Before Electronic Arts goes private in a groundbreaking sale, some US lawmakers are pleading for some federal oversight. Democratic members of the US Congress, as part of the Congressional Labor Caucus, penned a letter asking the Federal Trade Commission to "thoroughly review" the $55 billion acquisition of EA.
EA confirmed the sale to the Public Investment Fund, or the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia, Silver Lake and Affinity Partners in September, but the deal is expected to close in the first quarter of 2027. Before the official change of ownership, the 46 House Democrats who signed the letter to the FTC are calling for more scrutiny into the impacts of the deal.
The letter noted some of the most consequential effects, including the worsening of an unstable industry, the potential for more layoffs and increased market dominance for EA. "We respectfully urge the Commission to conduct a thorough investigation into the labor market consequences of this proposed acquisition, including EA’s existing wage-setting power, the likelihood of post-transaction layoffs, the degree of labor-market concentration in relevant geographic and occupational markets, and the role of cross-ownership in shaping labor outcomes," the letter read.
The letter already earned support from the Communications Workers of America union, who also supported a petition from the United Video Games union. As spotted by Eurogamer, the petition calls on regulators and elected officials to "scrutinize this deal and ensure that any path forward protects jobs and preserves creative freedom."
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/us-congress-members-call-for-thorough-review-of-eas-55-billion-sale-175851429.html?src=rss©
© REUTERS / Reuters
Vimeo just got hit by a brutal round of layoffs, according to a report by Business Insider. Staffers are posting on various social media sites that the layoffs have impacted most of the company, including the entire video team. Vimeo is a video-hosting platform, so that sounds bad.
“Yesterday, following Vimeo’s recent acquisition by a private equity firm, I learned that I, along with a large portion of the company, was impacted by layoffs,” wrote the company’s former vice president of Global Brand & Creative, Dave Brown. He is referring to a firm called Bending Spoons that bought Vimeo for $1.38 billion in the latter half of 2025.
We don't know why parent company Bending Spoons conducted such a massive round of layoffs, but the equity firm is known for purchasing tech companies and aggressively cutting costs via layoffs. It did the same thing to Evernote back in 2023 and WeTransfer in 2024. Engadget has reached out to Vimeo to inquire about the exact number of employees that were laid off and will update this post when we hear back.
"I can confirm that a layoff was announced at Vimeo on January 20, 2026. To respect the privacy of those departing, we cannot provide additional details at this time,” a Bending Spoons spokesperson told Gizmodo in an emailed statement. "Going forward, Bending Spoons remains committed to growing Vimeo to meet the needs of its diverse user base."
Reviving this account to say: Almost everyone at Vimeo was laid off yesterday, including the entire video team. If you're looking for talented engineers, there are a few on the market.
— Derek Buitenhuis (@daemon404) January 21, 2026
Sucks to see something I built killed by private equity in a technology company skin suit.
It's good to know the company "remains committed to growing Vimeo" after firing just about everyone that works there. One former employee said on X that it "sucks to see something I built killed by private equity in a technology company skin suit."
Vimeo has been around a long time. The platform was founded a full year before YouTube and has positioned itself as being a premium alternative for hosting creative and business-adjacent videos. We have no idea what it'll look like with a minimal staff and no video team.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/vimeo-lays-off-most-of-its-staff-just-months-after-being-bought-by-private-equity-firm-184556023.html?src=rss©
© Vimeo
After years of uncertainty over TikTok's future in the United States, a deal for the app's US business has been finalized. The new US entity is called TikTok USDS Joint Venture. ByteDance has retained a 19.9 percent percent stake in the new business, with the rest controlled by a group of non-Chinese investors, including Oracle, Silver Lake and MGX, an Emirati-state owned investment firm, all of which have a 15 percent stake. Dell CEO Michael Dell and other investors have smaller stakes in the new company.
The terms of the deal were first leaked last month, after TikTok CEO Shou Chew reportedly told employees in a memo that TikTok and ByteDance had agreed to a group of investors. This ends a lengthy saga and months of slow progress as the agreement was being worked out, ensuring that the app will remain available in the US after years of being on the verge of a ban in the country.
President Donald Trump, who had tried to ban the app during his first term in office, praised the deal in a post on Truth Social. "It will now be owned by a group of Great American Patriots and Investors, the Biggest in the World, and will be an important Voice," he wrote."I only hope that long into the future I will be remembered by those who use and love TikTok."
According to TikTok’s announcement, the joint venture will protect American users’ data with Oracle's secure US cloud environment. It will also retrain TikTok’s algorithm on US users’ data and will be in charge of content moderation in the US. The entity promises interoperability, as well, promising that users will still get international content and, if they’re a creator, viewers. “The safeguards provided by the Joint Venture will also cover CapCut, and Lemon8 and a portfolio of other apps and websites in the US,” TikTok said.
The new entity will be overseen by a seven-member board of directors, most of whom are Americans. It includes, Shou Chew, the Chief Executive Officer of TikTok, Silver Lake co-CEO Egon Durban, Oracle Executive Vice President Kenneth Glueck and MGX Chief Strategy and Safety Officer David Scott. Adam Presser, who had previously been head of operations and trust and safety at TikTok, is the CEO of TikTok USDS Joint Venture.
Exactly what the new joint venture means for US users of TikTok is unclear. Shortly after the deal was announced, TikTok introduced new terms of service for US users. As the BBC notes, the new terms include provisions relating to use of the app by kids under 13 (they are limited to the "Under 13 Experience") and that the "TikTok USDS Joint Venture does not endorse any content" in the app. The company hasn’t announced specific changes to the app’s algorithm or other core features.
Update, January 23, 2026, 10:58AM PT: This post was updated to add a statement from President Trump, and with additional information about TikTok’s new terms of service.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/tiktok-finalizes-deal-for-its-us-entity-010543484.html?src=rss©
Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison is apparently still hopeful that investors will approve his $108.4 billion hostile takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery. Paramount Skydance announced Thursday that it's extending its all-cash offer to acquire the storied studio, and giving investors until February 20, 2026 to accept. The company's previous offer expired on January 21, but with a lawsuit in the works and a revised Netflix deal to compete with, Paramount Skydance wants to stay in the conversation.
Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery originally announced their $82.7 billion acquisition agreement in December 2025. Netflix's deal is for a significant portion, but notably not all, of Warner Bros. Discovery as it exists today. If approved, the streaming service would acquire Warner Bros. film studios, New Line Cinema, HBO, HBO Max, the company's theme parks, game studios and select linear channels like TNT, but not the collection of reality TV and news programming that Warner Bros. Discovery calls “Global Networks.”
Paramount Skydance made its competing offer of $108.4 billion for all of Warner Bros. Discovery a few days later in December, with the recommendation that shareholders reject the Netflix deal. To add pressure, Paramount Skydance also sued Warner Bros. Discovery in January alleging that the company had not provided adequate information about why it favored Netflix over Paramount. Beyond offering more money, Paramount contends its deal is more likely to be approved by regulators because owning Warner Bros. doesn't "entrench Netflix's market dominance." Warner Bros. Discovery claims that funding for Paramount's deal "remains inadequate" and that the company is uncertain Paramount Skydance will actually be able to complete the deal.
David Ellison was previously able to merge Skydance with Paramount using the financial backing of his billionaire father Larry Ellison, and the Ellison family's friendly relationship with the Trump administration. Promising to make sure that CBS News represents "a diversity of viewpoints” via a newly appointed ombudsman, and that the merged Paramount Skydance won't create any diversity, equity and inclusion programs was enough to get the FCC to approve the merger. Ellison might have thought acquiring Warner Bros. Discovery would be equally easy, but at least so far that hasn't worked out as planned.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/david-ellison-extends-deadline-for-warner-bros-discovery-takeover-offer-204752313.html?src=rss©
Interview transcript
Terry Gerton You have done some analysis looking at the pattern of senior military officers being relieved with very little explanation from the Department of Defense. We’ve all read some of the headlines, but what is it about this issue that concerns you?
Virginia Burger For me, the biggest concern was that, like you said, there’s little to no justification for many of these firings. Or if we get any, it’s very oblique references in tweets from senior leaders like Secretary Hegseth, and we’re never provided any follow-up or any true validation that the relief was actually warranted. And for me, that is a red flag because it seems like we’re probably politicizing a organization that is meant to be apolitical, right? The military was always supposed to be an apolitical body, it’s not supposed to serve a party, it is supposed to serve the people, and if we are firing the most senior leaders of that organization for overtly political reasons, which is what we are left to surmise, given lack of any other information, that should be a serious point of pause for all Americans.
Terry Gerton As I mentioned, we’ve seen some headlines, but we may not know about all of the reliefs. Can you talk about how widespread this has become?
Virginia Burger So obviously I think the ones that everyone’s probably most familiar with were right away, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General C.Q. Brown, was relieved and then the chief of naval operations, Admiral Lisa Franchetti, were both relieved. They were probably the two biggest ones that everyone saw. And again, Hegseth characterized it very generally as cleaning house. I need new leadership, new generation for context. Neither of them were due to be turned over at that point in time, they were both still, well — had several years left in their tenure in those positions. And everyone sort of was left to guess, well, maybe they relieved General Brown because he was African-American and maybe they relieved Admiral Franchetti because she was a woman. I don’t have a ton of familiarization with General Brown, but I know a lot of friends in the Navy who were incredibly proud [of] and respected Admiral Françhetti. She was considered the pick for CNO and so her relief was quite shocking to a lot of people because she was by far and way, if we’re gonna talk about merit for positions, she was the person for that position. Some other ones that have maybe not gone as noticed are in some lower, more subordinate commands, but certainly still across the board, there were several women relieved in the Air Force and the Army that were senior leaders, and also notably the head of the NSA was relieved, and that position was gapped for several months. In fact, the replacement was only announced in the last few weeks, and that was both concerning for, why was the person relieved, but also from a strategic decision. If the NSA doesn’t have a leader, that’s a hugely powerful arm of national security. That was a big bipartisan concern as well that many senators and representatives expressed concern over.
Terry Gerton Let’s follow that because you also documented some patterns about gaps in leadership and transition and readiness. Tell us more about that.
Virginia Burger So when a senior leader is relieved, and it’s not on the normal timeline, because most of these positions you hold for a period of usually two to three years, that’s the typical timeline for command, especially at those senior leader levels of lieutenant generals and vice admirals, generals and admirals. When one of those positions is relieved suddenly, you do not have a replacement lined up. And for a lot of these senior leaders the replacement has to be confirmed by Congress, right? For combatant commanders, for service chiefs, that person has to nominated, they have to be reviewed by the Senate Armed Services Committee, and then voted on by the Senate. If you fire someone off timeline, that position is going to be gapped, and these are our most senior military leaders who are in the positions that are making the most pivotal decisions for our national strategy, and who are making the decisions that America’s sons and daughters in service are going to have to execute. And so when they’re fired very suddenly, that position is empty and there is a power vacuum, there is a void and naturally the executive officer, the deputy is going to step up and do their best and maybe they’ll rush to put in someone who’s acting. But you know, an acting person in that position does not have the same legal authorities. They don’t have the same authorities for command and it’s just going to cause headaches and issues that will roll all the way down the chain. And it can be very, very difficult for a unit to run. And then when we’re talking about people in positions of such amount of power, that’s going to have a lot of ramifications on national security, morale, and making sure our service members are well taken care of.
Terry Gerton So, Virginia, these positions that have been relieved have been at the top of chains of command. Have you heard any response from within the military or within DoD about the impact?
Virginia Burger I can only speak to like anecdotes I’ve been given from people I know. I haven’t seen any significant reports or anything from the DoD officially because they aren’t releasing any information like that, right? Like, Secretary Hegseth has not come out and said, hey, here’s a survey or here’s an investigation we did to see if the very dramatic relief of Admiral Franchetti had negative impacts to naval readiness. He’s not doing that kind of work or if he is, he’s not going to publish it. What I can say, and what I’ve heard, like I said, I spoke to several peers and friends of mine who are in the Navy, and it was quite a morale blow when she was relieved. I know many women in service, as a veteran myself, I still have many friends on active duty, and they have watched as many of those relieved look like them. They are women, and they’re sort of questioning, is there a future for me in this organization? I have friends who have sort of passed the 10-year mark, they’re trying to make it to 20, and they are looking to see, is that even really an option? Will I be able to continue to dedicate my life to this service that I’ve chosen? And that’s going to have ripple effects across the force and that’s not gonna have great implications when it comes to readiness, morale, etc.
Terry Gerton I’m speaking with Virginia Burger. She’s the senior defense policy analyst for the Center for Defense Information at the Project on Government Oversight. Virginia, in your paper, you talk about some opportunities that Congress might have to have some more say in this. Walk us through your suggestions.
Virginia Burger Like I said earlier, Congress has to review these nominees for the senior positions, right? And we’re talking specifically about the highest ranking officers. These are three and four-star generals and admirals. So those are the positions that have to go before Congress, they have to be cleared by SASC, Senate Armed Services Committee, and then voted on before they can take their seat in that position. And so Congress, and specifically the Senate, exists in that advisory capacity to the president’s nomination. And that’s written in law. That’s in Title 10, which is the section of U.S. Code that governs the United States military. There is a specific section, Section 601, that talks about the appointment of these officers, and it also talks about the removal and the replacement of them in some level of detail, but without any mention of Congress’ role, because there isn’t one in law for their removal. My suggestion is that we actually amend Section 601, so that there is some official oversight. Now, granted, Congress has avenues for oversight over these decisions now, right? The Senate, congress, they have the ability to conduct hearings, open investigations. If they wanted to, they could open an investigation into the relief of General Brown or Admiral Franchetti and subpoena them or subpoena Secretary Hegseth and have them come in and answer questions about that incident. The Senate could do that tomorrow. Politics aside, with all of that, there are things they could do to change the law. So my recommendations would be that they include explicit requirements for formal congressional notification, right? So when a senior leader, one of these three or four stars, is relieved, within 24 hours, it should be in the law, within twenty four hours, Congress must be formally notified of that decision. Right? Because again, these are the people whose relief is going to have the biggest impact to our national security. Our legislative body should be told that. That is something that I think would be a no-brainer to include, in my opinion. Another one is make sure that the DoD has to show their work, right? There should be a full investigative report. You and I have both been executive officers, I think you, for a very large battalion. You’re aware that the military loves to investigate everything. Someone sneezes in the wrong direction and an investigation is triggered. My guess is there’s probably investigations when these reliefs happen, I would hope there is, at the very least. If there isn’t, that’s maybe another question that we need to also pull the thread on. But at the least, I think Congress should be in receipt of that investigative material. Whatever investigation was done at that command level for the relief of that general or admiral should be provided to them, along with a statement from either the service secretary or the secretary of defense as to the justification for the relief and an optional response from the relieved officer stating their perspective. And that, I believe, should be included in 601 as a requirement to be given to Congress following the relief of one of these officers within 30 days. That way, Congress has this information. Does it need to be public? Maybe not. You could argue if someone is relieved for maybe personal misconduct that they don’t want in the public eye, sure, then the Senate or Congress can handle that with discretion, but at the very least, those legislators need that information so that they can make sure that the Secretary of Defense, the service secretaries, are not engaging in overt politicization in the removal of these officers.
Terry Gerton Virginia, I want to push on that a little bit because those proposals would give Congress oversight, but it still doesn’t address the issue of remediation or reinstatement that Congress might have that authority, if they were to receive all of that information and find that, in fact, in their opinion, that individual should continue on active duty. How do we get to a corrective measure that might help address this problem, or are you thinking that the additional oversight is its own deterrent?
Virginia Burger I think the oversight would be a deterrent in its own right because, you know, my guess is the secretary of defense does not want to be hauled in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee to answer for these should the Senate read the report and realize that the decision was overtly political. But there are, you now, like you said, ways that we could do it. They could impeach the service secretary or the secretary of defense if they feel like they are making these political decisions. That’s available to them now. I believe articles of impeachment for Secretary Hegseth were put forward in the House I think last week in light of Venezuela, I think one of the representatives did. I don’t think they went anywhere, but it’s something that they could do any day of the week if they feel like they are inappropriately handling their position, right? So that’s something they could to enforce this. Unfortunately, a lot of the rules governing the appointment of officers are established through case precedence. It’s not necessarily reflective explicitly in Title 10 or in the Constitution. So, a lot of the limitations that say the president is the one who should be appointing officers comes from case law, specifically before the Supreme Court. So that gets a little bit murky when it comes into the reinstatement of officers. But certainly, in my opinion, the easiest way would be if we believe a secretary of defense is mishandling their position by relieving officers for political reasons. If you impeach them, potentially the next secretary could then reinstate them. And then it’s very clean because it’s the secretary and the president who are then reinstating them.
The post Quiet firings with big consequences, why the lack of transparency when relieving military leaders matters first appeared on Federal News Network.
© The Associated Press
If your smoking setup is due an upgrade, now’s the perfect time to dive into The Vault Headshop. We’ve just added a massive selection of brand-new headshop products, giving you more choice than ever before.
From bold, eye-catching glass bongs that make a statement, to ultra-durable silicone pieces built for everyday use, our latest arrivals are designed to suit every smoking style.
Alongside new bongs, we’ve also expanded our range of essential smoking accessories, making it easier to fine-tune your setup and enjoy smoother, more consistent sessions.
Whether you prefer classic designs, modern materials, or practical pieces you can rely on day after day, you’ll find quality, functionality, and style across the board.
Whether you’re a collector hunting for something unique, a daily smoker upgrading your go-to gear, or just starting to build your kit from scratch, there’s something new waiting for you at The Vault.
Even better, you can save while you shop — scroll down to find the discount code below and enjoy money off across the headshop, including the CBD Shop.
Our discounted CBD range includes CBD gummies, CBD vapes, CBD pod refills, and CBD pouches (SNUS-style), offering convenient, smoke-free options to suit every preference and lifestyle.
Our latest glass bongs arrivals bring together bold designs, premium materials, and smooth functionality, making them perfect for smokers who value both aesthetics and performance.
Each new glass bong added to The Vault Headshop has been carefully selected to deliver clean pulls, reliable airflow, and a satisfying smoking experience from the first hit to the last.
From compact designs ideal for everyday use to taller, heavyweight statement pieces built for powerful sessions, our glass bong range offers something for every preference.
Thick borosilicate construction ensures durability and heat resistance, while well-designed chambers and percolation features help cool and filter smoke for smoother, more enjoyable draws.
Beyond performance, these new glass bongs are designed to stand out. Striking colour finishes, unique shapes, and eye-catching details make each piece as much a visual feature as it is a functional one.
Whether you’re upgrading your current setup or adding a standout piece to your collection, our newest glass bongs combine quality craftsmanship, modern style, and dependable performance in every session.
The Mystic Myco Glass Percolator Bong combines compact design with smooth, filtered performance, making it ideal for everyday sessions.
Standing at 23 cm, it features an integrated percolator that helps cool and diffuse smoke for cleaner, more enjoyable pulls.
Each piece comes in a randomly selected colour, giving it a unique, magical-inspired look that stands out while still delivering reliable functionality and consistent airflow.
The Pineapple Express Coloured Glass Bong offers a perfect balance of style and practicality in a compact 22 cm design.
Its vibrant coloured finish adds personality to your setup, while the classic water pipe structure helps cool smoke for smooth, satisfying hits.
Easy to handle and stable during use, this bong is a great choice for smokers looking for dependable performance with a fun, eye-catching twist.
The Metallic Justin Hale Glass Bong is a heavyweight statement piece built for powerful, smooth sessions.
At 55 cm tall, it’s crafted from thick borosilicate glass for durability and heat resistance, with a tall chamber that allows for excellent smoke cooling and filtration.
Finished with a striking metallic look, this bong delivers both impressive visual impact and reliable performance for serious smokers.
Looking for something tougher? Our expanded silicone bongs range is perfect for smokers who want maximum durability without sacrificing performance.
Designed to handle real-life use, these bongs are ideal for anyone who wants a reliable piece they don’t need to constantly worry about damaging.
Made from high-quality, food-grade silicone, these bongs are flexible, drop-resistant, and built to withstand knocks, bumps, and everyday wear. They’re a great choice for busy households, travel, outdoor sessions, and festivals, offering peace of mind without compromising on airflow or functionality.
Silicone bongs are also incredibly easy to clean and maintain, making them a practical option for regular smokers. Many designs feature removable parts for quick rinsing, helping you keep your setup fresh with minimal effort.
If you’re after a low-maintenance, long-lasting alternative to glass, our latest silicone bong additions deliver convenience, durability, and dependable performance session after session.
The PieceMaker Kwack Silicone Duck Bong turns heads with its playful duck-shaped design while delivering practical, everyday performance that smokers love.
Made from high-quality, flexible, food-grade silicone, this unbreakable water pipe features an angled Hex-Tek diffusion system and a stainless-steel bowl, helping to cool and purify smoke for smoother, cleaner hits — all inside a quirky, compact silhouette that’s great for home, bath-time sessions or on-the-go use.
Easy to fill and clean thanks to the removable head and downstem, the Kwack combines quirky style with reliable function, making it a standout piece for both collectors and casual smokers alike.
The Piecemakergear Kermit Kotton Kandy Silicone Bong delivers durable, everyday performance with a bold, colourful design.
Made from flexible, food-grade silicone, it’s drop-resistant and ideal for smokers who want reliability without worrying about breakage.
Easy to clean and comfortable to handle, this bong offers smooth airflow and consistent hits with a fun splash of colour.
The Piecemaker Karma Go Silicone Pipe in Klay Kanyon is a compact, travel-friendly smoking solution built for convenience and durability.
Measuring just 4 inches, this pipe fits easily into pockets or bags and is crafted from tough silicone that can handle everyday wear.
Its simple, ergonomic design delivers smooth, satisfying draws, making it a dependable choice for smokers on the move.
No setup is complete without the right smoking accessories, and we’ve stocked up on some absolute essentials designed to make every session smoother, easier, and more enjoyable.
Our latest smoking accessory additions focus on practicality, reliability, and everyday convenience, helping you get the most out of your setup without unnecessary extras.
From tools that simplify rolling to accessories that keep your sessions organised and mess-free, these new arrivals are all about improving the small details that make a big difference.
Whether you smoke at home or on the go, having the right accessories can save time, reduce waste, and deliver more consistent results every time you light up.
The Basil Bush Compact Rolling Machine is a simple, reliable tool for achieving consistent rolls every time.
Its compact size makes it easy to store or carry, while the smooth rolling mechanism helps create evenly packed cigarettes or joints with minimal effort.
The OCB Regular Auto Rolling Box takes the effort out of rolling by delivering quick, consistent results with minimal fuss.
Designed for standard-size papers, this automatic rolling box ensures even packing and smooth rolls every time.
Durable and easy to use, it’s perfect for smokers who want speed, simplicity, and dependable performance.
Juicy Jays Flavoured Papers add an extra layer of enjoyment to your smoking experience with their distinctive flavours and smooth burn.
Known for their quality and consistency, these papers roll easily and burn evenly, allowing you to personalise your sessions with subtle flavour notes while maintaining excellent smoking performance.
The Piecemaker Munchie Bowl in Kotton Kandy is a fun, practical accessory for keeping snacks organised during sessions.
Made from food-grade silicone, this 15 cm bowl is flexible, durable, and easy to clean, making it perfect for everyday use.
Its vibrant design adds personality to your space while offering a convenient, mess-free way to enjoy your favourite munchies.
To celebrate all these new arrivals, we’re offering 10% off all Headshop items, including the entire CBD Shop.
Use code: HEAD10 at checkout
Whether you’re upgrading your glass, switching to silicone, or restocking accessories, now’s the time to grab a bargain.
With tonnes of new products added and a site-wide discount running, there’s never been a better moment to refresh your collection. Check out the latest arrivals, find your new favourite piece, and enjoy top-tier quality at great prices – only at The Vault Headshop.
Discover unbeatable value with our discount cannabis seeds, where premium genetics meet wallet-friendly prices, giving you access to top-tier strains without the premium cost.
Our promotions are about helping you stretch your budget further while still enjoying high-quality, reliable genetics—perfect for growers who want maximum results with minimal spend. From beginner-friendly varieties to elite, high-performing strains, our discount cannabis seeds make it easier than ever to explore new options, stock up, and grow more for less.
Our offers page is packed with rotating Discounts, exclusive On Purchase Promos, Cannabis Seeds Special Offers and generous FREE Seeds.
You’ll also find exciting competitions and giveaways designed to help you grow more for less, with chances to win everything from premium cannabis seeds to top-quality CBD products and must-have headshop gear.
Whether you’re stocking up or trying something new, you’ll find top-quality strains at reduced prices alongside bonus deals you won’t want to miss. Dive in and level up your grow while keeping costs low — smart shopping never felt so rewarding.
Finally, to stay fully in the loop with all the latest Vault deals, giveaways, promos, and exclusive offers, make sure you join our newsletter to be notified the moment new updates drop.
It’s the easiest way to get insider info delivered straight to your inbox, including early-access promotions, special competitions, and new discount cannabis seed releases.
Don’t miss out — stay connected and always be the first to know what’s coming next.
Remember: It is illegal to germinate cannabis seeds in many countries including the UK. It is our duty to inform you of this fact and to urge you to obey all of your local laws to the letter. The Vault only ever sells or sends out seeds for souvenir, collection or novelty purposes.
The post Discount Headshop Products & Brand-New Lines Just Added first appeared on Cannabis Seeds News.
You’ve likely at least heard of Marion Stokes, the woman who constantly recorded television for over 30 years. She comes up on reddit and other places every so often as a hero archivist who fought against disinformation and disappearing history. But who was Marion Stokes, and why did she undertake this project? And more importantly, what happened to all of those tapes? Let’s take a look.
Marion was born November 25, 1929 in Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Noted for her left-wing beliefs as a young woman, she became quite politically active, and was even courted by the Communist Party USA to potentially become a leader. Marion was also involved in the civil rights movement.
For nearly 20 years, Marion worked as a librarian at the Free Library of Philadelphia until she was fired in the 1960s, which was likely a direct result of her political life. She married Melvin Metelits, a teacher and member of the Communist Party, and had a son named Michael with him.
Throughout this time, Marion was spied on by the FBI, to the point that she and her husband attempted to defect to Cuba. They were unsuccessful in securing Cuban visas, and separated in the mid-1960s when Michael was four.
Marion began co-producing a Sunday morning public-access talk show in Philadelphia called Input with her future husband John Stokes, Jr. The focus of the show was on social justice, and the point of the show was to get different types of people together to discuss things peaceably.
Marion’s taping began in 1979 with the Iranian Hostage Crisis, which coincided with the dawn of the twenty-four-hour news cycle. Her final tape is from December 14, 2012 — she recorded coverage of the Sandy Hook massacre as she passed away.
In 35 years of taping, Marion amassed 70,000 VHS and Beta-max tapes. She mostly taped various news outlets, fearing that the information would disappear forever. Her time in the television industry taught her that networks typically considered preservation too expensive, and therefore often reused tapes.
But Marion didn’t just tape the news. She also taped various programs such as The Cosby Show, Divorce Court, Nightline, Star Trek, The Oprah Winfrey Show, and The Today Show. Some of her collection includes 24/7 coverage of news networks, all of which was recorded on up to eight VCRs: 3-5 were going all day every day, and up to 8 would be taping if something special was happening. All family outings were planned around the six-hour VHS tape, and Marion would sometimes cut dinner short to go home and change the tapes.
People can’t take knowledge from you. — Marion Stokes
You might be wondering where she kept all the tapes, or how she could afford to do this, both financially and time-wise. For one thing, her second husband John Stokes, Jr. was already well off. For another, she was an early investor in Apple stock, using capital from her in-laws. To say she bought a lot of Macs is an understatement. According to the excellent documentary Recorder, Marion own multiples of every Apple product ever produced. Marion was a huge fan of technology and viewed it as a way of unlocking people’s potential. By the end of her life, she had nine apartments filled with books, newspapers, furniture, and multiples of any item she ever became obsessed with.
In addition to the creating this vast video archive, Marion took half a dozen daily newspapers and over 100 monthly periodicals, which she collected for 50 years. This is not to mention the 40-50,000 books in her possession. In one interview, Marion’s first husband Melvin Metelits has said that in the mid-1970s, the family would go to a bookstore and drop $800 on new books. That’s nearly $5,000 in today’s money.
It’s easy to understand why she started with VHS tapes — it was the late 1970s, and they were still the best option. When TiVo came along, Marion was not impressed, preferring not to expose her recording habits to any possible governments. And she had every right to be afraid, with her past.
Those in power are able to write their own history. — Marion Stokes
As for the why, there were several reasons. It was a form of activism, which partially defined Marion’s life. The rest I would argue was defined by this archive she amassed.
Marion started taping when the Iranian Hostage Crisis began. Shortly thereafter, the 24/7 news cycle was born, and networks reached into small towns in order to fill space. And that’s what she was concerned with — the effect that filling space would have on the average viewer.
Marion was obsessed with the way that media reflects society back upon itself. With regard to the hostage crisis, her goal was trying to reveal a set of agendas on the part of governments. Her first husband Melvin Metelits said that Marion was extremely fearful that America would replicate Nazi Germany.
The show Nightline was born from nightly coverage of the crisis. It aired at 11:30PM, which meant it had to compete with the late-night talk show hosts. And it did just fine, rising on the wings of the evening soap opera it was creating.
When Marion passed on December 14, 2012, news of the Sandy Hook massacre began to unfold. It was only after she took her last breath that her VCRs were switched off. Marion bequeathed the archive to her son Michael, who spent a year and half dealing with her things. He gave her books to a charity that teaches at-risk youth using secondhand materials, and he says he got rid of all the remaining Apples.
But no one would take the tapes. That is, until the Internet Archive heard about them. The tapes were hauled from Philadelphia to San Francisco, packed in banker’s boxes and stacked in four shipping containers.
So that’s 70,000 tapes at let’s assume six hours per tape, which totals 420,000 hours. No wonder the Internet Archive wasn’t finished digitizing the footage as of October 2025. That, and a lack of funding for the massive amount of manpower this must require.
If you want to see what they’ve uploaded so far, it’s definitely worth a look. And as long as you’re taking my advice, go watch the excellent documentary Recorder on YouTube. Check out the trailer embedded below.
Main and thumbnail images via All That’s Interesting
It was early evening in Berlin, just a day before Christmas Eve, when Josephine Ballon got an unexpected email from US Customs and Border Protection. The status of her ability to travel to the United States had changed—she’d no longer be able to enter the country.
At first, she couldn’t find any information online as to why, though she had her suspicions. She was one of the directors of HateAid, a small German nonprofit founded to support the victims of online harassment and violence. As the organization has become a strong advocate of EU tech regulations, it has increasingly found itself attacked in campaigns from right-wing politicians and provocateurs who claim that it engages in censorship.
It was only later that she saw what US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had posted on X:
For far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose. The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship.
— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) December 23, 2025
Today, @StateDept will take steps to…
Rubio was promoting a conspiracy theory about what he has called the “censorship-industrial complex,” which alleges widespread collusion between the US government, tech companies, and civil society organizations to silence conservative voices—the very conspiracy theory HateAid has recently been caught up in.
Then Undersecretary of State Sarah B. Rogers posted on X the names of the people targeted by travel bans. The list included Ballon, as well as her HateAid co-director, Anna Lena von Hodenberg. Also named were three others doing similar or related work: former EU commissioner Thierry Breton, who had helped author Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA); Imran Ahmed of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, which documents hate speech on social media platforms; and Clare Melford of the Global Disinformation Index, which provides risk ratings warning advertisers about placing ads on websites promoting hate speech and disinformation.
It was an escalation in the Trump administration’s war on digital rights—fought in the name of free speech. But EU officials, freedom of speech experts, and the five people targeted all flatly reject the accusations of censorship. Ballon, von Hodenberg, and some of their clients tell me that their work is fundamentally about making people feel safer online. And their experiences over the past few weeks show just how politicized and besieged their work in online safety has become. They almost certainly won’t be the last people targeted in this way.
Ballon was the one to tell von Hodenberg that both their names were on the list. “We kind of felt a chill in our bones,” von Hodenberg told me when I caught up with the pair in early January.
But she added that they also quickly realized, “Okay, it’s the old playbook to silence us.” So they got to work—starting with challenging the narrative the US government was pushing about them.
Within a few hours, Ballon and von Hodenberg had issued a strongly worded statement refuting the allegations: “We will not be intimidated by a government that uses accusations of censorship to silence those who stand up for human rights and freedom of expression,” they wrote. “We demand a clear signal from the German government and the European Commission that this is unacceptable. Otherwise, no civil society organisation, no politician, no researcher, and certainly no individual will dare to denounce abuses by US tech companies in the future.”
Those signals came swiftly. On X, Johann Wadephul, the German foreign minister, called the entry bans “not acceptable,” adding that “the DSA was democratically adopted by the EU, for the EU—it does not have extraterritorial effect.” Also on X, French president Emmanuel Macron wrote that “these measures amount to intimidation and coercion aimed at undermining European digital sovereignty.” The European Commission issued a statement that it “strongly condemns” the Trump administration’s actions and reaffirmed its “sovereign right to regulate economic activity in line with our democratic values.”
Ahmed, Melford, Breton, and their respective organizations also made their own statements denouncing the entry bans. Ahmed, the only one of the five based in the United States, also successfully filed suit to preempt any attempts to detain him, which the State Department had indicated it would consider doing.
But alongside the statements of solidarity, Ballon and von Hodenberg said, they also received more practical advice: Assume the travel ban was just the start and that more consequences could be coming. Service providers might preemptively revoke access to their online accounts; banks might restrict their access to money or the global payment system; they might see malicious attempts to get hold of their personal data or that of their clients. Perhaps, allies told them, they should even consider moving their money into friends’ accounts or keeping cash on hand so that they could pay their team’s salaries—and buy their families’ groceries.
These warnings felt particularly urgent given that just days before, the Trump administration had sanctioned two International Criminal Court judges for “illegitimate targeting of Israel.” As a result, they had lost access to many American tech platforms, including Microsoft, Amazon, and Gmail.
“If Microsoft does that to someone who is a lot more important than we are,” Ballon told me, “they will not even blink to shut down the email accounts from some random human rights organization in Germany.”
“We have now this dark cloud over us that any minute, something can happen,” von Hodenberg added. “We’re running against time to take the appropriate measures.”
Founded in 2018 to support people experiencing digital violence, HateAid has since evolved to defend digital rights more broadly. It provides ways for people to report illegal online content and offers victims advice, digital security, emotional support, and help with evidence preservation. It also educates German police, prosecutors, and politicians about how to handle online hate crimes.
Once the group is contacted for help, and if its lawyers determine that the type of harassment has likely violated the law, the organization connects victims with legal counsel who can help them file civil and criminal lawsuits against perpetrators, and if necessary, helps finance the cases. (HateAid itself does not file cases against individuals.) Ballon and von Hodenberg estimate that HateAid has worked with around 7,500 victims and helped them file 700 criminal cases and 300 civil cases, mostly against individual offenders.
For 23-year-old German law student and outspoken political activist Theresia Crone, HateAid’s support has meant that she has been able to regain some sense of agency in her life, both on and offline. She had reached out after she discovered entire online forums dedicated to making deepfakes of her. Without HateAid, she told me, “I would have had to either put my faith into the police and the public prosecutor to prosecute this properly, or I would have had to foot the bill of an attorney myself”—a huge financial burden for “a student with basically no fixed income.”
In addition, working alone would have been retraumatizing: “I would have had to document everything by myself,” she said—meaning “I would have had to see all of these pictures again and again.”
“The internet is a lawless place,” Ballon told me when we first spoke, back in mid-December, a few weeks before the travel ban was announced. In a conference room at the HateAid office in Berlin, she said there are many cases that “cannot even be prosecuted, because no perpetrator is identified.” That’s why the nonprofit also advocates for better laws and regulations governing technology companies in Germany and across the European Union.
On occasion, they have also engaged in strategic litigation against the platforms themselves. In 2023, for example, HateAid and the European Union of Jewish Students sued X for failing to enforce its terms of service against posts that were antisemitic or that denied the Holocaust, which is illegal in Germany.
This almost certainly put the organization in the crosshairs of X owner Elon Musk; it also made HateAid a frequent target of Germany’s far right party, the Alternative für Deutschland, which Musk has called “the only hope for Germany.” (X did not respond to a request to comment on this lawsuit.)
For better and worse, HateAid’s profile grew further when it took on another critical job in online safety. In June 2024, it was named as a trusted flagger organization under the Digital Services Act, a 2022 EU law that requires social media companies to remove certain content (including hate speech and violence) that violates national laws, and to provide more transparency to the public, in part by allowing more appeals on platforms’ moderation decisions.
Trusted flaggers are entities designated by individual EU countries to point out illegal content, and they are a key part of DSA enforcement. While anyone can report such content, trusted flaggers’ reports are prioritized and legally require a response from the platforms.
The Trump administration has loudly argued that the trusted flagger program and the DSA more broadly are examples of censorship that disproportionately affect voices on the right and American technology companies, like X.
When we first spoke in December, Ballon said these claims of censorship simply don’t hold water: “We don’t delete content, and we also don’t, like, flag content publicly for everyone to see and to shame people. The only thing that we do: We use the same notification channels that everyone can use, and the only thing that is in the Digital Services Act is that platforms should prioritize our reporting.” Then it is on the platforms to decide what to do.
Nevertheless, the idea that HateAid and like-minded organizations are censoring the right has become a powerful conspiracy theory with real-world consequences. (Last year, MIT Technology Review covered the closure of a small State Department office following allegations that it had conducted “censorship,” as well as an unusual attempt by State leadership to access internal records related to supposed censorship—including information about two of the people who have now been banned, Medford and Ahmed, and both of their organizations.)
HateAid saw a fresh wave of harassment starting last February, when 60 Minutes aired a documentary on hate speech laws in Germany; it featured a quote from Ballon that “free speech needs boundaries,” which, she added, “are part of our constitution.” The interview happened to air just days before Vice President JD Vance attended the Munich Security Conference; there he warned that “across Europe, free speech … is in retreat.” This, Ballon told me, led to heightened hostility toward her and her organization.
Fast-forward to July, when a report by Republicans in the US House of Representatives claimed that the DSA “compels censorship and infringes on American free speech.” HateAid was explicitly named in the report.
All of this has made its work “more dangerous,” Ballon told me in December. Before the 60 Minutes interview, “maybe one and a half years ago, as an organization, there were attacks against us, but mostly against our clients, because they were the activists, the journalists, the politicians at the forefront. But now … we see them becoming more personal.”
As a result, over the last year, HateAid has taken more steps to protect its reputation and get ahead of the damaging narratives. Ballon has reported the hate speech targeted at her—“More [complaints] than in all the years I did this job before,” she said—as well as defamation lawsuits on behalf of HateAid.
All these tensions finally came to a head in December. At the start of the month, the European Commission fined X $140 million for DSA violations. This set off yet another round of recriminations about supposed censorship of the right, with Trump calling the fine “a nasty one” and warning: “Europe has to be very careful.”
Just a few weeks later, the day before Christmas Eve, retaliation against individuals finally arrived.
Digital rights groups are pushing back against the Trump administration’s narrow view of what constitutes free speech and censorship.
“What we see from this administration is a conception of freedom of expression that is not a human-rights-based conception where this is an inalienable, indelible right that’s held by every person,” says David Greene, the civil liberties director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a US-based digital rights group. Rather, he sees an “expectation that… [if] anybody else’s speech is challenged, there’s a good reason for it, but it should never happen to them.”
Since Trump won his second term, social media platforms have walked back their commitments to trust and safety. Meta, for example, ended fact-checking on Facebook and adopted much of the administration’s censorship language, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg telling the podcaster Joe Rogan that it would “work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world” if they are seen as “going after American companies and pushing to censor more.”
Have more information on this story or a tip for something else that we should report? Using a non-work device, reach the reporter on Signal at eileenguo.15 or tips@technologyreview.com.
And as the recent fines on X show, Musk’s platform has gone even further in flouting European law—and, ultimately, ignoring the user rights that the DSA was written to protect. In perhaps one of the most egregious examples yet, in recent weeks X allowed people to use Grok, its AI generator, to create nonconsensual nude images of women and children, with few limits—and, so far at least, few consequences. (Last week, X released a statement that it would start limiting users’ ability to create explicit images with Grok; in response to a number of questions, X representative Rosemarie Esposito pointed me to that statement.)
For Ballon, it makes perfect sense: “You can better make money if you don’t have to implement safety measures and don’t have to invest money in making your platform the safest place,” she told me.
“It goes both ways,” von Hodenberg added. “It’s not only the platforms who profit from the US administration undermining European laws … but also, obviously, the US administration also has a huge interest in not regulating the platforms … because who is amplified right now? It’s the extreme right.”
She believes this explains why HateAid—and Ahmed’s Center for Countering Digital Hate and Melford’s Global Disinformation Index, as well as Breton and the DSA—have been targeted: They are working to disrupt this “unholy deal where the platforms profit economically and the US administration is profiting in dividing the European Union,” she said.
The travel restrictions intentionally send a strong message to all groups that work to hold tech companies accountable. “It’s purely vindictive,” Greene says. “It’s designed to punish people from pursuing further work on disinformation or anti-hate work.” (The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.)
And ultimately, this has a broad effect on who feels safe enough to participate online.
Ballon pointed to research that shows the “silencing effect” of harassment and hate speech, not only for “those who have been attacked,” but also for those who witness such attacks. This is particularly true for women, who tend to face more online hate that is also more sexualized and violent. It’ll only be worse if groups like HateAid get deplatformed or lose funding.
Von Hodenberg put it more bluntly: “They reclaim freedom of speech for themselves when they want to say whatever they want, but they silence and censor the ones that criticize them.”
Still, the HateAid directors insist they’re not backing down. They say they’re taking “all advice” they have received seriously, especially with regard to “becoming more independent from service providers,” Ballon told me.
“Part of the reason that they don’t like us is because we are strengthening our clients and empowering them,” said von Hodenberg. “We are making sure that they are not succeeding, and not withdrawing from the public debate.”
“So when they think they can silence us by attacking us? That is just a very wrong perception.”
Martin Sona contributed reporting.
Correction: This article originally misstated the name of Germany’s far right party.
The Microsoft Library in Redmond has long been a quiet anachronism in the middle of the high-tech campus, a place where authors gave talks and employees checked out old-fashioned paper books, including titles recommended by CEO Satya Nadella and other execs.
That chapter of the company’s history is now closing.
The Verge broke the news Thursday that Microsoft’s traditional library is going away as part of what Microsoft described internally as a shift to a “modern, AI-powered learning experience.”
Responding to an inquiry from GeekWire, the company confirmed that its libraries in Redmond, Hyderabad, Beijing, and Dublin closed as of this week and “are being repurposed into collaborative spaces for group learning and experimentation,” where employees can explore emerging technologies.
“We’re evolving Microsoft Library locations and services to better support how employees learn, stay current, and build new skills,” a Microsoft spokesperson said via email. The changes are already underway and will roll out fully in the coming weeks, according to the company.
In an internal FAQ obtained by The Verge, Microsoft described the new approach as a “Skilling Hub” and acknowledged that the decision “affects a space many people valued.”
The shift also includes cuts to employee subscriptions for newspapers and industry reports. Publications affected include The Information and Strategic News Service, which had provided global reports to Microsoft employees for more than two decades.
Microsoft said it continues to offer access to more than 20 digital resources and subscriptions, “prioritizing those most valuable to employees.”
Strategic News Service didn’t mince words about Microsoft’s AI-focused rationale.
“Technology’s future is shaped by flows of power, money, innovation, and people — none of which are predictable based on LLMs’ probabilistic regurgitation of old information,” Berit Anderson, the company’s chief operating officer, told The Verge.
The library has moved around over the decades, from the original Building 4 to Building 92 most recently. The news of the closure drew a nostalgic response on X from Steven Sinofsky, the former Windows president, who called the library “a crown jewel of the early days.”
“They bought every PC book and two copies of every software,” Sinofsky wrote. “If you found one you needed that they didn’t have, they acquired it.”
When I ask this question in my cookery classes, people often laugh first — and then admit their worries. I recognise those fears, because although I grew up with Indian food, I didn’t grow up Read More ...
The post What People Are Afraid Of When Cooking Indian Food first appeared on Give Me Some Spice!.
On Sunday, Google removed some of its AI Overviews health summaries after a Guardian investigation found people were being put at risk by false and misleading information. The removals came after the newspaper found that Google's generative AI feature delivered inaccurate health information at the top of search results, potentially leading seriously ill patients to mistakenly conclude they are in good health.
Google disabled specific queries, such as "what is the normal range for liver blood tests," after experts contacted by The Guardian flagged the results as dangerous. The report also highlighted a critical error regarding pancreatic cancer: The AI suggested patients avoid high-fat foods, a recommendation that contradicts standard medical guidance to maintain weight and could jeopardize patient health. Despite these findings, Google only deactivated the summaries for the liver test queries, leaving other potentially harmful answers accessible.
The investigation revealed that searching for liver test norms generated raw data tables (listing specific enzymes like ALT, AST, and alkaline phosphatase) that lacked essential context. The AI feature also failed to adjust these figures for patient demographics such as age, sex, and ethnicity. Experts warned that because the AI model's definition of "normal" often differed from actual medical standards, patients with serious liver conditions might mistakenly believe they are healthy and skip necessary follow-up care.
© Getty Images
This was in Yorkshire, UK. But it could happen anywhere.
The post Fake UK Council Posts Show the Power of AI Misinformation appeared first on TechRepublic.
This was in Yorkshire, UK. But it could happen anywhere.
The post Fake UK Council Posts Show the Power of AI Misinformation appeared first on TechRepublic.
The company will use the funds to enhance its AI-based narrative intelligence technology platform and accelerate go-to-market efforts.
The post Blackbird.AI Raises $28 Million for Narrative Intelligence Platform appeared first on SecurityWeek.
From 2010, Give Me Some Spice was all about blogging; creating recipes, styling food, taking photos, and sharing them online. I loved that phase of my life, and I’m incredibly grateful for everything blogging gave Read More ...
The post Why My Focus Has Shifted from Blogging to Teaching first appeared on Give Me Some Spice!.
First of all, well done to everyone taking part in Veganuary — you’re doing great. If you’re finding it a bit challenging rather than just “what to eat”. Here are some gentle, realistic tips I Read More ...
The post Veganuary Made Easy: My Top Vegan Recipes first appeared on Give Me Some Spice!.
Californians are getting a new, supercharged way to stop data brokers from hoarding and selling their personal information, as a recently enacted law that’s among the strictest in the nation took effect at the beginning of the year.
According to the California Privacy Protection Agency, more than 500 companies actively scour all sorts of sources for scraps of information about individuals, then package and store it to sell to marketers, private investigators, and others.
The nonprofit Consumer Watchdog said in 2024 that brokers trawl automakers, tech companies, junk-food restaurants, device makers, and others for financial info, purchases, family situations, eating, exercising, travel, entertainment habits, and just about any other imaginable information belonging to millions of people.
© Getty Images
OpenAI, the company that developed the models and products associated with ChatGPT, plans to announce a new audio language model in the first quarter of 2026, and that model will be an intentional step along the way to an audio-based physical hardware device, according to a report in The Information.
Citing a variety of sources familiar with the plans, including both current and former employees, The Information claims that OpenAI has taken efforts to combine multiple teams across engineering, product, and research under one initiative focused on improving audio models, which researchers in the company believe lag behind the models used for written text in terms of both accuracy and speed.
They have also seen that relatively few ChatGPT users opt to use the voice interface, with most people preferring the text one. The hope may be that substantially improving the audio models could shift user behavior toward voice interfaces, allowing the models and products to be deployed in a wider range of devices, such as in cars.
© Eugene Gologursky via Getty Images
Login
