Tech

Why the Social Media Addiction Case Isn’t Over Yet

Published

3 weeks ago

9 April 2026

Algorithms. Beauty filters. Endless scrolling.

The case over “social media addiction” against Meta and Google in a California courtroom ultimately came down to these elements, legal experts say, and what a jury found was negligence on social media companies’ part when designing apps where tweens and teens would come to spend roughly one-fifth of their day.

Joseph McNally, former federal prosecutor and director of Emerging Torts and Litigation at McNicholas & McNicholas in California, says jurors agreed with the novel legal argument that Meta and Google were negligent in their design of Instagram and YouTube, respectively, contributing to the mental health problems of the plaintiff. Parent companies of Snapchat and TikTok settled with the plaintiffs before the trial.

McNally and other experts tell EdSurge the verdict will affect thousands of similar cases and influence how tech companies roll out their features — and that the legal tussle over where liability falls when it comes to youth mental health isn’t over yet. With the social media giants vowing to appeal, the case could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Email Evidence

The impact left by the presentation of internal company emails was undeniable, McNally says. Internal Meta communications showed that employees raised alarms about the potential harm to teen girls posed by a beauty filter. Documents also showed they knew that users much younger than 13 — the minimum age required for sign up — were on their platforms, he adds.

“They looked the other way because — the plaintiffs argued — they had a long-term benefit, long-term value of hooking those users early,” McNally says. “I think that the emails painted a picture of a company whose own employees were raising concerns about features in the product, and the plaintiff effectively used those emails to show that they knew about the risk of the product.”

“Addictive” Design

If Meta and Google had settled, the court wouldn’t have had cause to grapple with the legal question of whether social media companies can be held liable for harm caused by their design. But from the defense’s perspective, tech companies had been solidly protected by Section 230 in the past, explains Princess Uchekwe, corporate attorney and founder of The Chief Counsel in New York. That’s the part of the 1996 Communications Decency Act that shields websites and online platforms from being sued over content posted by users.

Just one day before the California verdict, a New Mexico jury found Meta liable in a $375 million consumer protection lawsuit over its failure to protect children from social media harm on its platforms.

“What the lawyers for the plaintiffs were arguing is, essentially, it’s not the content that we have a problem with,” Uchekwe says, “It’s the fact that when people use your platform, you have implemented certain features that make it almost impossible for people to leave. You can scroll into the bottomless pit of hell on Instagram, and nothing ever tells you, ‘Maybe you should pause.’”

The Appeal of an Appeal

The $6 million in damages is a drop in the bucket for the two social media giants, but McNally says there are potential benefits to appealing the ruling anyway. There are thousands more consumer lawsuits against social media companies around the country, with school districts joining as plaintiffs.

One is that an appellate court might find that the long-time protections that social media companies have relied on should have come into play. The verdict barreled through the defenses raised by Section 230, which protects platforms from claims of harm caused by third-party content. It’s a policy that makes a free and open internet possible.

“[Section] 230 has resulted in the dismissal of hundreds of lawsuits over the years where they would’ve otherwise faced hundreds of millions of dollars in liability,” McNally says. “An appeal [based on] Section 230, which is a federal statute, could make its way up to the Supreme Court, who would have the final word on the scope. [If the] court of appeals remanded it back to the trial court and said, ‘Look, Section 230 applies,’ it would essentially bar these claims [of harm caused by the design].”

Uchekwe says failure to win an appeal could be “almost devastating” for tech companies due to the sheer amount of damages they could have to pay across thousands of similar lawsuits, along with the cost of restructuring how their apps function. That could mean rethinking features like targeted algorithms, the ability to endlessly scroll and notifications that draw users back into the app.

“Not only social media companies,” Uchekwe says, “all tech companies that have implemented things like that, especially if they have children as a base, are going to have to start reconsidering.”

First Amendment Question

There’s also a First Amendment case to be made, McNally adds. Some legal experts, including UC Berkeley law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, argue that the “addictive” algorithms that came under fire during the trial are protected free speech. If that argument succeeds on appeal, it could stop the legal cases arguing product liability in their tracks.

“If the Supreme Court overturned it based on Section 230 and the First Amendment, it’s unlikely there’s going to be a new trial. It would likely be dismissed,” McNally says. “I won’t say that with certainty, but the prospects of dismissal would be pretty good for the defendants.”

Ripple Effect

McNally says the fact that a jury ruled Meta and Google’s app features were “unreasonably unsafe for its users” creates challenges for them in the swaths of similar lawsuits they’re facing. Plaintiffs in those cases still must prove a direct link between the social media companies and the harm they’re alleging.

“I think it’s going to result in some cases probably moving closer to settlement, but in all those cases, I think that the defendants are going to be looking closely at the causation issue,” McNally says. “There’s probably other cases out there where the evidence of causation is not as strong, and those cases may be harder for a plaintiff to get across the finish line.”

Uchekwe predicts that if the verdict sticks, tech companies — especially those with users who are under 18 — will be forced to retool their app features to encourage users to spend less time on their platforms. That could hurt the companies’ ad revenue and their ability to gather data on users.

“Undoing some of those things may decrease their bottom line, but I’m not sure it will do it to the extent that it’s detrimental to their revenue,” Uchekwe says. “If you weigh the benefits of putting these safeguards in for children versus your revenue, I never think that your profit should come at the expense of a generation of people.”

Source link

Tech

Are Red Light Cameras The Same As Speed Cameras?

Published

7 minutes ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

PixelBiss/Shutterstock

We see them every day with alarmingly increasing frequency — cameras that pop up on the side of the road or at intersections. Whether they’re used to issue tickets in speed and construction zones or relay license plate information, let’s face it: These aren’t going anywhere. It’s best to keep informed as to what they do, what they look like, and where to find them so you can avoid a potentially hefty fine.

You’ll find no fewer than four types of traffic camera in the United States: Traffic-monitoring cameras, automated number-plate recognition (ANPR) cameras, speed cameras, and red light cameras. The first two cannot issue tickets, so we’ll be brief about them. A traffic-monitoring camera’s job is to detect where cars are to precisely time traffic lights and govern automated signage according to conditions. The ANPR camera identifies a car by its license plate, acting as a monitor to track movements.

Speed cameras and red light cameras, on the other hand, both function in similar ways in that they’re designed to prosecute drivers for disobeying traffic laws. The main difference between the two is simply where they’re placed and what laws they uphold. A red light camera, as the name suggests, sits at an intersection and monitors red light offenses. Speed cameras are typically situated at the sides of roads prone to speeding, like back roads and highways. These cameras issue automated tickets, which the registered vehicle owner receives in the mail. It’s a system not without its faults; for instance, a woman’s license plate matched a common novelty plate, and she was issued 15 traffic tickets. Let’s dive deeper and explore more about how these systems differ and what they can and can’t do.

How red light cameras work

Red traffic signal with overhead camera mounted on its own pole

Bill Uko/Getty Images

Traffic-issuing red light cameras operate through a hard link to the traffic signal itself. When you pull up to the red light, the camera takes a picture of your car as it moves into position, then detects if the vehicle moves past the point where it’s then in the intersection. If the light is red in both phases, i.e. the car blew the red light, then the camera photographs the car a second time as it goes through the light. It then issues a citation to the registered owner of the vehicle.

This system was first implemented in New York City in 1994, a metropolitan area we all know for its infamous gridlock. The New York Department of Transportation took a hard look at statistics, recording fatalities occurring at intersections and asking the question, “Would an automated red light camera help stop speeders?” New York champions the system today with plans to expand it to 600 intersections. If you blow a light in the City and your car is captured by this camera, expect a $50 ticket in the mail.

Typically you’ll find red light cameras situated at busy intersections, near school or work zones, or in major cities. They’re identified by the secondary camera unit that captures a picture of the car as it goes through the light, typically mounted on its own pole overlooking the intersection. The legality of red light cameras is often called into question, with specific rules varying on a per-state basis. Some states exclude them outside of metropolitan areas, and others don’t allow them at all.

How speed cameras are different

Speed camera tracking three vehicles, two with green square overlay and one with red square overlay

AntonSAN/Shutterstock

Speed cameras function the same in principle — if you’re speeding, it’ll take a picture of your car and mail you a ticket. But there are actually several types of speed cameras, each one operating using different methods. Most modern systems use a form of LIDAR and infrared photography to track and capture a car’s image, either by measuring its speed between two fixed points or by measuring its speed at a specific point — much like the ones used in Colorado. These are your fixed units, designed to run autonomously, as opposed to mobile units, which are set up by officials and, as the name suggests, are not static.

These types of cameras are generally what you’ll see in places like construction areas or school zones — any place with a consistent, reduced speed in comparison to the usual flow of traffic. Other areas include high-speed expressways and suburban areas with excessive rates of speeding violations. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, their presence has reduced crash frequency by 54%, and accidents involving injuries and fatalities by 47% and 20%, respectively.

Different cameras operate using different methods, making detection an exceedingly difficult proposition. For instance, some speed cameras use lasers, whereas others use different bands of radar. Apps like Waze and Google Maps typically state fixed speed trap locations as a heads-up, but you’ll often find surprise mobile units in front of construction zones and the like. Just like red light cameras, the person who receives the ticket will be the one to which the vehicle is registered.

Source link

Tech

Today’s NYT Connections Hints, Answers for May 2 #1056

Published

29 minutes ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Looking for the most recent Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands puzzles.

Today’s NYT Connections puzzle is all over the place, My fellow journalists, pay special attention to words hidden in four words. They’ll end up in a journalism-related purple category. Read on for clues and today’s Connections answers.

The Times has a Connections Bot, like the one for Wordle. Go there after you play to receive a numeric score and to have the program analyze your answers. Players who are registered with the Times Games section can now nerd out by following their progress, including the number of puzzles completed, win rate, number of times they nabbed a perfect score and their win streak.

Hints for today’s Connections groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Sixth sense.

Green group hint: Bravo!

Blue group hint: Government groups.

Purple group hint: Extra, extra!

Answers for today’s Connections groups

Yellow group: Clairvoyant.

Green group: Staged performances.

Blue group: U.S. cabinet departments.

Purple group: Starting with newspaper names.

What are today’s Connections answers?

The completed NYT Connections puzzle for May 2, 2026.
NYT/Screenshot by CNET

The yellow words in today’s Connections

The theme is clairvoyant. The four answers are extrasensory, mental, psychic and telepathic.

The green words in today’s Connections

The theme is staged performances. The four answers are ballet, musical, opera and play.

The blue words in today’s Connections

The theme is U.S. cabinet departments. The four answers are Education, Interior, State and Treasury.

The purple words in today’s Connections

The theme is starting with newspaper names. The four answers are globetrotter, heraldry, Post-It and times tables.

Source link

Tech

AI Performances And Screenplays Won’t Be Eligible For Oscars

Published

41 minutes ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Still of an AI-generated Val Kilmer from the upcoming film

First Line Films

Sorry, Val Kilmer fans, but the late actor’s Oscar ship has officially sailed. On Friday, Reuters reported that AI-generated acting and writing won’t be eligible for Academy Awards. The new rules from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will take effect beginning with next year’s presentation, scheduled for March 2027.

The Academy’s updated rules state that while filmmakers can use AI tools, “synthetic” performers can’t win any awards. Ditto for AI-written screenplays, which must be “human-authored.” The Academy can request more information from submissions to confirm that they were created by humans.

A “performance” that won’t need further clarification is Kilmer’s fully AI-generated appearance in the upcoming indie film, As Deep as the Grave. The actor was initially cast in the movie but had to back out due to medical concerns. (He died in April 2025.) Although Kilmer never stepped foot on set, he will appear in “a significant part” of the movie, according to Variety.

“His family kept saying how important they thought the movie was and that Val really wanted to be a part of this,” said Coerte Voorhees, the film’s writer and director. “He really thought it was [an] important story that he wanted his name on. It was that support that gave me the confidence to say, okay let’s do this. Despite the fact some people might call it controversial, this is what Val wanted.”

Perhaps even more jarring than the AI-generated likeness of a dead actor is the work of a ByteDance tool that has also raised some alarm in the industry. A two-sentence prompt using Seedance 2.0 was all it took to generate a highly convincing 15-second clip of Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt duking it out on a rooftop. (C’mon, Pitt would totally kick his ass.)

The cinematic clip went viral, Hollywood experienced existential panic, and Washington even weighed in. The latest? ByteDance reportedly paused the tool’s rollout while the entertainment industry braces for a future where typing a few words could be all it takes to churn out a feature film.

Source link

Tech

AirPods Max 2 review one month: Price, features, specs

Published

49 minutes ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

A month after Apple’s AirPods Max 2 went on sale, there’s a lot to like, but little of it is new, and there’s not much reason to upgrade from the original model.

That’s the uncomfortable truth that I came to after spending a few weeks with Apple’s premium headphones. But it also shouldn’t be a surprise for anyone who took even a cursory glance at the specs sheet.

Any second-generation product takes what the first-gen model did well and then builds upon it. But with AirPods Max 2, Apple took the easy way out. And it’s a real shame that it did.

AirPods Max 2 do improve upon the original model, bringing some AirPods Pro features along for the ride. Still, too many first-gen problems persist, setting users up for the same frustrations.

And that’s the problem here. Those buyers will spend $549 for a pair of AirPods Max 2 headphones. What they’ll get is great audio, but with issues that shouldn’t be there.

If you’re shopping for great audio with some striking design issues, I have good news for you. There are likely some great OG AirPods Max deals available. You should probably buy those instead.

AirPods Max 2 review: Familiar look, familiar mistakes

When I say that AirPods Max 2 look familiar, I’m not kidding. I’m not even exaggerating, because they’re identical.

That even extends to the colors on offer. There are still five for you to choose from. And they’re still Blue, Purple, Midnight, Starlight, and Orange.

Two pairs of matte black over ear headphones lying side by side on a colorful retro style desk mat with sunset and city skyline graphics and a keyboard in the background

AirPods Max 2 review: Space Gray and Midnight side-by-side

I’ve been using the Midnight headphones, and they have a slightly different hue from my original Space Gray model. Those also have a Lightning connector, but apart from that, they’re almost impossible to tell apart.

AirPods Max 2, of course, have a USB-C port for charging this time around. You can also use a USB-C to USB-C cable if you want to enjoy lossless audio.

Like the original and mid-cycle USB-C refresh, AirPods Max 2 use metal as their material of choice. That means they’re still heavy, weighing in at 386.2 grams or 13.6 ounces.

As someone who isn’t a fan of plastic headphones, I’m happy with the metal construction Apple uses. I also don’t mind the weight because it adds an air of quality to the headset.

What I don’t like is Apple’s continued use of a mesh headband. It’s notorious for stretching and sagging, and there’s little to suggest that AirPods Max 2 buyers won’t have the same issue.

The good news is that there are aftermarket accessories that help here. They attach to the headband and use another material to distribute the weight. You’ll likely spot one on my AirPods Max in some of the photos here.

Controls-wise, nothing has changed here. You’ll find holes for the microphone and for air movement on the left ear cup. On the right, there’s a USB-C port on the bottom.

Up top, Apple’s familiar Digital Crown is used for volume and playback controls. The remaining button is used to cycle between the active noise cancellation (ANC) and Transparency modes.

Finally, there’s the case. It’s the same as the original AirPods Max case and one of the main things I expected Apple to fix with this second generation.

Alas, it chose not to. And this case still does almost nothing to protect the headphones during transit. The top and bottom of the metal ear cups are left bare.

Unfortunately, the case is also the only way to put the AirPods Max 2 to sleep. Leave them out, and they’ll never slip into the deep sleep mode that preserves battery life.

That means you’ll need to fiddle with the case and its magnetic flap a lot. The lack of a way to sleep the headphones outside of the case is another issue I expected to be fixed this time around.

Again, alas.

AirPods Max 2 review: The H2 makes its presence felt

One of the few places where Apple has tweaked things is the use of a new H2 chip. The same chip first debuted in Apple’s AirPods Pro 2 from 2022, so it’s not new technology.

Black over-ear headphones in a protective case resting on a laptop keyboard, with a bright pink and blue abstract wallpaper on the screen and a black speaker in the background

AirPods Max 2 review: The familiar Smart Case makes a return

It’s new to Apple’s headphones, though, and brings with it some new features. Apple says the new chip is capable of improved audio processing. But as Andrew O’Hara said in his initial review, you’ll be hard-pressed to tell the difference.

Apple also says that AirPods Max 2 offer 1.5x more active noise cancellation than the previous generation. I can’t refute the claim, but AirPods Max were already class leaders here, and I’ve found AirPods Max 2 to be just as good.

Thankfully, you will notice a difference if you use any of these new features:

Adaptive EQ adjusts the sound based on the fit and seal between the ear cups and your head.

Live Translation that translates languages as someone speaks

Adaptive Audio that adjusts the ANC and Transparency modes based on the volume of your environment.

Conversational Awareness that lowers the volume when someone speaks to you and raises it when they’re done.

Personalized Volume automatically adjusts the volume after learning your preferences.

Head gestures so you can control Siri by shaking and nodding your head.

A Camera Remote feature means you can press the Digital Crown to take a photo using your iPhone.

Remember that these features are also available on AirPods Pro 2 and AirPods Pro 3. Some are even present on the entry-level AirPods 4 as well.

The H2 also handles all of the features AirPods owners have become accustomed to. Instant device pairing and switching are still present, and as welcome as ever.

Rounding out the features, Apple’s H2 helps AirPods Max 2 run for up to 20 hours between charges, even with ANC and Spatial Audio enabled. I’ve found that to be a reasonable expectation, and they charge quickly using a USB-C cable.

AirPods Max 2 review: Apple’s audio chops shine again

Apple knows how to make great audio. It’s proven it with all of its most recent AirPods wireless earbuds, and it proved it with the original AirPods Max.

With AirPods Max 2, it’s once again proven that few can compete with its wireless audio capabilities.

AirPods Max 2 sound excellent. They benefit from new high dynamic range amplifiers this time around, marking the one hardware change besides the H2 chip.

Black over ear headphones in a protective case resting against a closed Apple laptop on a wooden desk, with monitor, speakers, and colorful mouse pad in the background

AirPods Max 2 review: Apple’s best-ever headphones, just like its last

The result is the familiar, rich AirPods Max sound. Except, dare I say, turned up to 11 this time around.

Music sounds warm and full of body thanks to a strong bass performance when the audio calls for it. The highs may be a little on the brighter side than some might like, but that’s nitpicking.

With the excellent ANC enabled, AirPods Max 2 make it easy to fall into an album. It envelopes you. In a desert of lackluster wireless headphones, AirPods Max 2 are an oasis of crisp, clear sound.

But then, so are AirPods Max. Even over five years after their 2020 release, I’ve yet to find wireless headphones that have bettered them.

And yes, that applies to AirPods Max 2 as well. They’re every inch as good as AirPods Max, but better? I’ve yet to experience it, unfortunately.

Rounding things out on a more positive note, AirPods Max 2’s ANC and Transparency modes don’t disappoint. Again, Apple’s headphones surely sit at the top of the pile in both regards, although Sony continues to give it a run for its money.

AirPods Max 2 review: A missed opportunity

As I sit here, writing this review while listening to AirPods Max 2, I find myself disappointed. Not because they don’t live up to the original, but because Apple had such a solid foundation to build upon.

And yet, it chose not to.

As great as AirPods Max 2 sound, and as much as I enjoy listening to them, they’re almost impossible to recommend.

For existing AirPods Max owners, there’s little here to warrant spending so much money to upgrade. Not unless one of the new H2-powered features calls to you, and not when all of the same mistakes have been made.

They’re an easier sell to anyone considering AirPods Max 2 as their first Apple headphones. But you absolutely need to be aware of the problems before you put down your $549.

As I write this in 2026, AirPods Max 2 are likely the best-sounding wireless headphones I’ve ever worn. But whether they’re the best, overall, is a harder question to answer.

Over ear wireless headphones, a smartwatch with metal band, and a white earbud case resting on a colorful retro style mouse pad with a sunset and city skyline design

AirPods Max 2 review: Handy “L” and “R” markings help orientation

At $549, they’re a costly purchase. They don’t have a real case to keep them safe, and there’s no way to turn them off. They’re also heavier than most people will be used to, and the headband mesh will likely sag much sooner than it should.

If you’re still happy to throw down $549 for AirPods Max 2 with that in mind, more power to you. You’re going to get a pair of headphones that sound great with excellent ANC for your money.

Or you could save a hundred dollars or more and get the original. They’ll sound great.

AirPods Max 2 review: Pros

No wireless headphones sound better

Industry-leading ANC and Transprency mode

H2 chip adds some nice-to-have features

Instant pairing and device switching

AirPods Max 2 review: Cons

They still won’t sleep outside of the case

Smart case offers little protection

Same colors as last-gen model

Costly at $549

AirPods Max 2 rating: 4 out of 5

Scoring something like AirPods Max 2 out of five is difficult. Scoring anything out of five isn’t easy, but when you’re reviewing the successor to a previous release, things get more complicated. In the case of AirPods Max 2, Apple has a good pair of headphones on its hands. They sound great, and are about as premium-feeling as these things get.

On the other hand, AirPods Max 2 don’t improve upon AirPods Max in ways that I think they should have. The improvements that have been made are unlikely to change the game for most headphone buyers, too.

In choosing a score, I’ve gone with a 4 because, in isolation, AirPods Max 2 are a quality product. If AirPods Max didn’t exist, they’d easily get a 4 for their sound and build quality.

If you already own AirPods Max, consider the review score a 3 or 3.5, instead. AirPods Max 2’s score would be reduced by the lack of meaningful improvements to the original’s shortcomings.

For AirPods Max owners, there is little, if any, reason to upgrade to AirPods Max 2.

Where to buy AirPods Max 2

AirPods Max 2 are on sale now at Apple and other retailers, with Amazon and Walmart discounting the headphones slightly.

You can also pick up first-gen AirPods Max with USB-C for $449 at B&H Photo and Walmart while supplies last.

Our AirPods Max Price Guide offers easy price comparison across popular Apple resellers as well.

Source link

Tech

Today’s NYT Wordle Hints, Answer and Help for May 2 #1778

Published

1 hour ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Looking for the most recent Wordle answer? Click here for today’s Wordle hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Connections, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands puzzles.

Today’s Wordle puzzle is a medium-tough one, with a few letters I rarely guess. If you need a new starter word, check out our list of which letters show up the most in English words. If you need hints and the answer, read on.

Today’s Wordle hints

Before we show you today’s Wordle answer, we’ll give you some hints. If you don’t want a spoiler, look away now.

Wordle hint No. 1: Repeats

Today’s Wordle answer has no repeated letters.

Wordle hint No. 2: Vowels

Today’s Wordle answer has one vowel.

Wordle hint No. 3: First letter

Today’s Wordle answer begins with B.

Wordle hint No. 4: Last letter

Today’s Wordle answer ends with G.

Wordle hint No. 5: Meaning

Today’s Wordle answer can mean to convey or carry something.

TODAY’S WORDLE ANSWER

Today’s Wordle answer is BRING.

Yesterday’s Wordle answer

Yesterday’s Wordle answer, May 1, No. 1777, was PLUME.

Recent Wordle answers

April 27, No. 1773: EERIE

April 28, No. 1774: QUACK

April 29, No. 1775: RURAL

April 30, No. 1776: CROCK

Source link

Tech

Does the Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) interface dramatically differ from QuickBooks Online?

Published

1 hour ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

This post is brought to you in paid partnership with QuickBooks

The Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) interface doesn’t dramatically differ from QuickBooks Online. Core navigation, workflows, and accounting functions remain familiar. The main difference is added functionality for managing multiple entities, user permissions, and consolidated reporting. This means most users can adapt quickly while gaining tools to handle more complex financial operations.

Key takeaways

IES keeps familiar workflows but adds multi-entity functionality.
Navigation remains similar, with additional controls for managing entities.
Users adapt quickly by learning reporting and entity-level differences.

What is the difference between IES and QuickBooks Online?

Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) builds on the structure of QuickBooks Online but is designed for businesses managing multiple entities or more complex financial operations. While QuickBooks Online focuses on single-company accounting, IES introduces entity-level controls, consolidated reporting, and more advanced user permissions without changing core accounting workflows.

How to adapt from QuickBooks Online to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES)

Moving from QuickBooks Online to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) involves learning how to work across entities rather than relearning accounting basics. The steps below help users adjust quickly and avoid common confusion.

Start with familiar tasks: Begin with workflows like invoicing, expenses, and reporting to build confidence in the system.
Understand how entities are structured: Learn how companies are organized and how to switch between them when working.
Recognize where workflows change: Identify tasks that now involve selecting an entity or working across multiple entities.
Learn consolidated reporting early: Understand how to generate reports that combine data without merging records.
Adjust to permission-based access: Get used to seeing only the data relevant to your assigned entities.
Test common workflows across entities: Practice recording transactions and reviewing reports in more than one entity.
Train users based on their role: Focus training on what each user actually needs rather than the full system.

What changes when moving from QuickBooks Online to IES?

Area	What changes in IES
Company structure	Manage multiple entities instead of one company
Navigation	Familiar layout with added entity controls
Reporting	Includes consolidated reporting across entities
User access	More granular permissions across companies
Workflows	Similar tasks with added entity-level steps

Key differences users notice when moving from QuickBooks Online to a multi-entity system.

Example: Adapting to multi-entity workflows after moving from QuickBooks Online to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES)

A regional property management company previously used QuickBooks Online to manage a single entity. As the business expanded, it created separate legal entities for each property group, which led to multiple QuickBooks accounts and manual consolidation in spreadsheets.

The finance team moved to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) to manage all entities in one system. During the transition, they found that daily tasks such as raising invoices and tracking expenses felt familiar. The main adjustment was selecting the correct entity when recording transactions and learning how to run consolidated reports.

Within one reporting cycle, the team reduced time spent on monthly consolidation and eliminated manual spreadsheet work. Managers could review performance across all property groups without switching systems, while entity-level reporting remained unchanged for local teams.

Checklist: Validating your transition to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES)

Use this checklist to confirm that your team has adjusted to the key workflow and reporting changes in Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES).

Confirm all entities are set up correctly and accessible in one system.
Check that users only see the entities they are assigned.
Run sample reports to compare entity and consolidated outputs.
Verify transactions are consistently recorded in the correct entity.
Test a full workflow across entities, from invoice to reporting.
Review dashboards to ensure they reflect expected performance.
Identify and remove manual consolidation processes.

Best practices and pitfalls for adapting to Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES)

Follow these best practices to help users adjust faster and avoid common transition mistakes.

Expect workflows to expand slightly when working across entities.
Don’t treat IES like a single-company system with extra tabs.
Align reporting structure early to avoid rework later.
Make sure teams understand when to work at entity or group level.
Don’t carry over manual workarounds that the system replaces.

Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) vs QuickBooks Online FAQs

Is Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) difficult to learn if I use QuickBooks Online?

No. Most users familiar with QuickBooks Online can adapt quickly because core workflows remain similar. The main learning curve comes from understanding how to work across multiple entities and how reporting changes when combining data from different companies.

Does Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES) look the same as QuickBooks Online?

The interface is similar in structure, with familiar navigation and workflows. However, IES includes additional controls for managing multiple entities, user access, and reporting, so some screens and processes include extra steps or options.

What is the biggest difference between IES and QuickBooks Online?

The main difference is multi-entity capability. IES lets businesses manage several companies within one system, including consolidated reporting and more advanced permissions, while QuickBooks Online is typically designed for single-entity use.

Will my team need training to use Intuit Enterprise Suite (IES)?

Some targeted training is helpful, especially for teams working across multiple entities or using consolidated reporting. However, users familiar with QuickBooks Online can usually transition quickly by focusing on how entity structure and reporting differ.

This content is paid for by the brands indicated. Digital Trends works closely with advertisers to highlight their products and services to our readers. Although this article is informational and not opinionated, it reflects thorough fact-checking by our team to ensure accuracy. Our dedicated partnerships team, not external advertisers, crafts all branded content in-house. For more information on our approach to branded content, click here.

Source link

Tech

Meta quietly locks in massive AWS infrastructure deal, shifting from chip ownership to renting entire AI backbone at unprecedented scale

Published

1 hour ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Meta commits to tens of millions of hosted Graviton cores
The deal includes infrastructure, networking, power, and management layers
Graviton5 is designed for sustained processing and multi-step task execution

Meta has signed an agreement to deploy tens of millions of AWS Graviton Arm cores, making it one of the largest Graviton customers in the world.

The deal marks a major expansion of the long-standing partnership between Meta and AWS, but with a critical difference: Meta is not just buying chips; it is buying the entire infrastructure around them. It is a wholesale agreement, not a hardware purchase.

Source link

Tech

OpenAI Faces Lawsuits Over Deadly Mass Shooting in Canada

Published

2 hours ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

The families of victims of a February school shooting in British Columbia opened seven lawsuits Wednesday against OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT. The lawsuits, filed in federal court in San Francisco, claim that OpenAI’s actions regarding the shooter’s use of its AI allowed the shooting to happen.

The cases could have major implications for future chatbot safeguards and whether companies can be held liable for how people use artificial intelligence.

The shooting occurred on Feb. 10 when an 18-year-old former student entered a secondary school in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, and opened fire using a modified handgun, killing five children and an education assistant, according to news reports. Investigators allege that the shooter had also killed her mother and half-brother. The combined fatalities made this one of the deadliest shootings in Canadian history. The shooter died at the scene, apparently of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The shooter had engaged ChatGPT in conversations involving violence before the attack.

OpenAI says it has taken steps intended to address issues raised by the lawsuits.

“We have already strengthened our safeguards, including improving how ChatGPT responds to signs of distress, connecting people with local support and mental health resources, strengthening how we assess and escalate potential threats of violence, and improving detection of repeat policy violators,” an OpenAI spokesperson told CNET in an email.

OpenAI co-founder and chief executive Sam Altman wrote a letter to the families, which was published on the local news site Tumbler RidgeLines.

“The pain your community has endured is unimaginable,” Altman wrote.

He referred to the shooter’s ChatGPT account, writing, “I am deeply sorry that we did not alert law enforcement to the account that was banned in June.”

CBS News reports that the shooter’s account was flagged in 2025 for misusing ChatGPT for “violent activities” and then banned. OpenAI told CBS that it considered flagging the account to law enforcement but determined it “did not pose an imminent and credible risk of serious physical harm to others.”

According to The Guardian, the shooter was able to create a second account that OpenAI was unaware of until after the shooting.

More issues for OpenAI

These are not the only legal and regulatory challenges facing OpenAI over its AI chat products. Earlier in April, Florida officials announced they were investigating OpenAI about whether a shooter who killed two people at Florida State University in Tallahassee used ChatGPT in connection with the attack.

Separately, a March lawsuit filed by Merriam-Webster and Encyclopedia Britannica says OpenAI improperly used copyrighted material to train its AI systems.

(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET’s parent company, filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in 2025, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.)

The company is also navigating a series of product and business pressures, including shuttering its generative video model, Sora and halting work on an adult mode for ChatGPT.

It has also faced scrutiny from investors after missing certain internal revenue and user growth targets ahead of a potential public offering.

Source link

Tech

"Copy Fail" is a rare Linux bug that can turn an unprivileged user into a root admin in seconds

Published

2 hours ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Tracked as CVE-2026-31431, Copy Fail could represent a significant security risk in the making. The vulnerability was discovered by researchers at Theori, who investigated the Linux kernel’s authencesn cryptographic template using an AI-assisted scanning process. The team also developed a 732-byte Python script capable of escalating privileges and granting an…
Read Entire Article
Source link

Tech

China just launched a massive electric cargo ship, and its battery system alone rivals hundreds of electric cars in scale

Published

2 hours ago

1 May 2026

NewsAdmin

Ning Yuan Dian Kun, a 10,000‑ton container ship, is powered by the equivalent of 250 Tesla‑grade batteries
It can swap all ten batteries at the dock like a giant phone
Two 875‑kW motors push this electric giant to 11.5 knots

When most people think of electric vehicles, they imagine a sedan or an SUV, not a vessel that underwent sea trials off Shanghai in February 2026.

The Ning Yuan Dian Kun, an electric vessel, stretches nearly 128 meters from bow to stern — longer than a standard American football field, including both end zones.