AppleCare coverage for the iPhone Duo will mean inexpensive repairs for Apple’s first foldable, including $99 full inner display replacement or $19 “cover layer” swaps.

Apple’s iPhone Duo may be the most complex and expensive iPhone to date, but thankfully it appears to be inexpensive to repair. At least, that will be the case if you have AppleCare.

According to Apple’s service and repair website, first discovered by Quinn Nelson of SnazzyLabs, the iPhone Duo has a swappable cover layer that will cost just $19 with active AppleCare coverage. Of course, this will mean going to an Authorized Apple Service Provider to get it done.

Other AppleCare repair costs include $29 for front display or back glass repairs and a $99 inner display repair. Accidental damage repair is also $99 and theft or loss replacement is $149.

An interview with Apple’s VP of hardware engineering Kate Bergeron, shared by 9to5Mac, reveals that Apple’s intention with the removable cover layer is an option for user replacement after wearing in the existing layer. She said that Apple engineered the cover layer to wear in for as long as possible before a user might need to replace it.

Don’t try this at home, for now

Since we’re talking AppleCare, that means that the layer likely isn’t meant to be “user” replaceable, though we won’t know how easy it is to get off or put a new one back on until testing can be done. There is a small chance that Apple’s self-service website will provide users a path to purchasing their own display cover layer.

AppleCare coverage for iPhone Duo will be much cheaper than paying for repairs without it

If it is easily peeled off, there is also an opportunity for third-party alternative outer layers. I could imagine different textures for Apple Pencil, privacy layers, or glossy covers that are more durable overall.

Obviously, Apple has engineered iPhone Duo and its hinge mechanism to account for the exact thickness and material of its first-party cover layer. Knowing Apple, this isn’t some kind of simple screen protector-like surface and isn’t intended for novice user replacement or third-party alternatives.

Going without one likely isn’t an option either.

Whatever the case, wait to let the YouTubers with too much time and money to break a few iPhone Duos before trying any of this yourself. Chances are that any alternative cover layer could potentially damage the iPhone Duo and even invalidate the warranty and AppleCare.

iPhone Duo goes up for pre-order on October 16 and ships on October 23. It starts at $1,999 with 256GB of storage.

The new school year is underway, and like educators across the country, I have been engaging in my annual dose of professional development (PD) sessions.

Unfortunately, over the years, I’ve found that traditional PD can sometimes feel repetitive, with facilitators covering reviews and strategies teachers have already mastered, and approaches to curricular analysis that often leave much be desired. While well-intentioned, these workshops can miss the mark when they focus too much on compliance rather than creating opportunities for teachers to innovate, develop and refine engaging strategies for today’s classrooms.

Having led and designed PD sessions myself, I know how challenging it is to create experiences that resonate with everyone. But teachers, much like the students we support, crave transformative learning experiences grounded in active inquiry, collaboration and respect for our classroom expertise. When traditional workshops fall short of that standard, educators naturally look elsewhere for inspiration and community. 

When I first applied to become a National Board Certified Teacher (NBCT), the process felt so much more transformative, not because of what we did, but because it was intentionally designed around teacher personal and professional growth as opposed to compliance. Colleagues in my NBCT cohort not only made me reflect deeply on my personal pedagogy, but also encouraged me to tinker and inquire about how to improve it. 

Last September, during a routine webinar, my colleagues and I found ourselves scrolling TikTok on our phones, seeking relatable teacher perspectives, quick classroom hacks and insights from fellow educators.

Unlikely as it may seem, online platforms like Spotify, Substack and TikTok are becoming vibrant spaces for meaningful, bite-sized PD. So much so that this new phenomenon has inspired me to investigate exactly how social media can help teachers connect theory to real classroom practice.

The Generation Gap in Professional Development

Evi Wusk, assistant professor of secondary education at Nebraska Wesleyan University, acknowledges the phenomenon of virtual microlearning among preservice teachers in her recent EdSurge article “What TikTok Is Teaching Future Teachers (That We Aren’t).” In her work with preservice teachers, Wusk notes that more and more, instead of having to wait until they get into the classroom to learn some of the job’s hardest lessons, many preservice students are exposed to teacher personalities and lived experiences on TikTok; they even come to her graduate classes enthusiastically citing brilliant teaching “hacks” they’ve seen on their phone. 

Virtual communities like the Science of Reading Classroom have been essential to my professional growth — and to helping my colleagues and students. When I was chosen to coach 30 teachers across my district in implementing a new literacy curriculum, I set out to learn as much theory as I could to help teachers understand why the work we were about to engage in went beyond a simple textbook change, but involved a change of their entire pedagogical approach. 

First, I enrolled in a graduate reading specialist program that unfortunately did nothing more than promote outdated practices. When that pursuit fell flat, I started listening to educator podcasts such as “Melissa & Lori Love Literacy” while reading blogs by real teachers and theorists alike on Substack. 

Eventually, I found the Goyen Foundation, where a cohort of literacy fellows is chosen each year to deepen and share our understanding of learning science. We often ended the final minutes of each invigorating meeting commiserating over how alone we felt in our schools, and wishing our own communities fostered this kind of collaboration and inquiry that this virtual one did. 

In these spaces, through the use of technology, I found like-minded, curious and passionate educators who have taken it upon themselves to improve the state of literacy in the 21st century. These virtual spaces reignited a fire and passion to improve my own practice, which has become increasingly important for me to maintain as a teacher navigating critical changes in the field today. 

At one point, it occurred to me that no matter how much knowledge I wanted to pursue, and how much life got in the way, I always ended up bingeing viral teacher humor videos. If this was the viral loop I was stuck in, other teachers were too. So why not bring evidence-based practices and meet teachers where they are?  

When I couldn’t find that content readily enough, I decided to create it.

Charting a New Pathway for Professional Learning

Many times before, I have seen teachers who are curious but also have to run out the door right after the bell rings to go to a second job, take care of a family member or drive the kids to soccer practice. It is for those teachers that I started to funnel everything I learned about the science of reading into bite-sized PD opportunities on TikTok, because even in the day-to-day grind, almost all of us find ourselves in a dopamine-infused scroll a few times each day. 

When I set up my TikTok channel, Science of Reading Snaps, my goal was to create bite-sized professional development that explicitly connects theory to practice. And that isn’t just a buzzword either; when I say practice, I mean that I actually film myself using the skills, strategies or theory in my own classroom with real students. 

Along the way, I have had to sharpen my skills in intentionally connecting the work I do in the classroom to the knowledge I seek out in online communities. For example, I have always included the classic turn-and-talk in my day-to-day teacher toolbox. But only after diving into reading science and talking with colleagues online about the importance of oracy did I realize that verbal reasoning and oral language skills are absolutely key to students building comprehension from early literacy through postgraduate content. 

While none of my content is viral, it does make an impact. Over the past year, I have racked up over 100,000 views across 50 videos on TikTok.

What surprised me more than the number of views were the conversations educators had in the comments. I think it’s in our nature as educators to keep building knowledge, and I was thrilled to see that people found value in my content and engaged in a discussion about it. 

For many of my videos, I get the familiar comments like “Love this” or “I’ll be doing this regularly.” What I didn’t quite expect was for the comment section to evolve into its own micro-professional learning community. In the comments on my recent morphology matrix video, one teacher shared how they called this strategy “Meet the Relatives,” while another asked what the difference was between a base word and a root word.  

From my classroom to theirs and back again, teachers asked questions, shared resources and offered their own knowledge. 

Teaching is often an undervalued vocation, but seeing colleagues engage with my content this way was not only validating, but also deeply humbling. Knowing my colleagues in the trenches valued and appreciated my work meant a great deal, because this job isn’t one we can do alone. 

Being the Change, One Video at a Time

As teachers, we spend time talking with administrators, asking questions, sharing examples from our own classrooms and discussing new ideas we want to try. The more excited we are about the content we’re learning through these micro-PDs, the more likely the leadership team will see the changes needed. 

Change is hard, but I do feel the most important trait an educator can have is a love of learning new concepts and tactics. I am fortunate enough to have the capacity to read, persevere and inquire independently in order to improve myself and my practice — a skill I work to pass on to my students every day, and to teachers through the content I create. I’m also fortunate that technology has become a tool and helpful alternative that teachers can point to for inspiration and motivation to improve their teaching methods and enhance the curriculum.

The internet, social media and the devices in our hands have made it possible to expand our reach and have also allowed me to expand mine through a love and passion for the science of reading.

Boston Dynamics’ Atlas has been the internet’s favorite robot for years, pulling off backflips at CES and entertaining fans at the FIFA World Cup. But party tricks don’t pay the bills. Now, Boston Dynamics and Hyundai Motor Group want Atlas to trade the stage for the factory floor.

How did Atlas go from show-off to coworker?

AI has changed how Atlas picks up new skills. Rather than coding every movement, Boston Dynamics now trains the robot much like a new hire. Atlas runs on two separate systems. One keeps it steady on its feet and lets it reach for objects, while the other helps it understand the world and carry out multi-step instructions.

Like AI chatbots, Atlas improves with more data, but that data hasn’t been collected yet. Right now, it is practicing automotive tasks at the Robotics MetaPlant Application Center before heading into actual factories. Car plants have tough safety and reliability rules, making them a solid proving ground.

Where will we see Atlas working?

This version of Atlas is designed for heavy-duty industrial work. It can haul seriously heavy loads and handle scorching, unforgiving workplaces, which makes it a good fit for manufacturing, food and beverage, and semiconductor plants. So, don’t expect it to fold your laundry just yet.

Hyundai’s backing is what makes the numbers work. Hyundai Motor Group is building a new US factory with the capacity to churn out 30,000 robots every year, and it plans to put 25,000 Atlas units to work. According to Boston Dynamics, the partnership has already brought costs down by 60 to 80 percent between the prototype and the first production run.

Are robot coworkers finally becoming a reality?

For years, humanoid robots felt like something out of a sci-fi movie. Now, with a dedicated factory, thousands of units planned, and a market projected to reach $200 billion by 2035, they suddenly feel very real.

Boston Dynamics isn’t new to this game either. Its Spot robot already works for more than 500 customers in 46 countries. If Atlas can follow in its footsteps, the robot we once watched doing backflips might soon be lifting boxes next to factory workers.

Related Coverage:

Japan’s biggest power generator is teaming up with Dell to build AI data centres across the country. The push could cost as much as $140bn, the Financial Times reported.

JERA, Dell and UK developer RHAELM signed a non-binding agreement on Thursday, JERA said. Private equity firm Apollo will help fund the work as RHAELM’s financing partner.

The first project sits next to JERA’s gas-fired power station in Chiba, east of Tokyo. It will draw about 400 megawatts and cost more than $15bn, or ¥2.3tn, across all phases.

Operations are due to start around 2028. The FT said the site would be among Asia’s largest outside China.

Skipping the grid queue

The plan’s selling point is speed. The data centre will take power straight from JERA’s plant, rather than wait years for a grid connection.

“We can deliver a 400MW facility years ahead of a conventional grid-connected timeline,” said Bradd Lewis, RHAELM’s chief executive.

Each firm has a set role. JERA brings the land and power, Dell supplies ready-built racks of servers, and RHAELM runs the build.

JERA says it generates about a third of Japan’s electricity.

“JERA is uniquely positioned to power Japan’s AI ambitions,” said Yukio Kani, its global chief executive.

The partners want to copy the model at other JERA sites. The aim is several gigawatts of AI capacity across Japan in the 2030s.

A crowded field

JERA has not put its own figure on that wider rollout. The $140bn estimate comes from the FT’s reporting.

Others are piling in too. In June, Blackstone said it planned $30bn for Japan AI data centres over the next few years.

Japan’s digital minister has warned the country could become an “AI colony” if it falls behind.

from the transparent-as-a-brick-wall dept

Among the many promises that RFK Jr. offered in his confirmation hearings, promises that he has gone about breaking in spectacular fashion, one was a promise of “radical transparency”. His approach, in his own words, was laid out directly to Congress.

My approach to administration HHS will be transparency. If members of this committee or other members of Congress want information, the doors are open. I’ve spent many years litigating against HHS and its sub-agencies, NIH, CDC, FDA on FOIA issues trying to get information that we the taxpayers paid for and oftentimes getting back redacted copies after a year or two years of litigation. That should not be the case and if Congress asked me for information, you will get it immediately.

In the most recent news involving Kennedy-style fuckery, the CDC was mysteriously prohibiting the procurement of seasonal COVID vaccines through the Vaccine for Children program, designed so that states can get these shots at no cost for children who lack insurance, who are on Medicaid, and for Indigenous children. Why? Nobody seemed to be able to answer that question.

The CDC made some vague claims that the months-long delay was due to the need to finalize the procurement process (bullshit), or perhaps the need to have an outside expert consult on the final procurement process (bullshit). How do I know those statements were bullshit? Well, this is a statement from HHS to Ars Technica made on Wednesday, September 23rd, after media outlets began reporting on the shots being delayed:

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) told Ars on Wednesday that “CDC has not yet finalized procurement decisions” for the shots. The department’s statement further suggested Trump officials were questioning whether children should receive them. “HHS and CDC are committed to responsible stewardship of taxpayer resources and to ensuring that vaccines purchased through federally funded programs are appropriate for the populations those programs serve,” the department said.

Then, on that very same day, mere hours later, the Washington Post reported that procurement of the shots was now open and states could order the shots.

However, The Washington Post reported late Wednesday that ordering was opening. An unnamed source told the Post that part of the reason the vaccine ordering was held up was a delay in finalizing the CDC’s clinical guidance, which is written for health care professionals and public health officials. The guidance reportedly needed to be reviewed by an external expert.

According to further reporting, this explanation was also bullshit.

The Post also reported that CDC career officials had previously finished preparations for making the vaccines available. All Trump officials needed to do was essentially push a button to open ordering, sources said. Further, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Department of Health suggested to the Post that CDC leadership was behind the hold, saying the state had been told “that CDC leadership approval is needed before distribution of the vaccine can begin.”

In a response to Ars on Thursday, HHS again did not respond to questions about what caused the delay or how it was resolved. The department did, however, confirm that ordering for COVID-19 vaccines is now open.

So let’s call this what it is: Kennedy got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and reversed course once he’d been found out. And let’s also note that if any of this is supposed to be “radical transparency”, then I must be working off of a different dictionary than Kennedy and HHS.

None of this is transparent. There is no actual explanation on offer here for why the shots were delayed. And I have no doubt that if it had somehow gone unnoticed, the COVID shots never would have been made available at all. Kennedy, after all, has claimed that the COVID vaccine has killed lots and lots of people, and maimed others.

So we have another promise made to Congress broken. That same Congress should be demanding answers, at a minimum.

Filed Under: anti-vaxxers, cdc, covid, covid vaccines, hhs, rfk jr., transparency, vaccines

It’s been a while since we saw Catherine Zeta-Jones strutting her stuff in an action setting, but she’s back in this hard-hitting thriler series. Adapted from the Nick Harkaway novel, The Price You Pay, this adaptation, titled Kill Jackie, sees Zeta-Jones playing a wealthy art dealer with a hidden past that will come back to bite her.

As the squad of hitmen known as The Seven Demons close in, the titular Jackie uses her dark web connections and surprising brutality to tun the tables and hunt the killers for herself.

Here’s a fun history lesson for you. Don’t worry, we’ll make it quick! In 1966, nearly 51,000 people died on US highways. The overwhelming evidence suggested that many lives could have been saved with modern seat belts, which by then had been around for several years. The automotive industry responded by rallying together, and, in a triumph of self-regulation, voluntarily put the safety feature in every new vehicle that rolled off the line.

Kidding! Of course they didn’t do that. In the fall of 1966, Congress established the Department of Transportation and then passed the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act as well as the Highway Safety Act, giving the federal government sweeping new authority to set safety standards. By 1968, seat belts were required in every new car. Despite a massive increase in highway traffic in the last 60 years, far fewer fatalities happen on the road today.

I was thinking about this while watching various AI CEOs huddle around US president Donald Trump on Tuesday, congratulating themselves and each other on having signed an AI safety accord. My colleague Maddy Varner wrote about the specific stipulations here, but the short version is that it’s largely up to the AI labs to keep themselves in check.

Or, as Trump put it even more succinctly in the Oval Office on Wednesday: “They’re gonna police, and they’re gonna police each other, and they’re gonna self-police, they’re gonna police themselves. It’s going to work out very well.”

So this is the current state of AI safety regulation. On one side are the AI executives, employees, and tech luminaries, who are all saying that there need to be clear, thoughtful, tactical rules introduced to avoid potential disaster. (Bill Gates, for instance, has been on a media blitz playing Cassandra about an AI apocalypse.) On the other side is Trump’s magical thinking that if you say something enough times, it must be true.

That’s not to say any of this is simple or easy. The question of how to properly “pace the frontier,” as some of those same executives like to say, remains open. Even if all of the major AI labs were to agree to a slowdown, there’s no good way to keep them to their word, and China would likely continue on its own path regardless. The US economy is increasingly propped up on the AI industry, which itself has become an ouroboros of financing deals and circular investments; any meaningful crackdown risks major instability that reaches well beyond Silicon Valley.

The automotive industry is also admittedly an imperfect analogy for all kinds of reasons. There’s no seat belt equivalent for AI, no straightforward solution that can demonstrably reduce risk overnight. (It also took decades for the majority of states to pass laws mandating that people actually wear them.) The potential harms are less certain and less quantifiable. AI doomers will tell you the technology could result in human extinction in a decade; skeptics argue that’s sci-fi marketing malarkey.