The final stragglers testified on Wednesday in the Musk v. Altman trial. The witnesses generated few waves, aside from the revelation that Microsoft has so far spent over $100 billion on its partnership with OpenAI. Rather than focus on that, I wanted to bring you a candid observation that my colleague Maxwell Zeff and I can’t stop talking about after spending nearly three weeks watching the trial.

The courtroom is littered with butt cushions.

Several of the hard, wooden benches on the right side of US district Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers’ courtroom are reserved for OpenAI and Microsoft’s attorneys, executives, and other members of the defense. About 10 people, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and general counsel Che Chang, have benefitted from thick black cushions—the plushest of them from the brand Purple; $120 from Target—that spare their butts from hours of sitting. Some cushions have rounded corners, while others are square. On Wednesday, Chang even put one behind his back, a less common but not unprecedented move in the courtroom.

OpenAI President Greg Brockman and his wife, Anna, have watched a considerable portion of the trial—and have both been prolific users of pristine white pillows. Judging from the tags bursting from the seams, the pillows seem to be from the sleeping goods brand Coop, which sells a two pack of alternative down-filled throw pillows for $35.

On Wednesday, an OpenAI bodyguard carried a purple handbag into the courtroom, with a pillow for each of the Brockmans. Anna gave her husband just a minute to suffer in pillow-less oblivion before she discreetly passed one to him and then situated her own. I felt bad for OpenAI chief futurist Joshua Achiam, who later took Brockman’s seat but wasn’t left with either of the pillows. (Achiam eventually did obtain one of the more standard black cushions.)

OpenAI did not immediately respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

One longtime technology lawyer told WIRED that using cushions or pillows isn’t exactly “customary,” but noted, “it’s not totally out of left field.” Personally, he said, he has never seen lawyers use pillows or cushions during his trials, but then again, he’s “never been involved in a trial that has lasted as many days as that one.”

The core litigators in this case sit in comparatively luxurious leather chairs, though a couple do show signs of fraying, so maybe the padding isn’t as robust as it appears.

My last time in this courtroom for an hours-long stretch was in 2021, covering portions of the Epic Games v. Apple trial. But capacity was limited back then because of Covid concerns, so I had plenty of room to stretch out. This time around, the courtroom has been filled nearly to its maximum capacity—about 150 people—including bench seats for up to 90.

I thought about bringing my own cushion roughly an hour into my first day of the trial at the end of April, because, well, these benches are deeply uncomfortable. But I didn’t want to come off as weak. None of the other two dozen or so reporters regularly in attendance—including one who is pregnant—seemed to bring cushions, at least, initially. So I went through a run of six days with my bottom and back getting sorer by the minute.

Last week, after a particularly brutal morning, I finally decided to bring in some help. I couldn’t find the well-padded seat cushion meant for stadium bleachers, so I settled for a “cooling” cushion passed out at the steaming-hot outdoor venues at the Tokyo Olympics. About two seconds into using it on Wednesday morning for the first time, I ruled it counterproductive. It was too small and too thin to offer any relief. My back got particularly stressed when furiously typing notes about the Musk-inspired jackass trophy, which reportedly once had its own pillow.

Four hours in, I gave up on the pillow entirely. But I noticed one New York Times reporter who eventually caved, as well as the courtroom artist—who has a particularly colorful cushion—remained seated on their pillows. Maybe I’ll find a better remedy for next week, when Gonzalez Rogers will hear arguments about potential penalties.

Maxwell Zeff contributed to this report.

This is an edition of Maxwell Zeff’s Model Behavior newsletter. Read previous newsletters here.

Strands is the NYT’s latest word game after the likes of Wordle, Spelling Bee and Connections – and it’s great fun. It can be difficult, though, so read on for my Strands hints.

Want more word-based fun? Then check out my NYT Connections today and Quordle today pages for hints and answers for those games, and Marc’s Wordle today page for the original viral word game.

• ZAM stacks nine functional memory layers vertically inside every compact module
• Each ZAM memory layer reportedly contains exactly 1.125GB of DRAM capacity
• Estimated ZAM bandwidth figures now approach Nvidia HBM4 performance territory closely

Computer memory architecture is set to undergo a significant structural transformation in the coming years.

A new design called Zero-Angle Memory (ZAM) stacks chips vertically rather than spreading them across a flat surface, a shift that could increase data transfer speeds while lowering power consumption.

from the lawless-government dept

Let’s hope the word “possibly” can be stricken from this headline in the near future. And while contempt charges don’t mean much to an administration that is openly contemptuous of anything that hints at checks or balances, it would, at the very least, encourage other judges to stop treating the Trump DOJ like it’s worthy of anything less than contempt.

If nothing else, federal judge Melissa DuBose has at least forced the government to publicly admit it’s been lying to her.

A federal judge said Monday that the Trump administration had put her security at risk by posting a “patently false” allegation that she knowingly released an ICE detainee with an international warrant for murder.

Justice Department attorney Kevin Bolan profusely apologized to Rhode Island-based U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose for the press release posted last week by the Department of Homeland Security, which Bolan acknowledged “simply was not true.”

Let’s go live (because — for whatever reason — the press release is still “live”) to the DHS website posting, which leads off with this headline because it’s operated by unserious people who have chosen to serve an autocratic megalomaniac rather than the nation itself:

Activist Biden Judge Releases Violent Criminal Illegal Alien Wanted for Murder

A judge ordering the release of an arrestee on bail is rarely reason for a public statement by a federal agency. Normally, they’ve got better stuff to do that engage in personal attacks on judges who have done nothing more than interpreted the law and ruled accordingly.

Every alleged crime is noted in bold type in the press release, which also includes this statement from the DHS (emphasis in the original):

“Bryan Rafael Gomez is a criminal illegal alien from the Dominican Republic with an international warrant for homicide,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis. “An activist judge appointed by Joe Biden released this wanted murderer back into American communities. This is yet another example of an activist judge trying to thwart President Trump’s mandate from the American people to remove criminal illegal aliens from our communities. Under President Trump and Secretary Mullin, DHS will continue to fight for the removal of criminal illegal aliens who have no right to be in our country.”

Even if you choose to ignore the headline and the politically motivated attacks on the judge, you’re still left with something that isn’t normally the way the federal government does business. After all, judges are part of a co-equal branch, and there’s little to be gained by pretending normal court stuff is “activism.”

There’s even less to be gained when it’s discovered that the government’s lawyers didn’t bother to apprise the judge of this homicide warrant the DHS is now using to attack the judiciary. And what’s left of the DOJ appears to have realized this belatedly. There’s a lot of contrition in this short filing that Assistant US Attorney Charles Calenda (who oversees the affected jurisdiction) hopes will defuse the judge’s righteous anger.

Signed by Assistant US Attorney Kevin Bolan, the response to Judge DuBose’s order to show cause blames ICE for misleading the judge, even though it was Bolan who ultimately did the misleading:

Before the response was filed, I had been informed by ICE about the Petitioner’s pending arrest warrant issued on January 24, 2023, from a court in the Dominican Republic and that I could not disclose that information. I was not aware that ICE had previously disclosed that same information on April 16, 2026. In failing to disclose the information regarding Petitioner’s criminal history, I relied on ICE’s representation that I was not permitted to disclose that information and understood that a legitimate law enforcement reason prevented disclosure. Judge DuBose, therefore, lacked that information about the Petitioner’s criminal background when she granted the petition.

I sincerely apologize to Judge DuBose, personally, and to the entire Court for the consequences of this lack of disclosure.

Sure, contrition is welcomed. But it’s not quite as welcome when (1) ICE had already disclosed this fact, (2) the DHS continues to post an unwarranted attack on this “activist judge,” and (3) nobody in the government appears willing to act honestly until a court forces them to do it.

The DOJ may have some plausible deniability, but that relies on everyone assuming this administration is so disjointed some fingers may not even know what other fingers are doing, which is something that needs to be addressed before we get to larger questions vis-à-vis right hands and left hands knowing what each other are up to.

And while the DOJ may have some legitimate complaints about being both understaffed and overwhelmed by immigration cases, the problem lies with Donald Trump and his cabinet full of bigoted middle managers. The administration is still hoping to eject nearly a half-million more people by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the DOJ continues to bleed talent thanks to loyalty purges and prosecutors walking off the job because they can’t stomach what they’re being commanded to do.

The solution is contempt charges. It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s a start. Judge DuBose says she’s looking at both the DOJ and DHS. If any entity should bear the brunt of this, it’s the DHS, which continues to post misleading invective targeting this judge, as well as being instrumental in the burial of information the judge should have had access to while making a release determination.

And while I understand that contempt charges just mean taxpayers will continue to bail out an administration unworthy of its tax dollars, it will at least contribute to the steady drip of adverse rulings. When enough of those pile up, it becomes a flood this administration won’t be able to contain.

Filed Under: contempt, dhs, doj, kevin bolan, mass deportation, rhode island, rule of law, trump administration

AI tools are everywhere, so why do most people still use them like it’s 2015? Artificial intelligence now sits inside almost every tool you open, from search engines and office apps to browsers, phones, and creative software.

Updates keep adding assistants, copilots, and generators, each one promising to change how work gets done.

On paper, adoption looks high. Millions of users already have these features available, often switched on by default, waiting inside menus most people rarely explore.

Actual behaviour moves more slowly. Many users still write documents line by line, search the web the same way they did years ago, and complete tasks manually, even when the software suggests another option.

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 goal was never to replace creativity or talent, but to augment it, and that only works when people understand where the new capability fits into what they already do.

In this article, we look at why AI tools are everywhere, yet everyday software use still feels stuck in the past. The real problem isn’t access to AI, it’s adoption.

Software vendors are not moving slowly. New AI features appear in updates almost every week, added to tools people already use for writing, coding, design, search, and communication.

Access is no longer the barrier. What’s missing is the moment when the user actually learns where the new feature fits into their existing workflow.

Most software still expects people to figure that out on their own, which is why tools like WalkMe Learning Arc focus on teaching features within the application rather than sending users to separate documentation or training portals.

The shift reflects a wider realisation across the industry that releasing functionality does not mean people will use it, a problem also discussed in debates around AI oversight and usability in clarity as a strategy.

Most learning still happens outside the tool itself. Users are expected to read guides, watch tutorials, or sit through formal sessions similar to traditional employee training programmes, even though the real difficulty only appears once they are back inside the software, trying to complete a task under time pressure.

In practice, people fall back on habits they already trust, ignoring features they never had time to explore properly. Innovation keeps moving forward, but user capabilities move at a different pace.

Feature overload is making modern software harder to use

Modern apps are not struggling because they lack capability. They struggle because every update adds another layer on top of what was already there. AI did not replace old interfaces; it stacked on top of them, which means users now face more options, more panels, and more assistants than before.

Even discussions about how AI analytics agents need guardrails, not more model size, reflect the same concern that adding intelligence does not automatically make software easier to use.

Open almost any tool today and the pattern looks familiar: office software with built-in copilots and sidebars, design tools filled with generators, templates, and prompts, productivity apps with chatbots inside every menu, and platforms that expect users to learn through guides similar to employee training.

When the interface becomes crowded, people stop experimenting and return to what they already know. More power sounds good in release notes, but in practice, it often means more decisions on every screen. That is why usage patterns often lag years behind the technology already available.

People don’t resist AI; they resist changing how they work

Most users are not against artificial intelligence. What they resist is changing the way they already know how to work.

Once a routine feels reliable, people repeat it without thinking, even when the software offers a faster method. Habit becomes the default, which helps explain why the gap is growing between AI availability and real capability.

While most employees are expected to use AI at work, only a minority feel properly trained to do so. Microsoft research shows that 66% of leaders say they wouldn’t hire someone without AI skills.

Many are learning on their own while job requirements move closer to the skill sets now associated with future new jobs developers rather than traditional roles.

Learning a new workflow sounds simple until it interrupts real work. Muscle memory takes over, deadlines get closer, and there is rarely enough guidance inside the tool itself to make the new method feel safe to try.

The gap between innovation and adoption is mostly human, not technical, which is why the next shift in AI will not come from better models alone.

The next wave of AI will focus on teaching, not just automating

The next phase of AI development is starting to move away from adding more features and toward helping users understand the ones already there.

Instead of expecting people to read guides or watch tutorials like it’s 2015, newer tools are beginning to guide actions directly within the interface, showing step-by-step suggestions as the task progresses.

Copilots that recommend the next command, walkthroughs that appear in the middle of a workflow, and interfaces that adapt to how the user works are becoming more common across productivity, design, and development software.

This shift is also why more teams are asking questions like how to choose a digital adoption platform, as learning is no longer something that happens before using software, but during it.

The tools that stand out will not be the ones with the longest feature lists, but the ones people can actually understand without stopping their work to figure them out.

“It’s like a community, right? And it’s a global community that people really love and identify with.”

That’s how Bobby Kim, Global Creative Director at Disney Consumer Products, describes Star Wars fandom. And it’s a framing that feels especially fitting as another May the 4th is behind us and we’re weeks out from a big-screen debut.

Key takeaways:

• The Federal Communications Commission has banned the sale of new foreign-made routers in the US. The sweeping order applies to virtually every Wi-Fi router currently available in the US market.
• After speaking with seven industry experts, I recommend holding off on buying a new router if you can. 
• Under the current rules, banned routers will no longer receive essential security firmware and software updates after Jan. 1, 2029. 
• The FCC’s action has effectively frozen the entire market while router companies scramble to gain approval. 
• More specific information on which router companies will be subject to the ban is expected to become clearer within the next month or two. 

In my eight years of writing and reviewing broadband and routers, I’ve rarely seen news that I would describe as unprecedented. The FCC’s March 23 decision to ban foreign-made routers is absolutely unprecedented.

The sweeping order applies to any router in which any stage of “manufacturing, assembly, design and development” occurs outside the US — in other words, just about any router you can buy right now. The argument is that they pose “unacceptable risks” to national security. Ironically, the order also prevents existing foreign-made routers from receiving vital security updates after Jan. 1, 2029, an extension of the initial March 1, 2027, deadline.

The ban doesn’t apply to routers that were already authorized by the FCC — only new models that haven’t been approved yet. That means every router that was available before the order is still available today, and router companies can still restock them using their existing manufacturing processes. So far, both Eero and Netgear have received exemptions from the ban, and will be able to sell new models in the US going forward.

Essentially, the FCC is freezing the Wi-Fi router market. As William Budington, a technologist for the digital rights nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation, put it to me, “This is using an extremely blunt instrument.”

Where previous FCC bans have been limited to specific companies, such as last year’s push to ban TP-Link routers, this one affects an entire industry. So where does that leave someone who needs a new Wi-Fi router? Should you buy a model you’ve had your eye on in case it sells out? Or is it better to wait and see which companies the FCC considers foreign-made?

I know what I would do, but I gut-checked my advice with four cybersecurity experts. Turns out, we agree. 

My advice: Hold off on buying a new router for now

When I first saw the FCC’s announcement, I couldn’t stop thinking about how much chaos this would introduce to the US router market. As I tried to tease out which manufacturers would count as “foreign-made,” it quickly became clear how deeply international the supply chains for routers are. 

Understanding the scope of the ban

Take Netgear. While it’s a US-founded and headquartered company, it manufactures routers in Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia and Taiwan. According to a recent report from the trade group Global Electronics Association, “Virtually no consumer router is manufactured entirely within the United States.”

I don’t have any issues recommending routers that were manufactured abroad. After all, they’d already gone through the FCC’s authorization process, and I haven’t seen convincing evidence that any one router brand has more hardware vulnerabilities than another. 

Thomas Pace, CEO of cybersecurity firm NetRise, told me last year during an interview about the potential TP-Link ban: “We’ve analyzed an astonishing amount of TP-Link firmware. We find stuff, but we find stuff in everything.”

I just finished testing, reviewing and rating over 30 routers, and after years of resistance, I finally concluded that Wi-Fi 7 routers are worth the money for the speeds you get. While I stand by my recommendations, with this ban in place, the router you buy today may not be any good in a year. 

The future-looking security risk

Then I saw the FCC’s Public Notice on the ban, which specifies that manufacturers can continue providing software and firmware updates “at least until March 1, 2027,” which has since been extended to at least Jan. 1, 2029. That means if you own a foreign-made router — if you own any router, in other words — it won’t be able to get security patches after that deadline. 

That’s why I think the wise move here is to wait on buying one if you can. Keeping your router’s firmware up-to-date is an essential part of securing your home network. If you buy from a router company that doesn’t get an exemption from this ban, you risk having an unsecured device a year from now. 

It’s an ironic side effect of an order that is ostensibly designed to keep Americans safer: They may no longer be able to get the latest security fixes.  

“If you’re limiting the ability of people to get security updates, then you’re making the problem worse, not better,” Alan Butler, senior counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told me. “A lot of those routers are going to turn into pumpkins in a year unless they extend this waiver.”

By saying you can update your firmware “at least until Jan. 1, 2029,” the FCC does leave some wiggle room for an extension, and the Commission has suggested it could remove the deadline entirely. But until we know more about which companies the FCC considers foreign-made and which will be exempt, I wouldn’t feel comfortable recommending spending money on a new router right now. 

“The risk is very real,” said Rik Ferguson, vice president of security intelligence at cybersecurity company Forescout. “If you find yourself in a situation where that update pipeline has been switched off, then you definitely have to consider whether you want to keep using that device.”

“The risk just keeps going the longer time passes, because chances are that there will be new vulnerabilities being found that you cannot patch,” added Daniel Dos Santos, vice president of research at Forescout.

Advice for immediate router needs  

If your old router stopped working, I’m not going to tell you to wait for clarity from the FCC to get back on Wi-Fi — the timeline for concern is more in years than months. A good compromise might be to buy an older budget router rather than the latest Wi-Fi 7 model you’ve had your eye on. But if you can afford to wait a month or two, it’s worth exercising some caution. 

“I do think this is going to become a mess very quickly,” Butler said.

This is the messiest point in the process we’re likely to see. As the dust settles in the coming weeks, we’ll likely have better information on which routers will still be safe to use a year from now. 

What if you rent your router from your ISP?

Where does this order leave the 70% of Americans who rent their internet equipment from their internet service providers? The FCC’s ban will impact them, too, as they also rely heavily on foreign-made routers. 

Essentially, my advice is no different than it is for people who own their routers: Don’t panic, and wait to see how things shake out. If you haven’t upgraded your equipment in a few years, now might be a good time to call your ISP and ask them what options are available. But it’s not likely that they’ll proactively replace them on their own, says Doug Dawson, a veteran broadband analyst and author of the industry blog POTs and PANs.

“I don’t see any mass replacement of these things, because it’s just too much money,” Dawson told me. “I’d guess before any deadline on firmware updates, they’re going to issue those three days before that and then they’re going to cross their fingers that they don’t start seeing problems.”

Expert opinion: Is your current router still safe to use?

When I polled four cybersecurity experts, I was surprised to find that they were generally in favor of the FCC taking action to protect router security in theory, but critical of the execution. 

“It’s going to impact many harmless products in order to stem a real problem,” Budington said.  “It’s also not particularly well-targeted, since routers are only one part of the problem, along with IoT devices.”

The concern for national security risk 

The FCC says that routers produced abroad were “directly implicated” in the Volt, Flax and Salt Typhoon cyberattacks. These attacks aren’t necessarily targeting an average person’s data, but they can turn your router into a tool to be used in malicious attacks. 

“The individual user who owns the router probably doesn’t even know anything about it,” Butler said. “It’s happening in the background without their knowledge, and it’s not necessarily affecting them directly in any way that they can notice.” 

In the Salt Typhoon attack, hackers gained access to data from millions of people through their internet providers, aiming to gain access to information from court-authorized wiretaps. It was a particularly bold instance of a tried-and-true hacker approach called “spray and pray”: Find default login credentials and try them on as many connected devices as you can. 

“It can be only one router out of 5,000, but that one can be a bingo,” Sergey Shykevich, a threat intelligence manager at Check Point Research, told me about these types of attacks. “It’s mostly just easy. In many cases, you don’t have to be a very sophisticated actor, or even nation-state, in order to be successful.”

How you can secure your router right now 

It’s just as easy for hackers to gain access through a router’s default credentials as it is for you to change your own settings. Most routers have an app that lets you update your login credentials from there, but you can also type your router’s IP address into a URL. These are different from your Wi-Fi name and password, which should also be changed every six months or so. It’s also a good idea to keep your firmware updated, which you can do automatically in your router’s settings or by manually downloading updates in your router’s app or web portal.

When will we know more?

I wish I could point to another time when the FCC ordered a blanket ban on an entire category of consumer products, but nothing like this has happened before. Manufacturers can apply for “Conditional Approval,” and they are likely scrambling behind the scenes to make the cut. When I reached out to the FCC for more clarity on the order, I was referred to the commission’s “Covered List” FAQ page.

My best guess is that we’ll learn more specifics on which companies are banned in the next month or so — an estimate that was echoed by two industry observers I spoke with. But the wait could be even longer. Budington told me he thinks router companies might wait until the ban is lifted rather than hustle to try to move their entire supply chains to the US. 

No matter how it shakes out, we’ll likely look back on this as the most chaotic chapter of the router ban story. Unless you need a new router immediately, there’s a good chance you’ll be able to make a more informed decision a month from now. 

Makers will always be chasing a dream, a wild concept, and few of those ideas come close to producing results as this one. The YapStopper 3000 is a device that can detect what someone is saying from across the room, add a tiny bit of delay, then fire that precise audio back at them, to the point that their brain can’t seem to put two meaningful sentences together.

Delayed auditory feedback results in a slight mismatch between what a person says and what they hear a split second later. The brain expects instant input from its own speech, so when there is a delay, the timing is completely thrown off. People stumble over their words, resulting in protracted pauses and fractured thoughts. Typically, getting that effect to work requires some sort of special setup, such as wearing headphones or being in a carefully controlled environment, but our small construct skips all of that and beams the delayed voice directly at the individual who refuses to quiet speaking.

Sale

Logitech Creators Blue Yeti USB Microphone for PC, Mac, Gaming, Recording, Streaming, Podcasting, Studio…

• Custom three-capsule array: This professional USB mic produces clear, powerful, broadcast-quality sound for YouTube videos, Twitch game streaming…
• Blue VO!CE software: Elevate your streamings and recordings with clear broadcast vocal sound and entertain your audience with enhanced effects…
• Four pickup patterns: Flexible cardioid, omni, bidirectional, and stereo pickup patterns allow you to record in ways that would normally require…

You can thank the high-frequency sound for the accurate targeting. The YapStopper emits sound waves at 40 kilohertz, which are far beyond what human ears can detect, but those waves transmit the delayed speech as a type of ‘hidden message’, similar to how a radio station wraps music inside the carrier frequency. Since the wavelength is so short, the sound beam simply zooms in on its target rather of spreading out all over the place, which is made feasible by an array of ultrasonic transducers that basically work together to enhance the beam, resulting in an acoustic spotlight effect. You simply point the built-in laser, turn the switch, and the delayed audio is precisely on target while everyone else hears nothing.

To collect the original audio on the other end, a shotgun mic works well because it listens in from a distance, picks up the speaker’s words clearly, and sends them to the delay circuit. After it has been modified and delayed, the signal is sent out through the transducer array via the ultrasonic carrier. This is powered by a cordless drill battery, which is charged to 24 volts using a boost converter. All of the driver chips, MOSFETs, oscillators, and tuning bits and bobs are housed on a single custom circuit board that fits snugly inside this handy small box. You can adjust the delay and volume on the fly using simple knobs, or flip a switch to turn it on/off.

Months of careful assembly went into every detail. The maker spent five full months debugging, soldering, and replacing parts. Short circuits would sometimes emerge out of nowhere at the worst possible time. Despite all of these obstacles, the underlying principle continued to work. With a simple test using a phone app and some standard headphones, they demonstrated that only the delay may throw speech off track. But what they did with this hardware version was to make it function without the requirement for headphones on the target, which is a real-world feat. More distance testing is still needed, but the prototype demonstrates that directed delivery works in practice once all of the electronics are in sync.
[Source]