Long journeys highlight how quickly your phone can drain, with all those maps, images, and texts eating away at the battery like there’s no tomorrow. The INIU power bank, priced at $19.79 after coupon is automatically applied at checkout (was $33), comes to the rescue, packing 20,000mAh into a body measuring 2.8 x 4.1 x 1.2 inches and weighing only 11.1 ounces. Tuck it into a jacket pocket or side compartment, and it will sit quietly until you need it.

Its high-density cells are capable of packing a lot of power into such a small footprint without losing output quality. In general, a full charge will last your iPhone 16 up to four complete recharges or your Galaxy S23 up to three, but in practice, it all depends on screen brightness, apps, and so on, so don’t be surprised if it lasts you a full day of mixed stuff before needing a top-up.

LEGO – Speed Champions Ferrari 812 Competizione 76914

• Iconic LEGO Collection – The LEGO Speed Champions collection is full of iconic toy car models, including the Pagani Utopia (76915) and Porsche…
• LEGO Ferrari Collectible – Features a LEGO Speed Champions collectible model car replica of the Ferrari 812 Competizione plus a driver minifigure with…
• Race Driver Minifigure – The set includes a LEGO race driver minifigure to be placed behind the wheel of the race car toy for superfast action on the…

Recharging is a continuous 22.5 watts using PD & QC protocols so your phone charges up faster than with typical banks, which is good. One end is lined with three ports, two USB-C and one USB-A. Two or three devices can share the load, consuming up to 15 watts total. The bank also includes a short braided USB-C cable with a wrist band, eliminating the need to rummage through your luggage for extra cords or get held up at security.

Rather than an ambiguous battery indicator, the front boasts a handy LED display that shows you exactly what percentage is remaining. That way, you can quickly assess whether it will withstand another gadget or if it requires some TLC on its own. Recharging the bank takes about six hours with a regular wall adapter, which is quite fair. The 74-watt-hour rating is airline certified, so there’s no need for any further paperwork.

Hikers and festival-goers appreciate the built-in torch for late-night trips to the restroom or getting to your car in a parking lot. The outside case is durable enough for daily use, and the entire thing stays cool even when left on for extended periods of time.

• Pennsylvania residents revolt against expanding hyperscale data center infrastructure projects statewide
• Utility protections failed to calm growing public anger over development impacts
• Former supporters of Governor Shapiro openly threatened political retaliation during heated public meetings

A furious backlash against data center expansion in the state has placed Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro directly in the crosshairs of his own constituents.

During a tense recent two-hour town hall, roughly 20 speakers systematically dismantled the administration’s approach to infrastructure development.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Inside Climate News: A proposed merger of the largest utility in the country by market value, NextEra Energy, with the sixth-largest, Dominion, would create a megacompany at a time when data centers and rapid increases in electricity demand are reshaping the industry. The proposal, announced Monday morning and contingent on state and federal regulatory approval, would result in a company that leads in nearly every aspect of the US power and utility industry, including overall electricity generation, natural gas generation, and renewables. The $67 billion deal combines NextEra’s size and reach with Dominion’s positioning as the local utility for the world’s largest concentration of data centers in northern Virginia. But the results are likely bad for consumers and the environment, creating a company with enormous financial and political strength that will be difficult to effectively regulate, according to consumer advocates and analysts.

For perspective, only Exxon Mobil and Chevron would be larger based on market value among US-based energy companies. “Mergers are not about consumers; they’re about shareholders,” said Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at Harvard Law School. “For the Dominion shareholders, they are selling their shares at a premium. The executives are getting massive payouts for facilitating this, assuming it all goes through, and obviously NextEra believes the transaction is going to add value to the company. Ratepayers are all an afterthought.” The deal makes financial sense for both companies, said Andrew Bischof, an equity analyst for Morningstar. “We view the transaction as allowing NextEra to accelerate its data center ambitions, which had trailed those of its regulated peers, by using Dominion’s expertise and relationships to expedite NextEra’s data center hub plans,” he said in a note to clients.

NextEra, based in Juno Beach, Florida, includes Florida Power & Light, the largest regulated electricity utility in the state, and NextEra Energy Resources, a wholesale electricity supplier that owns power plants across the nation. Dominion, based in Richmond, Virginia, includes regulated utilities serving much of Virginia, parts of North Carolina and South Carolina, and other assets across the country. The company would be called NextEra Energy, and NextEra CEO John W. Ketchum would serve in the same role after the deal closes. Robert M. Blue, Dominion’s CEO, would be the CEO for regulated utilities for the merged company. The parties said they expect regulatory approvals to take 12 to 18 months. NextEra shareholders would own 74.5 percent and Dominion shareholders would own 25.5 percent, respectively, of the combined company in the all-stock transaction. “We are bringing NextEra Energy and Dominion Energy together because scale matters more than ever — not for the sake of size, but because scale translates into capital and operating efficiencies,” Ketchum said in a statement.

Although the companies claim the deal would produce savings, including $2.25 billion in Dominion customer bill credits, former regulator Marissa Paslick Gillett said she was “flabbergasted by the tone deafness,” arguing that major utility mergers rarely deliver the promised “synergies” and often create “a behemoth” that is harder to regulate.

Others warned that a larger NextEra could use its political power “to the disadvantage of ratepayers,” while climate advocates said expanding methane gas plants to serve data centers would worsen pollution and leave vulnerable communities “at the short end of the stick.”

from the oh-so-now-you’re-concerned? dept

A couple weeks back, Supreme Court watcher Steve Vladeck pointed out a fascinating “tell” by Justice Samuel Alito in dealing with stays that he will issue on shadow docket requests. If he is prone to agree with the underlying claim, he’ll issue an unbounded stay on a lower court’s ruling. If he is inclined to disagree with the underlying ruling, he issues a temporary stay with a short deadline before the stay is lifted. He noticed this in particular with the stay that Alito issued in response to the Fifth Circuit’s ruling blocking prescriptions of the abortion drug mifepristone without an in-person visit (an attempt to block the pills from being sent to the various Southern states covered by the Fifth Circuit). In that case, Alito had a short deadline before the stay would be lifted, in contrast to how he tends to treat such stays when he agrees with the result:

First, Justice Alito waited almost 48 hours to act—a period during which there was quite a lot of chaos across the country among doctors, pharmacists, and patients over whether and to what extent they were bound by Friday’s Fifth Circuit decision. 48 hours may not seem like a long time, but for comparison, in November, Alito issued an administrative stay in the Texas redistricting case just 68 minutes after Texas’s application for emergency relief was docketed by the Supreme Court (both of which happened after hours on a Friday night).

Second, and speaking of the Texas case, Alito’s administrative stays in the mifepristone case had something that his administrative stay in the Texas case didn’t—a deadline (next Monday at 5 p.m. ET). This follows a much broader pattern—in which Alito issues indefinite administrative stays in cases in which he appears to be sympathetic to the applicants, but imposes deadlines on the stays in cases in which he doesn’t. Before Monday, the last nine administrative stays in which Alito imposed deadlines were all cases in which at least one of the applicants had been the Biden administration. In contrast, Alito imposed no deadline in the Texas redistricting case; a potentially significant non-delegation case from 2024; and several other cases with … less … of an ideological valence.

To be sure, Alito isn’t the only justice to ever put a deadline on an administrative stay; Justices Gorsuch and Jackson have also each done it exactly once. And although the deadlines tend to create unnecessary tension and stress for both the parties and the Supreme Court’s press corps (who worry about what will happen if the deadline comes and goes with no action—which appeared to happen in the Texas SB4 immigration case in March 2024), they’re not especially significant beyond that. But it certainly seems like a petty way to treat parties differently based upon what you think of their claims.

Then, despite that short deadline (which, to be fair, was extended three days), the Supreme Court waited until 26 minutes past the deadline to issue its unexplained shadow docket ruling keeping the stay in place until after the rest of the proceedings play out (like a cert petition to the Supreme Court, and then a more complete ruling on the merits).

As a site that regularly calls out and complains about shadow docket rulings, and in particular unexplained shadow docket rulings, it’s unfortunate that the majority didn’t explain their reasoning — and equally unfortunate that Alito forced a rushed decision in the first place.

I know that the justices hate the term “shadow docket,” preferring either the “emergency” docket or the “interim” docket, but if they’re going to call it that they should really only use it for issues that are emergencies or for interim relief — the very limited number of scenarios where real unmitigated damage could be done in the interim until a thorough review has been conducted. But that’s just not the case most of the time. Relatedly, those rulings should have extremely narrow and limited precedential power. In theory that was the case until last year when some of the Justices (most notably, Justice Gorsuch) started whining about judges following actual full merits rulings as precedent, rather than magically applying unreasoned shadow docket decisions.

And while there is plenty of analysis elsewhere of the impact of last week’s late night ruling, I wanted to highlight the sheer hypocrisy* of Alito whining about the Justices not giving a reason for their stay. In his own dissent (which is likely why the ruling came out late, coming after Alito’s own needlessly imposed deadline), he starts off by complaining about the lack of any reasoning:

The Court’s unreasoned order granting stays in this case is remarkable.

Given how often Alito has signed onto other “unreasoned” shadow docket rulings when he agreed with them, it’s worth calling out the brazenness of complaining about the very practice he’s helped normalize.

* I use the word “hypocrisy” here deliberately for two reasons. First, because it is incredibly hypocritical. Second, because Alito’s ruling had an embarrassing typo, in which he referred to the litigation involving the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine as the Alliance for Hypocritic Medicine. This typo was one of many that the Supreme Court had to issue corrections on the filing not once, but twice, before finally fixing this particular typo.

And while the Wall Street Journal can pretend that shadow docket critics don’t care about unexplained shadow docket rulings when they go in their favor, that’s bullshit. Unexplained SCOTUS rulings are bad no matter what. In an ideal world, Alito wouldn’t have imposed an artificially short deadline on the administrative stay, and the court would have given some explanation for its decision — rather than leaving us to read tea leaves from Alito and Thomas’s odd dissents.

For what it’s worth, Vladeck also does an excellent job pointing out the fundamental inanity and contradictions of both Alito and Thomas’s dissents in this case.

First, Justice Thomas went full Comstock Act, arguing that all dispensation of mifepristone through the mail is illegal—never mind that the Department of Justice took a different position as recently as 2022. Putting aside the (well-documented) weaknesses of the Comstock Act arguments, Justice Thomas is simply wrong to argue that parties “cannot, in any legally relevant sense, be irreparably harmed by a court order that makes it more difficult for them to commit crimes.” As the Trump cases have regularly illustrated, a party can be irreparably harmed (at least in view of a majority of the current Court—including Justice Thomas) by a court order that makes it more difficult for them to break the law. Justice Thomas also apparently saw no problem with the Fifth Circuit issuing nationwide relief under the APA—even though he joined a 2023 concurrence by Justice Gorsuch arguing that such universal vacaturs were likely not authorized by the APA. Needless to say, that inconsistency was … not addressed.

And then there’s Justice Alito’s dissent. Alito opened by claiming that “[w]hat is at stake is the perpetration of a scheme to undermine our decision in Dobbs.” Of course, Dobbs insisted that it was returning the question of abortion to the states, whereas the Fifth Circuit ruling would’ve required in-person doctor visits on a nationwide basis. In any event, though, the FDA first got rid of the in-person doctor-visit requirement in 2021—before Dobbs was decided. So the “scheme to undermine Dobbs” began … before Dobbs.

Advertisement

There’s more at the link.

But at a time when the Supreme Court keeps telling us we shouldn’t believe that they make decisions on partisan grounds, it sure would help if they actually stopped doing things differently depending on the partisan valence of each case — something Alito seems to do quite regularly.

It really seems like we need serious reform of the Supreme Court. I’ve already argued that we should increase the number of Justices to 100 or more (to the point where no single Justice matters so much anymore), but any serious reform needs to contend with the abuses of the shadow docket, and making sure that it really is only used for emergency situations where an interim ruling is necessary for maintaining the status quo until a full briefing on the merits can occur.

Justice Alito appears to want to have two different sets of rules, depending on his feelings towards the parties. That’s the opposite of supposedly blind justice. If the court fears that its rulings are seen as illegitimate, then it should start by making sure Alito stops treating parties very differently depending on how aligned they are with his personal ideological beliefs.

Filed Under: 5th circuit, abortion, clarence thomas, louisiana, mifepristone, samuel alito, shadow docket, supreme court

Security researcher Brian Krebs brings us the news that America’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Agency (CISA) has had a large store of plaintext passwords, SSH private keys, tokens, and “other sensitive CISA assets” exposed in a public GitHub repo since at least November 2025.

The now-offline public repo—named, somewhat aspirationally, “Private-CISA”—was brought to Krebs’ attention by GitGuardian’s Guillaume Valadon, who was alerted to the repo’s presence by GitGuardian’s public code scans. Krebs says that Valadon approached him after receiving no responses from the Private-CISA repo’s owner.

In an email to Krebs, Valadon claimed that the repo’s commit logs show that GitHub’s default protections against committing secrets—protections designed to protect unwitting or unskilled developers against exactly this kind of stupidness—had been disabled by the repo’s administrator.

Testing by Seralys founder Philippe Caturegli showed that this was not a joke or hoax and that he was able to use the credentials in the Private-CISA repo to gain access to multiple Amazon Web Services GovCloud accounts “at a high privilege level.”

Krebs notes that the repo appeared to be managed by Virginia-based Nightwing, a CISA contractor. Nightwing has so far not commented publicly, instead referring questions back to CISA.

This isn’t the first time CISA has screwed up—in fact, it’s not even the first time this year. In January, polygraph-failing acting CISA Director Madhu Gottumukkala uploaded sensitive government documents to ChatGPT after demanding and receiving an exemption to the agency policy that prohibited ChatGPT’s use by CISA personnel. Gottumukkala was removed from his role in February.

Google unveiled another AI content-generation tool on Tuesday at its Google I/O developer conference. Are we really surprised? 

Gemini Omni was announced at the Shoreline Amphitheatre in Mountain View, California, alongside a slew of agentic AI features, such as Gemini Spark and Universal Cart (check out more on our live blog). Gemini Omni is Google’s new AI content-generation tool that creates graphics and videos based on your prompts. 

I hate to burst Google’s bubble, but we already have enough AI-content generation tools, including Google’s own Nano Banana 2, an AI image generator. OpenAI, Shutterstock and Canva also have AI video generation capabilities. 

Gemini Omni Flash is now available, so you can create and edit videos in the Gemini app, Google Flow and YouTube Shorts. Output modalities, like images and audio, will be available later. Google gave an example at Google I/O of creating a claymation-style video about how protein is created. 

Maybe Gemini Omni will be a cool way to teach my 5-year-old about science, but we all know this is just another tool for more AI slop. 

Americans want tighter AI restrictions

CNET found that many of us are already tired of the futuristic content on our social media timelines. Earlier this year, CNET found that 51% of US adults believe we need better AI labels online, and 21% believe there should be a total ban on AI-generated content on social media. Only 11% say AI content is useful, informative or entertaining. 

Despite over half of US adults wanting tighter AI content restrictions, AI is still getting past us. Most (94%) of US adults believe they see AI-generated or AI-altered content on social media. However, only 44% say they can confidently tell real content from AI-generated photos and videos. 

Google appeared to reveal a solution to that problem at Google I/O. 

Google is adding Content Credentials verification across its Gemini app to show whether the content was created with AI or a camera. It will also detect whether it’s been edited with AI. The SynthID detector is still available on the app to verify AI-generated content. 

It sounds like Google is trying to please everyone while still pushing its agenda of shoving AI into every tool and software update possible. 

Google wants to play on both sides of AI

Between Nano Banana Pro and Gemini Omni, that feels like a paradox. The same tech giant that provides the tools to create AI-generated content is also developing tools to verify it. 

Gemini Omni is one of many examples of how Google’s developer showcase is out of touch with everyday consumers. There’s still hesitancy and mistrust toward AI, despite how helpful it can be in some use cases. 

We don’t need another AI content generation tool. We need to understand how companies are protecting our data, not by hosting demo planning parties or by using smart glasses to turn crowds into cartoons. 

Much weirder is voice editing in Google Docs, in a new feature called Docs Live. By describing with your voice what you want to write, an agent will dictate your words, generate text, pull in citations from the web, and aim to turn your stream-of-consciousness wishes into a coherent document.

(Reminder: All this stuff may eventually have ads.)

For Gemini power users, Google is creating a new subscription tier, the AI Ultra plan, for $100 a month. It is also dropping the price of its top Gemini AI Ultra from $250 a month to $200.

Gemini Omni

Google announced Gemini Omni, an AI video generator, akin to Sora 2. That was OpenAI’s generator that let you deepfake yourself, but was eventually killed by the company.

Google’s approach is building out a far more realistic video generator that can incorporate real video and extrapolate all manner of AI-powered weirdness on top of that. Google is eager for you to turn Omni’s eye on yourself, putting your face front and center. As such, selfie videos can be modified to add different backgrounds, styles, or environments, making it appear that you are somewhere other than your actual location.

The feature was demoed on stage with a video of someone recording themselves walking through a metal sculpture. They then asked Omni to change the structure to look like it was made of bubbles. You can also add images and video of yourself from your camera roll and generate just about any variety of cinematic style. Google says Omni is capable of advanced animations and fun typography.

Google’s approach is focusing Omni on video creation first, though it says still image and text capabilities will be coming later. Eventually, Google says it wants to let Omni create any output with any input.

Read more about Omni in Reece Rogers’ story on WIRED. OmniFlash, a starter version of Omni, is available starting today for Google AI+ Pro and Ultra subscribers.

Gemini Spark

Gemini Spark is Google’s answer to OpenClaw, the viral AI powered helper bot that could be used to help with real life needs like buying groceries or researching vacation options (and occasionally causing you to wind up in a scam).

Spark can write emails or plan a block party and pull information from files in your Google Drive. It is meant to be a personal agent just for you, keeping up with your schedule so it knows the rhythms of your life, learns what major events are coming up, and can help manage long-term or recurring tasks for you.

Spark runs entirely on Google Cloud, which Google says means it can process background requests without having to leave your device on. For now Spark just works with other Google software, though not with the Chrome browser quite yet. Google says that is coming, along with third party support, later this summer.

WIRED’s Reece Rogers has a deeper dive into Spark.

Agents Love Shopping

To help you manage all of your online shopping, Google will start deploying an agentic-powered shopping experience. As you search for products, Google will show you listings that it hosts for products for sale at various retailers. You can also shop the old fashioned way, by going to various websites and perusing the listings there.

The big difference is that now, Google will offer a universal shopping cart. Just add the products you’re interested in as you surf, and Google’s agent will keep your wish list organized. It can alert you to price changes and tell you when there’s a newer version or a new color option available. While products are sitting in your cart, you can engage Gemini to ask for more details about your potential purchases, add other products to the cart, or try to find better deals at other retailers.

The FBI says Americans have lost over $388 million last year to scams using cryptocurrency kiosks, also known as crypto ATMs or Bitcoin ATMs.

Cryptocurrency kiosks are physical, standalone electronic terminals (which may or may not require identity verification to prevent money laundering) that resemble bank ATMs and allow users to buy or sell crypto assets using cash or debit cards.

They are often found around gas stations, convenience stores, and other easily accessible locations. Cybercriminals ask potential victims to deposit their cash into crypto kiosks that then transfer the funds to attacker-controlled crypto wallets.

Earlier this month, Minnesota lawmakers banned cryptocurrency kiosks statewide, after similar moves from Indiana in March and Tennessee in April.

In a public service announcement published on Friday, the bureau warned of a nearly 60% surge in reported losses to crypto ATM scams compared with the previous year.

“In 2025, the IC3 received more than 13,400 complaints reporting the use of cryptocurrency kiosks, with losses over $388 million — a 23% increase in complaints and a 58% increase in losses from 2024. More than half of the complaints involved individuals over 50, with losses over $302 million,” the FBI said.

“In typical IC3 complaints involving cryptocurrency kiosks, criminals give detailed instructions to individuals, including how to withdraw cash from their bank, how to locate a kiosk, and how to deposit and send funds using the kiosk.”

According to complaint data and adjusted losses shared by the FBI, Americans from Texas, Florida, and California filed over 3,300 crypto ATM scam complaints and reported over $112 million in estimated losses.

The FBI also shared some measures that anyone can take to protect themselves from falling victim to such scams, including not sending money to people you only know online, never scanning QR codes or following payment instructions from unknown individuals, always verifying phone calls directly, and not sharing any personal information over the phone.

It also recommended being wary when anyone claiming to be from the government or law enforcement demands cryptocurrency payments, stopping transactions if a kiosk operator warns you of fraud, and always keeping receipts for cryptocurrency transactions.

The FBI’s 2025 Internet Crime Report says the law enforcement agency received over 1 million complaints through its Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) last year, linked to almost $21 billion in losses from cyber-enabled crimes such as investment scams, tech support fraud, and business email compromise.

Automated pentesting tools deliver real value, but they were built to answer one question: can an attacker move through the network? They were not built to test whether your controls block threats, your detection rules fire, or your cloud configs hold.

This guide covers the 6 surfaces you actually need to validate.

Advertisement

Download Now