Tech billionaire Elon Musk has sparked fresh debate after proposing a “universal high income” program as a solution to job losses caused by artificial intelligence.

In a post shared on X, Musk said the federal government should provide citizens with direct payments.

“Universal HIGH INCOME via checks issued by the Federal government is the best way to deal with unemployment caused by AI,” he wrote. The post quickly gained attention and remains pinned to his account.

Musk argued that such a plan would not lead to inflation. He claimed that advances in AI and robotics would produce so many goods and services that the increase in money supply would not cause prices to rise, ET reported.

His idea builds on growing concerns that automation could replace millions of jobs in the coming years.

Experts Warn of Inflation Risks in Musk Income Plan

However, many economists pushed back against the proposal. Sanjeev Sanyal criticized the idea, saying it misunderstands how economies work.

“He is so wrong on this,” Sanyal wrote, adding that while AI may disrupt jobs, it will also create new ones over time. He warned that the plan could place a heavy financial burden on governments.

According to FoxBusiness, another critic, Pratyush Rai, raised concerns about how such payments would affect daily life.

He said giving everyone a high income could increase competition for housing, education, and other limited resources, potentially driving prices higher.

Still, not everyone dismissed the idea. Andrew Yang, who previously promoted a universal basic income plan, expressed cautious support.

“It’s clear that AI will wind up funding universal income. Let’s make that happen ASAP,” he wrote online.

Musk’s proposal goes further than traditional universal basic income programs. While UBI is designed to cover basic living costs while people continue working, a universal high income could reduce the need for work altogether.

This shift raises questions about how society might function if fewer people rely on jobs for income.

Originally published on vcpost.com

CUPERTINO, Calif. — Apple’s long-awaited entry into the foldable smartphone market, widely referred to in leaks as the iPhone Fold or potentially the iPhone Ultra, is generating buzz with its promised ultra-thin 4.5mm design, near-crease-free 7.8-inch inner display and book-style passport form factor. Yet despite claims of solving key industry pain points like screen durability and hinge reliability, early reports and industry patterns suggest prospective buyers should proceed with caution.

Here are 10 compelling reasons why waiting — or skipping the iPhone Foldable Ultra altogether — might be the smarter move when it arrives, potentially priced north of $2,000.

1. Eye-watering price tag Rumors point to a starting price of $2,000 or higher, possibly reaching $2,400, making it Apple’s most expensive iPhone ever. That premium reflects the complex dual-display setup, titanium hinge and advanced materials, but it dwarfs even current flagship Pro Max models. For many consumers, the cost rivals a high-end laptop or tablet bundle without guaranteed long-term value in a category still maturing. Early adopters of rival foldables have often regretted the steep outlay when repair bills or resale values disappoint.

2. First-generation risks Apple’s foldable would be a debut effort in a segment Samsung has dominated for years. History shows first-gen devices from even the most polished companies often carry teething problems. Engineering validation tests have already encountered more snags than anticipated in hinge reliability, display durability under repeated folding and component integration into an ultra-slim chassis. While Apple aims to minimize these issues, buyers could face unexpected quirks in software optimization for the unique form factor or multitasking on iOS.

3. Potential production and availability delays Recent reports indicate mass production has slipped by one to two months, with engineering hurdles in the test phase raising concerns about shipment timelines. Although Apple has not officially signaled a postponement beyond fall 2026, supply constraints could mean limited initial stock, long waitlists and higher secondary-market prices. Nikkei Asia cited sources noting that issues are more complex than expected, potentially pushing first shipments by months in a worst-case scenario.

4. Durability doubts despite Apple’s claims Foldables remain mechanically vulnerable. Even with Apple’s touted titanium alloy hinge and dual-layer glass approach for a near-crease-free experience, the inner screen uses flexible materials prone to scratches from fingernails or debris. Dust and sand can infiltrate the hinge, leading to grinding or failure over time. Repeated folding cycles — thousands per year for heavy users — test longevity in ways slab-style iPhones never face. Past foldable owners frequently report screen failures or hinge wear within 18-24 months.

5. Repair costs and hassle Replacing a damaged foldable display often exceeds $1,000 due to the integrated hinge and layered construction. Apple’s service network, while extensive, has limited experience with this technology. Out-of-warranty repairs could prove prohibitively expensive, and insurance add-ons may not fully offset risks. Many consumers end up trading in early or switching back to traditional phones when issues arise, diminishing the device’s resale value.

6. Battery life compromises The slim 4.5mm open profile and dual screens demand engineering trade-offs. Rumors suggest a large battery around 5,400-5,800mAh, yet real-world usage with an always-on inner display, multitasking and 5G connectivity could drain it faster than a standard iPhone 18 Pro Max. Early foldable adopters commonly complain of needing midday top-ups during heavy productivity or media sessions. Apple’s optimization prowess may help, but physics limits what even the best software can achieve in such a constrained chassis.

7. Compromised camera system Leaks indicate a dual 48MP rear camera setup rather than the triple-lens array found on current Pro models. Space constraints from the folding mechanism and thin design may limit sensor size, zoom capabilities or low-light performance. Users accustomed to iPhone photography excellence could notice differences in versatility, especially for video or portrait work that benefits from multiple focal lengths.

8. Software and ecosystem growing pains iOS will need significant adaptations for seamless inner/outer screen transitions, app continuity and true multitasking akin to iPadOS. While Apple promises polished experiences, first-gen foldables from competitors have suffered from awkward app scaling, notification glitches or suboptimal keyboard layouts in folded mode. Developers may take time to fully optimize popular apps, leaving early buyers troubleshooting workarounds.

9. Bulk and everyday practicality Closed, the device resembles a compact 5.5-inch phone, but opened it becomes a wider, passport-style tablet. That hybrid form can feel awkward in pockets, during one-handed use or in calls. The hinge adds weight and thickness compared to ultra-slim slab phones, potentially reducing the “always carry” convenience that defines iPhone appeal for many.

10. Better alternatives exist today — and tomorrow Samsung’s Galaxy Z Fold series has iterated through multiple generations, offering refined software, wider accessory support and often lower entry prices. Waiting for the iPhone Foldable Ultra’s second or third iteration could deliver meaningful improvements in durability, battery and pricing. Alternatively, sticking with a proven iPhone 18 Pro Max or even pairing a current iPhone with an iPad mini provides similar productivity without foldable risks. The category itself remains niche; many who try foldables return to traditional designs for reliability.

Industry analysts note that while Apple could elevate foldables with its materials science and ecosystem integration, the device arrives amid ongoing supply-chain pressures and broader economic caution around premium gadgets. Leaks highlight a titanium frame and Touch ID side button replacing Face ID due to space limits, further underscoring design compromises.

For enthusiasts drawn to the novelty of a crease-minimized 7.8-inch screen and potential A20-series chip with ample RAM, the iPhone Ultra might still tempt. Yet the combination of high cost, mechanical vulnerabilities, repair economics and first-gen uncertainties creates a risky proposition.

Apple has built its reputation on delivering polished, reliable products that justify premium pricing through longevity and user experience. In the foldable space, that bar is harder to clear given inherent physical challenges. Consumers weighing an upgrade should consider their usage patterns: heavy media consumers or multitaskers might benefit, but casual users or those prioritizing durability and value could find the traditional iPhone lineup more satisfying.

As testing continues and more concrete details emerge closer to the expected September 2026 announcement, prospective buyers would do well to monitor independent durability tests, real-world battery data and early repair cost reports. The foldable dream has captivated tech fans for years, but turning that vision into a must-own device without significant drawbacks remains an uphill climb — even for Apple.

In the meantime, many will stick with slab-style flagships that deliver proven performance without the folding compromises. The iPhone Foldable Ultra could ultimately redefine mobile computing, but for now, the 10 reasons above suggest exercising patience before opening your wallet for Apple’s boldest iPhone experiment yet.

LOS ANGELES — Kevin Durant will miss the Houston Rockets’ playoff opener against the Los Angeles Lakers after suffering a right knee contusion in practice, dealing an early blow to one of the Western Conference’s most intriguing first-round matchups.

Rockets coach Ime Udoka announced the decision about 90 minutes before Saturday’s Game 1 tipoff, ruling out the 37-year-old superstar who had been listed as questionable earlier in the day. Durant sustained the injury Wednesday when he bumped knees with a teammate while chasing a loose ball. Imaging showed no structural damage, but the knee remains tender and limits his mobility.

“He bumped a knee in practice on Wednesday,” Udoka said. “Hopefully, it’s a one-game thing, but he tried it out just a short time ago and didn’t feel good enough.”

Udoka added that the contusion struck “in an awkward spot” above the patella tendon. “The knee is very tender and tough to bend in certain ways,” he explained. “Pain tolerance is one part, but limited movement is another.”

Durant, who played 78 regular-season games and logged heavy minutes as a key piece in Houston’s push for postseason positioning, underwent an MRI after the incident. Team officials expressed optimism that the issue won’t sideline him long-term, describing him as day-to-day. Still, his absence forced immediate adjustments for a Rockets squad built around scoring punch from its veteran leader.

Without Durant, Houston started Josh Okogie at small forward alongside Reed Sheppard, Amen Thompson, Jabari Smith Jr. and Alperen Sengun. The lineup shift underscored the challenge of replacing a player averaging nearly 26 points per game on efficient shooting.

The Lakers, already navigating their own injury concerns with Luka Doncic and Austin Reaves sidelined indefinitely, seized the opportunity. Los Angeles rolled to a 107-98 victory in Game 1, with LeBron James posting 19 points, 13 assists and eight rebounds. Luke Kennard erupted for a playoff career-high 27 points, including perfect 5-for-5 shooting from three-point range. Deandre Ayton added 19 points and 11 rebounds in the frontcourt.

Lakers coach JJ Redick downplayed any strategic overhaul tied to Durant’s status. “I don’t think it affected our mentality,” Redick said afterward. “This is all we talked about for two months, just our playoff mentality. You can’t worry about who’s in or out of the lineup. It’s our game plan. It’s our standards. It’s how we play.”

The series now shifts with uncertainty hanging over Houston’s roster. Durant’s availability for Game 2 remains unclear as the Rockets evaluate his progress. Udoka and the medical staff will monitor swelling and range of motion closely in the coming days. The team’s depth, bolstered by young talent like Thompson and Sengun, will face an early test in compensating for the scoring and spacing Durant provides.

Durant’s durability has been a hallmark of his late-career resurgence. After stints with the Brooklyn Nets and Phoenix Suns, he joined the Rockets in a move that paired his veteran savvy with an up-and-coming core. His ability to stretch the floor and create off the dribble helped Houston secure a favorable playoff seeding. Missing even one postseason game carries weight for a player chasing another deep run in what could be among his final championship windows.

For the Lakers, the win provided breathing room in a series many viewed as competitive. James, now in his 23rd season, continues to defy age while guiding a supporting cast that stepped up without its own injured stars. Kennard’s hot shooting and Ayton’s interior presence filled gaps, but Redick emphasized preparation over reacting to opponent absences.

” We’ve built toward that, and I thought our guys responded well and met the moment,” Redick said. “That’s the biggest thing. You’ve got to meet the moment in every game.”

The Rockets entered the playoffs with momentum from a solid regular season but now confront questions about offensive flow. Durant’s mid-range mastery and ability to draw defenders create opportunities for teammates. In his absence, Houston leaned on Sengun’s playmaking and Thompson’s athleticism, yet the scoring drop-off proved noticeable against Los Angeles’ defense.

League observers noted the timing of the injury as particularly disruptive. Playoff series often hinge on health, and a knee contusion — while not season-threatening — can linger if not managed properly. Rockets officials stressed caution to avoid aggravating the bruise, especially with a best-of-seven format allowing recovery time between games.

Durant has a history of overcoming injuries, including past knee and Achilles issues that tested his resilience. His return to the court, whenever it occurs, could swing the series momentum. Houston’s young legs offer energy, but Durant’s experience in high-stakes moments remains irreplaceable.

As the series progresses, both teams will adapt. The Lakers aim to build on their Game 1 resilience, while the Rockets seek to stabilize without their star before potentially welcoming him back. Fans and analysts alike will track Durant’s status hour by hour, with updates expected as Houston prepares for Game 2.

The Western Conference quarterfinals have already delivered drama, and Durant’s knee adds another layer. For a player who has rewritten scoring records and earned multiple championships, this latest hurdle tests the depth of a Rockets team betting on its collective strength.

Houston will need contributions across the board to keep pace with LeBron and company. Whether Durant returns soon or the injury forces a longer absence, the opening chapter of this series highlighted the fragility of playoff basketball — where one awkward collision in practice can reshape expectations overnight.

TOKYO — Japan, situated on the volatile Pacific Ring of Fire where multiple tectonic plates converge, has endured some of the most powerful and destructive earthquakes ever recorded, with the 2011 Tohoku event standing as the strongest in the nation’s modern history at magnitude 9.1 and triggering a catastrophic tsunami that claimed nearly 20,000 lives.

The list of Japan’s 10 biggest earthquakes, ranked primarily by magnitude but also considering historical impact and death toll where records allow, reveals a pattern of megathrust events along subduction zones that have repeatedly reshaped the archipelago’s coastline, infrastructure and collective memory. While modern seismology provides precise measurements for quakes since the late 19th century, earlier events rely on historical accounts, with magnitudes often estimated retrospectively.

At the top is the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake (also known as the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami). On March 11, 2011, at 2:46 p.m. local time, a magnitude 9.0–9.1 megathrust quake struck off the Oshika Peninsula in Miyagi Prefecture at a shallow depth of about 29 kilometers. The rupture, spanning roughly 300 kilometers along the Japan Trench, displaced the seafloor and generated tsunami waves reaching up to 40 meters in some areas. Nearly 20,000 people died, with more than 2,500 still listed as missing years later. The disaster triggered the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdown, caused an estimated $360 billion in damage (adjusted figures approach $500 billion in today’s terms), and displaced hundreds of thousands. It ranks as the fourth- or fifth-largest earthquake globally since instrumental recording began.

The second-largest is the 869 Jogan Sanriku earthquake, estimated at magnitude 8.9–9.0. This ancient event devastated the Sanriku coast with a massive tsunami that inundated areas up to 4 kilometers inland, killing over 1,000 people according to historical records. Geological evidence of tsunami deposits links it to similar patterns seen in 2011, underscoring the recurrence interval of major events in the region.

Third comes the 1896 Meiji-Sanriku earthquake, magnitude 8.5. Striking on June 15, 1896, it produced one of the deadliest tsunamis in Japanese history, with waves up to 38 meters high claiming more than 22,000 lives, mostly in Iwate and Miyagi prefectures. The quake itself caused limited shaking damage, but the tsunami’s rapid arrival caught coastal communities unprepared.

The 1933 Showa-Sanriku earthquake, magnitude 8.4, followed a similar pattern on March 3, 1933. It generated tsunami waves up to 29 meters, resulting in nearly 3,000 deaths. Occurring during a period of heightened seismic activity, it prompted improvements in coastal warnings, though technology at the time remained limited.

The 1707 Hoei earthquake, estimated at magnitude 8.6, struck on October 28, 1707, affecting the Nankai Trough region. It caused widespread damage across Honshu and Shikoku, killing around 5,000 people, and is notable for coinciding with the last major eruption of Mount Fuji, which added volcanic ash fallout to the devastation.

The 1944 Tonankai earthquake, magnitude 8.1, hit on December 7, 1944, during World War II. Centered in the Nankai Trough, it killed over 1,200 and caused significant infrastructure damage, though wartime censorship limited immediate reporting.

The 1946 Nankaido earthquake, magnitude 8.1, occurred on December 21, 1946, in the same tectonic zone. It claimed about 1,300 lives and highlighted the paired nature of Nankai Trough events, where stress release in one segment often triggers activity in adjacent areas.

The 1923 Great Kanto earthquake, magnitude 7.9, devastated the Tokyo-Yokohama region on September 1, 1923. While lower in magnitude than megathrust events, its proximity to densely populated areas resulted in one of Japan’s highest death tolls — over 100,000, many from fires ignited by overturned stoves amid strong shaking. The quake destroyed much of Tokyo, prompted major urban planning reforms and is commemorated annually as Disaster Prevention Day.

The 1891 Mino-Owari (Nobi) earthquake, magnitude 8.0, struck central Japan on October 28, 1891, killing around 7,273 people. It caused extensive surface faulting and damage across Gifu and Aichi prefectures, leading to early advancements in seismic building standards.

Rounding out a top 10 by impact or estimated size is the 1854 Ansei-Nankai earthquake, magnitude around 8.4. Part of a paired event with the Ansei-Tokai quake, it devastated parts of Kyushu and Shikoku, killing thousands and reinforcing cultural beliefs linking earthquakes to mythical giant catfish (namazu) stirring beneath the islands.

These events illustrate Japan’s position at the convergence of the Pacific, Philippine Sea, Eurasian and North American plates. The Japan Trench and Nankai Trough are particularly prone to megathrust quakes, where one plate subducts beneath another, accumulating strain over centuries before releasing in massive ruptures.

Modern monitoring through the Japan Meteorological Agency and dense seismic networks has improved early warnings, saving lives in recent decades. The 2011 quake, despite its scale, benefited from seconds of advance alert via the national system, though the tsunami’s speed overwhelmed many coastal defenses. Post-2011 reforms included higher seawalls, stricter building codes, better evacuation planning and enhanced nuclear safety measures.

Yet challenges persist. Japan’s aging population and dense urban centers amplify risks, while climate change may influence tsunami impacts through rising sea levels. Scientists continue studying recurrence intervals — major Nankai Trough events are overdue based on historical patterns, with a potential magnitude 8–9 quake carrying catastrophic potential for central and western Japan.

Public preparedness remains high. Annual drills, earthquake-resistant architecture and widespread awareness campaigns reflect lessons from past disasters. The 1995 Great Hanshin (Kobe) earthquake, magnitude 6.9–7.3, which killed over 6,400, spurred nationwide improvements despite not ranking among the absolute largest by magnitude.

As of 2026, no earthquake has surpassed the 2011 event in recorded Japanese history, though frequent moderate quakes remind residents of ongoing risk. The April 2024 Noto Peninsula quake (magnitude 7.5) caused significant local damage and served as another test of resilience.

Geologists warn that the next “big one” could strike with little warning beyond seconds of shaking alerts. Research into slow-slip events, seafloor monitoring and AI-driven prediction aims to refine forecasts, though precise timing remains elusive.

Japan’s history of seismic trauma has fostered innovation. From tsunami stones warning “do not build below this point” to cutting-edge early-warning technology, the nation balances fatalism with determination. International cooperation, including shared data with the United States and other Pacific nations, strengthens global tsunami warning systems.

For a country that has rebuilt repeatedly from rubble, these 10 earthquakes represent not just destruction but chapters in a story of endurance. Each disaster prompted reflection, reform and renewed commitment to safety. As scientists monitor the plates grinding beneath the islands, the collective memory of past events serves as both cautionary tale and blueprint for survival.

The human cost — measured in lives lost, communities shattered and economies strained — underscores why Japan invests heavily in mitigation. Yet the beauty and resilience of the Japanese people shine through in recovery efforts, from temporary housing rebuilt into vibrant neighborhoods to the quiet determination of survivors sharing stories to prevent future tragedy.

While no one can prevent earthquakes, Japan’s experience shows that preparation, education and technological advancement can dramatically reduce their toll. As the nation marks anniversaries and conducts drills, the list of its biggest quakes stands as a solemn reminder of nature’s power and humanity’s capacity to adapt.