantee it will become law. Previous versions generated substantial attention and bipartisan support but ultimately stalled before reaching the finish line.

For Apple, the debate extends beyond another round of regulatory scrutiny. The legislation could affect how the App Store operates and how Apple Services compete on the company’s platforms.

Whether the latest version gains enough support to advance remains unclear. Its return shows that Congress is still trying to limit how dominant technology platforms use control of their ecosystems to benefit their own products and services.

With Prime Day 2026 fast approaching, Apple deals are heating up, and some of the lowest prices on record are available on new releases.

Prime Day officially starts on June 23, but retailers are slashing prices on popular Mac configurations, iPads, Apple Watches, AirPods, and more. Plus, the in-demand Mac mini is back at Amazon (and marked down). Here are the top deals this Thursday.

AirPods Pro 3 on sale for $179

AirPods Pro 3 have dipped to the lowest price ever.

We covered the $179 AirPods Pro deal yesterday, which marks the steepest discount seen to date. Walmart initially issued the $70 markdown, but the deal has expired at that retailer. Luckily, Amazon is still offering the $179 price.

If you’re looking for the lowest AirPods price across the range, AirPods 4 are available for $99 (a $30 discount off retail). And AirPods Max 2, which were announced in March 2026, are on sale for $499 after a $50 price cut.

Buy AirPods Pro 3 for $179

Today’s top AirPods offers

iPads drop to as low as $299

Early Prime Day deals on iPads deliver prices from $299.

Those in search of a budget-friendly tablet can grab Apple’s 11-inch iPad for $299.99. Or if you’d like Apple Intelligence support, the current M4 iPad Air and M5 iPad Pro are on sale, with a detailed selection of the price drops in our iPad Price Guide.

Buy iPad 11 for $299

Today’s top iPad sales

• iPad A16 (128GB, Wi-Fi): $299.99 ($50 off)
• iPad mini 7 (128GB, Wi-Fi): $474 ($25 off)
• M4 iPad Air 11-inch (128GB, Wi-Fi): $559 ($40 off)
• M4 iPad Air 13-inch (128GB, Wi-Fi): $749 ($50 off)
• M5 iPad Pro 11-inch (256GB, Wi-Fi, Standard Glass): $936.50 ($63 off)
• M5 iPad Pro 11-inch (1TB, Wi-Fi, Nano-texture Glass): $1,499 ($200 off)
• M5 iPad Pro 13-inch (1TB, Wi-Fi, Standard Glass): $1,749.99 ($150 off)

Apple Watch Series 11 up to $140 off

Apple Watch Series 11 prices are down to as low as $299.

Triple-digit discounts are in effect right now on the Apple Watch Series 11. Released in September 2025, the Apple Watch Series 11 is available in 42mm and 46mm case sizes and numerous band styles. Amazon’s markdowns deliver prices as low as $299, but you can also pick up an Apple Watch SE 3 for $219 and an Apple Watch Ultra 3 for $779.

Buy Apple Watch Series 11 for $299

42mm Apple Watch Series 11 deals

• 42mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS (Aluminum Case, Sport Band): $299 ($100 off)
• 42mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS + Cellular (Aluminum Case, Sport Band): $399 ($100 off)
• 42mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS + Cellular (Titanium Case, Sport Band): $589 ($110 off)
• 42mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS + Cellular (Titanium Case, Milanese Loop Band): $609 ($140 off)

46mm Apple Watch Series 11 discounts

• 46mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS (Aluminum Case, Sport Band): $329 ($100 off)
• 46mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS + Cellular (Aluminum Case, Sport Band): $399 ($130 off)
• 46mm Apple Watch Series 11 GPS + Cellular (Titanium Case, Sport Band): $609 ($140 off)

Additional Apple Watch deals

MacBooks as low as $589

Apple’s latest MacBooks are marked down to as low as $589.

Early Prime Day deals also include Mac computers, with Apple’s budget-friendly MacBook Neo dipping to $589.99. M5 MacBook Air models are also as low as $949.99, while M5 MacBook Pros with at least 1TB of storage can be picked up for as low as $1,529.99.

Top MacBook Neo savings

Best early Prime Day MacBook Air deals

• 13″ MacBook Air M5 (16GB RAM, 512GB SSD): $949.99 ($150 off)
• 13″ MacBook Air M5 (16GB RAM, 1TB SSD): $1,149 ($150 off)
• 13″ MacBook Air M5 (24GB RAM, 1TB SSD): $1,329 ($170 off) with in-cart coupon
• 15″ MacBook Air M5 (16GB RAM, 512GB SSD): $1,149.99 ($150 off)
• 15″ MacBook Air M5 (16GB RAM, 1TB SSD): $1,349 ($150 off)
• 15″ MacBook Air M5 (24GB RAM, 1TB SSD): $1,549 ($150 off)

Top MacBook Pro offers ahead of Prime Day

• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 (10C CPU, 10C GPU, 16GB, 1TB, Standard Display): $1,529 ($170 off) with in-cart coupon at B&H
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 (10C CPU, 10C GPU, 24GB, 1TB, Standard Display): $1,749 ($150 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (15C CPU, 16C GPU, 24GB, 2TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,399 ($200 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (15C CPU, 16C GPU, 48GB, 1TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,299 ($300 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (15C CPU, 16C GPU, 48GB, 2TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,799 ($200 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 24GB, 1TB, Standard Display): $2,199 ($200 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 48GB, 1TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,499 ($300 off)
• 14″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 64GB RAM, 1TB SSD, Standard Display): $2,799 ($200 off)

Best 16-inch MacBook Pro discounts

• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 48GB, 1TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,879 ($220 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 48GB, 2TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $3,199 ($300 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 64GB, 1TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $2,999 ($300 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 24GB, 1TB, Nano-texture, Space Black): $2,548 ($301 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Pro (18C CPU, 20C GPU, 48GB, 1TB, Nano-texture, Space Black): $2,949 ($300 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Max (18C CPU, 40C GPU, 64GB, 2TB, Standard Display): $4,299 ($300 off)
• 16″ MacBook Pro M5 Max (18C CPU, 40C GPU, 128GB, 2TB, Standard Display, Space Black): $5,099 ($300 off)

Mac mini returns with discounts

Apple’s in-demand Mac mini has returned at Amazon.

Apple’s M4 Mac mini has been out of stock for quite some time, as the model has become popular with users looking for a headless AI machine. But the 512GB Mac mini has returned at Amazon, with a $30 discount to boot.

Buy M4 Mac mini for $769.99

New Mac mini discount

Chargers, cables, and more for your Apple devices

Apple iPhone accessories are marked down.

iPhone accessories