A group of third grade students gather around a board game on a Wednesday afternoon in a Charleston classroom, grabbing game pieces, discussing potential moves and reading out playing cards. The games are not Monopoly, Sorry, or any others of yore – they’re focused on identifying, and boosting, students’ strengths and weaknesses.
It’s part of a shift in school districts’ gifted and talented programs. While many programs focused on a small group of high achieving students, instructors across the nation are now focusing more on inclusion, using data to help them zero in on students’ talents, a method that has the potential of capturing more students for advanced instruction.
For Vanessa Hill, the gifted education coordinator for Amphitheater Public School District in Tucson, Arizona, focusing on strengths and weaknesses helps to solve what she sees as a universal problem with gifted identification.
“Something I’ve been thinking deeply about that tends to be a universal problem is that gifted identification does not match the metrics of your district,” says Vanessa Hill, the gifted education coordinator for Amphitheater Public School District in Tucson, Arizona. “I’m constantly thinking of that, so our demographics can get closer. This new tactic is about exposure to critical thinking and reasoning – what does that look like, how to reason through a problem?”
The gifted and talented programs run the gamut of names and acronyms depending on the district, including advanced learning program, TAG (talented and gifted), LEAP (Learning Enrichment Alternative Program) or REACH (Realizing Excellence through Academic and Creative Help), among others.
Regardless of the name, the program has undergone several major shifts over the last few decades. Schools previously often only selectively tested students, often at the behest of involved parents or by a teacher recommendation. That brought a large amount of inequity in the programs, with many moving to a universal screening practice. Some states, including Washington and Missouri, made it a state mandate to test all students while in elementary school. The screening practice itself evolved from an IQ test to aptitude and ability tests, though how accurate those are is up for debate.
“Society is really unequal along socioeconomic and racial and ethnic lines, and these tests are just reflecting that,” says Scott Peters, director of research consulting at NWEA, a nonprofit education assessment organization. “You can change tests all day long, but at the end of the day, you can’t give some kids three years of $40,000-a-year preschool and also wonder why this kid that’s never been to school until first grade doesn’t do as well.”
Advertisement
Often, schools’ gifted and talented programs do not represent their overall school population and instead skew heavily toward white and Asian students. Zohran Mamdani, the widely-watched mayor of New York City, made it part of his platform to phase out gifted and talented programs because of the inequity.
NEWSLETTERS
STAY AHEAD IN EDUCATION.
Sign up for EdSurge newsletters for timely news, insights and analysis.
“Ultimately, my administration would aim to make sure that every child receives a high-quality early education that nurtures their curiosity and learning,” he said in a 2025 statement to the New York Times.
Advertisement
There is no silver bullet test that accounts for inequality and a child’s upbringing, although Peters said when factors such as income, race and other equity gaps are controlled in tests, most inequities disappear.
“This isn’t a factor of, ‘Oh, there are students of color scoring high, but they’re still not getting in,’” he says. “It’s that there’s not enough students of color scoring high because of that larger societal inequality issue.”
Because of the often-skewed gifted and talented population, schools are shifting toward “talent development” with all students, versus focusing on strengthening some students’ already solid skills.
“Because of the baggage of the past, we’re moving toward a new perspective where we’re identifying the strengths of students — whether academic, social or emotional — versus people for a program,” says Kristen Seward, clinical professor in gifted, talented and creative studies at Purdue University. “And I think this twist in how we approach education as gifted researchers is going to benefit everybody.”
Advertisement
Using Data for ‘Talent Development’
Developing talent for gifted programs, much like the name itself, varies depending on the district. Seward says many teachers have enriched curriculums, which enhance things like vocabulary, science and social studies — topics that have been put on the back burner over the years in favor of standardized testing. Teachers are trained to spot students’ strengths and respond to those, which in turn, helps with students’ weaknesses.
For example, if a student has a strong vocabulary but struggles in math, the teacher might focus on math vocabulary during math class to put the lesson on a level the child understands.
Elementary students play games that help with quantitative, verbal or non verbal skills.
Photo credit/Vanessa Hill
“I don’t want it to turn into a thing where the teacher is the gate, and if they don’t open the gate, then the students don’t get identified – which has been a problem,” Seward says. “We have to train teachers to be talent scouts, presenting the enriched curriculum. Hopefully it’s not something additional, but something they’d naturally do in their role.”
Advertisement
Elizabeth McLaurin Uptegrove, now the assistant academic director in Charleston County School District, created a “stretch or support” system that involves the games the students played in the aforementioned classroom. When Uptegrove first arrived in Charleston’s school district, South Carolina used to require all second grade students be tested for the gifted and talented program. But after that year, selection changed to a nomination system.
“Which sounds elitist, and it is,” she says, adding white, affluent children were three times more likely to be in the programs.
She pushed for universal testing again for all fourth grade students, which yielded three times as many students identified as gifted, jumping from 40 fourth graders to 150 across the district. Several schools across the country have adopted similar stretch-or-support systems.
But Uptegrove’s efforts go beyond identifying candidates for gifted programs through teacher observation: her game-based system uses data. With the aptitude test, there are verbal, quantitative and nonverbal subsections. The tests indicate if a child is low or high achieving in those areas. Then the children are placed in groups with those of similar abilities to play games that can enhance those skills.
Advertisement
The Stretch or Support games in Uptegrove’s third grade classroom help children grow or reinforce their skills.
Photo credit/Elizabeth McLaurin Uptegrove
“Typically a teacher is not very well-equipped to come up with activities or lessons that can actually reach their level of thinking ability and games do that really quickly, in a way that’s not as boring for children as a typical worksheet,” Uptegrove says. “That’s where the magic of the games comes in. We’re making rigorous, hard thinking almost irresistible so students are willing to do the activity for longer.”
Hill, the Arizona-based education coordinator, initially implemented Uptegrove’s game strategy across third grade classrooms in five schools: three Title 1 schools and two non-Title 1. She says the schools that have the strength or stretch program in place have higher passing rates of “proficient” or “highly proficient” scores than those who do not.
“To me, it’s the difference between being a passive learner and active learner; by being able to engage in the games, it’s more active learning,” Hill says. “You raise the exposure to critical thinking and are taught to apply those skills to any situation, whether it’s on an achievement test or on the playground with a friend.”
Advertisement
The Future of the Program
Both researchers and teachers acknowledge the “talent development” approach to gifted and talented programs is far from perfect. It is often costly, whether it is buying the games, instilling teacher training or taking out time from testing. Hill pointed to four schools within her district that are closing this year because of financial constraints.
“Ordering the games is no small cost; I feel so blessed it’s that level of importance that we will find the funds,” she says. “As far as critical thinking games, yes that was missing. It is a hole we were filling. I think that while the core curriculum is doing its best, it can oftentimes be a bit surface level.”
Uptegrove agrees, saying she believes the talent development method is becoming more popular, but “there’s a long way to go in belief and funding for it.”
Peters, who has long studied the best educational methods and practices, believes the shift in gifted and talented is a good step. But he has concerns about the larger moves needed for lasting impact.
Advertisement
“It’s easy to have a 30-minute gifted program; it’s hard to have a second through eighth grade math development pipeline involving everyone in the school,” he says. “And advanced learning isn’t enough of a priority for most schools.”
“Coyote vs. ACME” debuted its long-awaited final trailer. CNET calls it “an animation-meets-live-action story,” with the Coyote catapulting into theaters this August 28. (The film began development back in 2018, but was shelved for a tax write-off in 2023 by Warner Bros. until a backlash led to its sale to Ketchup Entertainment.) “Fed up with Acme’s unreliable products, Wile E. Coyote decides to hire a lawyer and sue the company…” writes CNET. “The movie also features Lana Condor along with a host of Looney Tunes characters like Porky Pig, Tweety, Foghorn Leghorn and Granny (who gets dinged by an anvil).”
In other movie news, CNET says Johnny Depp also “made a surprise appearance at Comic-Con, donning a costume as Ebenezer Scrooge” to promote his November 13 movie about the miser from Charles Dickens’ famous Christmas novella. (Ian McKellen and Daisy Ridley are also in the movie.)
But several geek favorites are being filmed as TV series…
There’s big news for William Gibson fans, reports Entertainment Weekly. “Two years after Apple TV announced production on the first-ever series adaptation of William Gibson’s seminal 1984 novel Neuromancer, the lucky few hundred who attended the studio’s Hall H panel at Comic-Con 2026 got to watch the first teaser.
For Amazon’s Prime Video, the Tolkien-derived “Rings of Power” series released a season 3 trailer that CNET said “successfully hides the best parts with fire… The trailer suggests that Sauron is building an army, and all of Middle-earth is trying to find ways to stop him… Rings of Power season 3 will start dropping weekly episodes on Nov. 11, meaning this show will be airing at the same time the Peter Jackson films will be celebrating their 25th anniversary.”
Later in November Amazon’s Prime Video will also debut Blade Runner 2099, an eight-episode series that’s a sequel to 2017’s film Blade Runner 2049, reports CNET. “Set in an alternate version of LA where replicants run things and the humans play second fiddle, the series sees Yeoh’s replicant Olwen chasing down outlaw replicants who’ve gone missing. With her own shelf life on a ticking clock, the stakes are high for her and for her human fugitive partner, Cora…”
Paramount Plus will debut Avatar: Seven Havens in October, a new animated series from the creators of Avatar: The Last Airbender which CNET says “follows a pair of twin avatars, one of whom is Korra’s successor.”
Kevin Feige said Marvel’s television slate will include more seasons of “X-Men ’97” and the upcoming “VisionQuest” TV series.
A lot has been made about the increase of automated traffic on the Internet, with the past years LLM-related crawlers having quite literally swarmed the picture here. Not only does this drive up traffic, it also increases load on web servers, whose owners find themselves faced with increased hosting costs. This recently led to The-Numbers.com going offline for a while as automated traffic was quite literally destroying their bottom line.
This saga is covered by [Stephen Follows], who had a chance to talk with the founder and CEO of the site, [Bruce Nash], after the site went basically offline for a few months. Since the website both licenses data for commercial purposes as well as offering the free access on its website, there were accusations of this being a ‘rug pull’.
The site was started in 1997, as a static HTML site on Geocities where [Bruce] provided box office analyses for investment purposes. Since that beginning traffic was generally polite, with human visitors and usually well-behaved search engine crawlers. Then around 2024 the first wave of scraper bots arrived, followed by a larger wave around December of 2025.
Despite implementing a few mitigations, such as LLM-targeted text, the increased traffic and the resulting load on a site architecture that was never designed for this ultimately led to a collapse. One of the major sources of traffic turned out to be from so-called ‘prediction markets’, like Polymarket, whose bots absolutely hammered the site.
Advertisement
Fortunately for [Bruce] and his team they do not rely on the free website for income, but they have had to massively rework the site’s architecture to bring back a semblance of the original features. As noted in the article, the amount of crawling traffic by these LLMs and ‘agentic AI’ tools is logarithmically more than that for search engines, which makes this a major challenge.
Issues like these is why services such as Cloudflare are offering blocking features for such automated traffic. After all, unless such traffic is of use to you, you may as well treat it like a DDoS attack and cut it off at the root.
When an appliance like a refrigerator breaks, the first thing to decide is whether it’s more cost effective to repair or replace it. Decide to get a new one and you’ll need to navigate the crowded domestic appliance market, which currently hosts a bevy of different manufacturers both familiar and new. One brand you might come across is Fisher & Paykel, which is one of the more historic names in the market.
The company was founded back in 1934 in New Zealand, when Maurice Paykel and Woolf Fisher first decided to import appliances like refrigerators to their homeland. They later began manufacturing their own appliances after the country’s government banned imports, first building them under license before eventually creating their own designs.
Advertisement
After decades as an independent company, Fisher & Paykel was acquired by Haier Group in 2012. Haier was founded in Qingdao, China, in 1984, and remains headquartered there today. It also owns the GE Appliance brand in the U.S., alongside a portfolio of other brands including Candy, Casarte, and Leader. As well as being owned by a Chinese company, some of Fisher & Paykel’s appliances are also made in China. It has additional manufacturing facilities in Italy, Mexico, and Thailand.
Advertisement
What kind of refrigerators does Fisher & Paykel offer?
In the U.S., Fisher & Paykel offers a range of different refrigerators catered towards the upper end of the market. As well as the typical selection of column refrigerators, French door refrigerators, and bottom freezer fridges, the company also sells wine refrigerators and other specialist undercounter appliances.
Within its lineup are a selection of smart refrigerators, although the features offered generally aren’t anything that makes its products stand out from those sold by other major smart fridge brands. Instead, where Fisher & Paykel shines is in the durability of its high-end refrigerators — in fact, some studies have crowned it the most reliable refrigerator brand on the market.
None of its products are cheap, with its basic refrigerators starting from just over $2,000 and larger, smarter models quickly increasing in price from there. For its Red Dot award-winning 36-inch Series 11 fridge-freezer, buyers can expect to pay at least $11,499. For their money, they’ll receive features like a variable temperature drawer which can be adjusted to better suit a wide variety of fresh foods, a steel-lined interior compartment, and a slimline water dispenser.
When looking at motorcycle engines, one of the first things to note is the engine’s displacement, as this usually has a strong correlation with the bike’s overall weight and power output. But that isn’t the only factor worth considering. It’s also worth taking a look at the number and orientation of the engine’s pistons.
Most of the motorcycles being made these days use either a parallel-twin or an inline triple-cylinder engine. These are affordable to manufacture and offer a unique blend of power and efficiency. Then there are the inline-four motorcycle engines, which are also sometimes called ‘screamers.’ These became very popular starting in the late ’60s, with that popularity seeming to peak in the mid-2010s. It’s only recently that these have started to slow down in production, and we have begun seeing fewer and fewer of them coming out each year. Many riders still consider these bikes highly desirable for their high-RPM power, smooth balance, and racetrack competence, but there’s no denying they’re slowly slipping out of vogue.
Advertisement
There are a few reasons why you’re seeing fewer inline-four engines coming out than before, and it isn’t just because they’re more expensive to make. There are several other disadvantages that might make them less appealing to the rider. You can still find a fair few affordable inline-4 motorcycles being made even now, but you might want to stop and consider the drawbacks before seeking one out.
Advertisement
1. Inline-fours typically have less low-to-mid-range torque
Most of the arguments in favor of the inline-four engine model primarily cite performance. The bikes that use them are known for delivering a large amount of power smoothly during acceleration, pushing the bike harder at higher speeds. That said, performance isn’t exactly a zero-sum game. While it’s true that inline-four engines are well known for their ability to output incredible amounts of horsepower at high RPMs (which is one of the reasons they are still so popular at the racetrack), this comes at a slight cost.
Inline-fours produce slightly less low-to-mid-range torque than some other engine types. This means riders often discover that they have a little less get-up-and-go when accelerating from a stop than if they were riding a bike with something like a parallel twin in its chassis. This makes them less than ideal for a daily driver, especially for those living in cities with plenty of traffic lights.
So, what qualifies as performance can vary depending on the type of bike and how it’s being ridden. An ultra-lightweight sport bike might have no trouble getting up to speed using an inline-four, while a heavy cruiser might struggle. Likewise, those who primarily ride in urban areas might prefer a bit more low-end torque, while those who prefer to push the red line at the track might prefer something with more power at higher speeds. This makes the inline-four a less practical choice for those seeking a commuter who aren’t looking to get any speeding tickets on the highway.
Advertisement
2. Inline-fours can be wider and heavier
Motorcycles that use inline-four engines are exceptionally well balanced. This is because the pistons move in pairs along a single plane, so there’s always one in the up position and one in the down position on each side, creating a smooth counterbalance. That said, they aren’t exactly petite.
It’s true that the pistons themselves are generally smaller in an inline-four than they are in a two- or three-cylinder motorcycle, but there are more of them, which means that they still end up having more parts and taking up more space overall. That means the casing has to be bigger, which means more metal, which means more weight. That alone can cause a ripple of other issues, such as lowering fuel efficiency and making the bikes feel a little more intimidating to smaller or less confident riders who want something light.
Advertisement
What’s more, the vast majority of modern inline-four engines are mounted transversely. As a result, the straight row of four cylinders is mounted perpendicular to the bike’s frame, not parallel. This effectively makes the engine wider, with each side protruding farther from the centerline than you might get in a two- or three-cylinder engine. That, in turn, means the bike needs a wider frame to accommodate it. This is another factor that might be detrimental to smaller riders, as it can be difficult for them to comfortably place their feet flat on the ground when stopped if they need to straddle a significantly wider seat.
Advertisement
3. Inline-fours drive up price tags
DAMRONG RATTANAPONG/Shutterstock
Inline-four engines are complex machines that are meticulously engineered for smooth acceleration and raw horsepower. Four smaller pistons being attached to the crankshaft in a row create a constant state of balance within each revolution as the bike is consistently receiving power. This is how these engines can accelerate with minimal thumping, and it’s also why they produce that signature screaming exhaust sound. Getting this to work properly requires that all four cylinders be perfectly balanced to prevent them from ever falling out of sync, but that complexity comes at a cost.
We’ve already mentioned that inline-four engines are being used less because they are more expensive to manufacture than parallel twins and some other design styles, but it isn’t actually the manufacturers who swallow that cost. The 2026 Kawasaki Ninja 650, for instance, has a 649cc parallel-twin engine and retails for $7,599. Compare that to the 2026 Honda CBR650R, which runs on a 649cc inline-four. Both are Japanese sport bikes with the same displacement as well as comparable designs and features, but the Honda starts at $9,199. Then take a look at the supersports. The 2026 Kawasaki Ninja ZX6R has a 636cc inline-four engine and retails for $11,599. But despite having a lower displacement, it costs more than the $9,399 2026 Yamaha YZF-R7, which runs on a 689cc parallel-twin. Perhaps one of the most extreme examples might be within Kawasaki’s own line. The 2026 Ninja 500 has a 451cc parallel-twin and starts at $5,799 for the ABS model. The 2026 Ninja ZX-4RR has a 399cc inline-four cylinder engine and costs $9,999.
Advertisement
4. Inline-fours have higher maintenance costs
While we’ve discussed the fact that manufacturing costs drive up the prices of the bikes that run on inline-fours, you also might find that you’re spending a lot more at the mechanic than you were on your last motorcycle. The very intricacy of the inline-four’s design that makes it such a powerhouse can also drive up maintenance costs.
Part of this is simple math. More cylinders mean more parts that require maintenance (twice as many valves), so your mechanic will need to spend twice as long checking the cylinders simply because there are twice as many. This also means more expendable parts like spark plugs and gaskets, but this is only a small part of it. The bigger issue is the effort required to get inside the engine. The inline-four sitting horizontally across the motorcycle’s frame means that it isn’t easy to access from the outside. Mechanics will often need to remove the fairings and tank from the bike just to get to it, which can drive up labor costs quite a bit.
Then there’s the additional complexities of the design. A routine valve adjustment, for instance, might cost between $300 and $600 for an inline-four engine, which usually requires a shim-under-bucket style valve adjustment. That would only run you between $150 and $400 on a V-twin that uses a screw and locknut valve adjustment system. Some of them even use a hydraulic lift valve adjustment system that is self-adjusting and doesn’t need to be serviced at all unless it breaks.
Advertisement
5. Inline-fours are less fuel-efficient
Fuel efficiency wasn’t as big of a consideration for a lot of riders back in the inline-four’s heyday, but it’s definitely become a major factor in how people choose their motorcycles now. Unfortunately, inline-fours sacrifice a fair amount of fuel efficiency in favor of high-RPM power. This might not be that big a deal for the kinds of riders who only use their motorcycles at the track, but it’s definitely something to think about if you’re planning on riding one of these bikes for your daily commute.
Take a look at some of the most fuel-efficient motorcycles on the market, and you’ll quickly find that all of them, except of course for the electric and hybrid models, are powered by one- or two-cylinder engines. Of course, fuel efficiency can be affected by other factors, such as overall weight, gearbox type, chain drive, throttle control, tire pressure, modifications, cargo, and the rider’s weight. There are a few examples of inline-four bikes that are more fuel efficient than you might think, like the Kawasaki Z900, which can get up to 49 MPG. As a rule, however, inline-four bikes are consistently less fuel-efficient than most other engine types and often get city miles closer to those of an SUV than an economy vehicle. Even Honda, which is exceptionally well known for efficiency, can only offer about 40 MPG on its inline-four CBR600RR, while its parallel-twin CBR500R boasts over 65 MPG. Even the larger parallel-twin Kawasaki Ninja 650 is able to hit over 51 MPG.
Advertisement
How we listed these disadvantages
Inline-four engines are immensely popular, and they certainly have a lot of great things going for them. However, there are certain weaknesses that riders who are thinking about getting one should be aware of. There is a wide variety of inline-four engines that have been released over the years, and they are attached to an even wider variety of motorcycles. As such, it is difficult to make any universal claims about design or performance that won’t be disproven by at least one exception. That said, there are certain general rules of thumb that one can apply to the vast majority of them when looking at these weaknesses.
Advertisement
By taking a look at several different professional reviews, motorcycle forums, mechanic forums, and the raw stats of many of the inline-four motorcycles that are on the market today, we have rooted out five key weaknesses that appear to apply to most of them. Once we had our list of weaknesses, we sought to corroborate these claims by verifying them against specs, price comparisons, and reports from trusted sources. We then explained these weaknesses, breaking down why they are tied to the design and how they can serve as a detriment to the rider. In this way, we hope to arm prospective buyers with as much information as possible when weighing the pros and cons of a purchase.
Marvel capped off Saturday evening’s Hall H presentations at San Diego Comic-Con, giving audiences a small taste of what’s next on the menu. And we mean small. Kevin Feige and cast members teased out some movies (no TV shows, today), and we’re breaking it down for you here.
Footage from Avengers: Doomsday was shown, with Doom commanding sentinels and a history lesson on the dynamic between the Fantastic Four and the doctor. But there were only two other major announcements, and nothing for X-Men, and no chart outlining Phase 6 or Phase 7.
Ryan Gosling as Ghost Rider
Johnny Blaze is making his MCU debut with Ryan Gosling in the role, which has been rumored for some time among Marvel’s fandom. Shawn Levy will be directing the new movie for the MCU after his successful run with Deadpool & Wolverine. Could this eventually segue into Midnight Sons? Fingers crossed, my friends.
Agent Carter in Avengers: Doomsday
Hayley Atwell is now officially confirmed to be in Avengers: Doomsday as Agent Peggy Carter, who was first introduced in the MCU in Captain America: The First Avenger. She was in Hall H during Marvel’s presentation for the film.
Advertisement
Black Panther 3 coming in 2028
Feige pretended to exit the stage for the night but then walked back out with one more update: Black Panther 3 will arrive in Dec. 2028. Actor David Jonsson will play T’Challa Jr. in the film, which is directed by Ryan Coogler. Jonsson is best known for roles as Andy in Alien: Romulus, Peter in The Long Walk and as Gus Sackey in Industry.
Kourtnee Jackson
Senior Editor
Kourtnee covers streaming services and entertainment. She previously worked as an entertainment reporter at Endgame 360, where she wrote about film, television, music, celebrities and streaming platforms.
See full bio
Warner Bros. Discovery filed a lawsuit this week accusing Amazon of interference with contractual relations, breach of contract, and unfair competition.
As reported by Deadline, the lawsuit alleges Amazon has been “hurriedly seeking to pirate away a number of contracted employees,” including Pia Barlow, an HBO Max marketing executive who recently joined Amazon MGM Studios. Warner Bros. (whose pending acquisition by Paramount has been paused for at least a few months) said Barlow’s employment contract was “not set to expire until October 31, 2027.”
“In blatant disregard of established California law, Amazon has gone rogue by attempting to induce Plaintiffs’ employees with term employment agreements to breach those agreements with impunity, backed up with the ready assurance that Amazon will defend and indemnify them should they be held to account for their blatantly unlawful acts,” Warner Bros. said.
The company also accused Amazon of seeking to “tortiously induce another WBD employee to breach their term employment agreement, which was not set to expire until December 2027,” although that executive (believed to be HBO programming executive Francesca Orsi) ultimately stayed at Warner Bros.
Advertisement
Deadline noted that this lawsuit is likely to renew debates about whether term employment agreements are actually enforceable under California law.
Both 13-inch and 15-inch MacBook Air laptops are on sale at B&H this week, with new markdowns slashing up to $200 off a variety of configurations and color options.
Each of the triple-digit MacBook Air discounts highlighted below also includes free 2-day shipping within the contiguous U.S. so you can begin using your new laptop right away.
A new, adult T’Challa is joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Kevin Feige hit the stage for Marvel’s Hall H Comic-Con showing on Saturday and, toward the end, gave the audience an update on Black Panther 3. Director Ryan Coogler and actors Winston Duke and Letitia Wright were on hand to welcome David Jonsson to the MCU, who will play T’Challa’s son, T’Challa Jr.
Jonsson has appeared in films such as Alien: Romulus and The Long Walk. While no official title has been shared, Feige revealed that Black Panther 3 is due to hit theaters Dec. 15, 2028.
Coogler, who’s writing and directing the next installment of the series, has reportedly begun production. He helmed the first two Black Panther movies, which brought the late Chadwick Boseman to the screen as the royal hero. T’Challa Jr. appeared as a child at the end of Black Panther 2, and the character will clearly be aged up for the new movie.
It’s rumored that X-Men character Storm will be in the mix, who has a history with Wakanda (and Black Panther) in the comic books. With a standalone X-Men movie in the works and renewed enthusiasm for the mutants since the release of the animated X-Men ‘97 series, an interconnected storyline would make sense for the MCU. Also rumored to appear in the superhero film is Brother Voodoo, a sorcerer-superhero (like Doctor Strange) who also works with the dead.
Advertisement
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (aka Black Panther 2) introduced Tenoch Huerta’s Namor and his underwater kingdom into the MCU, and he’s slated to surface in this year’s Avengers: Doomsday, along with the new Black Panther, Shuri (played by Wright).
Kourtnee Jackson
Senior Editor
Kourtnee covers streaming services and entertainment. She previously worked as an entertainment reporter at Endgame 360, where she wrote about film, television, music, celebrities and streaming platforms.
See full bio
China fines Trip.com $765 million for forcing hotel partners into exclusive deals and controlling their pricing
China’s market regulator fined Trip.com Group $765 million on Saturday after concluding that the country’s largest online travel platform abused its dominant market position. The State Administration for Market Regulation said Trip.com used its traffic allocation algorithms, platform rules and technology to restrict hotel operators from listing on competing services and to control the prices they could charge. The penalty, totaling roughly five billion yuan, includes confiscated gains, a separate fine and an order to refund hotel security deposits.
SAMR launched the investigation in January after receiving complaints that Trip.com was forcing hotel partners into exclusive arrangements and demanding they offer their lowest online rates only on its platform. The regulator found the company had engaged in these practices since 2020, leveraging its control of about 56 percent of China’s online travel market to pressure operators who depended on it for visibility and bookings. Trip.com said in a statement on its official WeChat account that it accepts the decision and will implement rectification measures.
The fine is the largest antitrust penalty SAMR has imposed on a single Chinese tech company since it fined Alibaba 18 billion yuan in 2021 for similar abuse of market dominance. That case, which forced Alibaba to abandon exclusive dealing arrangements with merchants, set the template for Beijing’s broader crackdown on platform monopolies. The Trip.com penalty signals that the regulator’s appetite for enforcement has not waned, even as Beijing has shifted its messaging toward calibrated oversight rather than blanket crackdowns.
Advertisement
The 💜 of EU tech
The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!
The case also reflects regulators’ concern that fierce competition among online travel platforms has been squeezing hotel operators’ margins and contributing to deflationary pressure in parts of the Chinese economy. Beijing has been rewriting its e-commerce law to bring platform companies under tighter domestic oversight, with draft amendments published earlier this month proposing expanded regulatory tools for overseeing algorithms, traffic rules and pricing practices. Trip.com’s penalty lands squarely within that framework.
Founded in 1999, Trip.com operates through brands including Ctrip and Skyscanner and has grown into the world’s largest online booking platform by transaction volume. Its dominance in China gave it leverage to dictate terms to hotel partners, but that same market power made it a regulatory target as Beijing moved to curb what it views as monopolistic behaviour across its technology sector. The company has been ordered to undertake a comprehensive rectification plan, though the specifics of those changes have not yet been disclosed.
The US semiconductor and computing giant declared a revenue of $16.1bn for the period.
Intel has published markedly strong financial results for the second quarter of 2026 that exceeded financial analysts’ expectations.
The US semiconductor and computing giant declared a revenue of $16.1bn for the period, up by 25pc from $12.9bn in Q2 2025 and more than the anticipated ceiling of $14.8bn declared at the end of the first quarter of 2026.
“AI is driving unprecedented demand for compute, and as we continue to execute, Intel is well-positioned to capture sustainable growth across our CPU franchise, ASICs, advanced packaging and vast wafer foundry network,” said Lip-Bu Tan, Intel’s CEO.
Advertisement
“Our Q2 results represent our strongest revenue growth in more than 15 years, enabled by greater speed, accountability and customer focus.”
Gross margin grew to around 40pc from around 28pc year-on-year, while Intel generated $7bn in cash from operations during the recent quarter, it said.
Intel’s Foundry revenue for Q2 was up 31pc year-on-year to $5.8bn; its Client Computing and Physical AI Group grew by 13pc to $8.9bn; and the division for data centres and AI was up 59pc to $6.3bn.
“AI-driven compute continues to strengthen, and to support expected growth this year and next across products and foundry, we are meaningfully increasing our investments in equipment, clean room space and substrates,” said Dave Zinsner, Intel’s CFO.
Advertisement
The company anticipates revenue in the third quarter of 2026 to hit between $15.8bn and $16.8bn, and projects a gross margin of 41pc.
The company’s share price increased by up to 4pc during trading hours yesterday following publication of its financial results.
Intel is estimated to have reduced its headcount by more than 35,000 employees since 2024, with major cuts announced in both 2024 and 2025.
Earlier this month, the company announced a major investment in its Kildare, Ireland facility, where Intel intends to spend €5bn on the Leixlip campus.
Advertisement
Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login