Related stories
Xbox's new chief exec, Asha Sharma, has only been in charge for a few months but things already seem like they might be changing for the better. Or at the very least, they might be getting cheaper. The Verge reported that the new Xbox CEO wrote a memo to employees addressing the current pricing of the Game Pass subscription service. "Game Pass is central to gaming value on Xbox. It’s also clear that the current model isn’t the final one," Sharma allegedly said. "Short term, Game Pass has become too expensive for players, so we need a better value equation. Long term, we will evolve Game Pass into a more flexible system which will take time to test and learn around." After Microsoft upped the price for Game Pass twice within 15 months, many of us certainly felt that the service had gotten too costly to keep. Xbox is still offering a wide range of titles on Game Pass; the April update is adding indies like Hades 2 and new Double Fine project Kiln alongside AAA hits like the remake of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare . The Verge 's sources suggested that the addition of the CoD franchise might have been a factor in some of the Game Pass price increases, since Microsoft would lose out on revenue by making the latest entries in the series available under the subscription. It's too early to say whether this memo from Sharma means Xbox is on the brink of a resurgence. And there are changes the company could make, like adding ever more complicated tiers, that would further hamper interest and uptake of Game Pass. But acknowledging the problem, even internally, is refreshing to see after so many baffling moves from Xbox in recent years. This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/xbox/xbox-ceo-called-game-pass-too-expensive-for-players-in-a-leaked-memo-194749597.html?src=rss
Dozens of civil rights organizations have written a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to warn of the dangers in bringing facial recognition technology to the company's smart glasses. More than 70 groups have banded together to form a coalition to urge Zuckerberg to abandon plans to incorporate the tech, on the grounds that it would empower stalkers, sexual predators and other bad actors. This coalition includes organizations like the ACLU, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Fight for the Future, Access Now and many others. The letter isn't asking for safeguards. These groups want the feature to be completely eliminated, stating the idea behind facial recognition of this type is so dangerous that it “cannot be resolved through product design changes, opt-out mechanisms or incremental safeguards." This tracks, as there would be no real way for bystanders to know or consent to being identified. "People should be able to move through their daily lives without fear that stalkers, scammers, abusers, federal agents and activists across the political spectrum are silently and invisibly verifying their identities and potentially matching their names to a wealth of readily available data about their habits, hobbies, relationships, health and behaviors," the letter states. The organizations have urged Meta to disclose any known instances of its wearables being used for stalking, harassment or domestic violence. They also want the company to disclose past or ongoing discussions with federal law enforcement agencies, including ICE, about the use of Meta smart glasses and other wearables, according to a report by Wired . There is certainly some cause for worry here. According to the New York Times , Meta issued an internal memo last year that suggested it could roll out this technology "during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have their resources focused on other concerns." That's corporate speak for "we'll do it when nobody is watching." The coalition called this "vile behavior" that looks to take advantage of "rising authoritarianism." NEW: Meta plans to add facial recognition to its smart glasses as soon as this year, according to a new report from The New York Times. The feature, internally known as “Name Tag,” would allow smart glasses wearers to identify people and get information about them through Meta’s… pic.twitter.com/et7PO9JGW5 — Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) February 13, 2026 The technology in question is apparently called Name Tag, for obvious reasons. It uses AI to pull up information about people in a field of view to smart glasses displays. That's about as dystopian as it gets. The company has reportedly been working on two versions of the toolset . There's one that would only identify people that are currently connected to a Meta platform and another that would identify anyone with a public account on a service like Instagram. It doesn't look like there's any way, as of yet, to use this tech to identify strangers on the street who don't have a Meta account of any kind. In other words, the company should expect a wave of cancellations if this rolls out. In an emailed statement, a Meta spokesperson told Engadget: "Our competitors offer this type of facial recognition product, we do not. If we were to release such a feature, we would take a very thoughtful approach before rolling anything out." Public outcry has gotten Meta to back off from facial recognition in the past. The company ended Facebook's photo-tagging system in 2021 after pushback from civil liberties groups and years of costly litigation. Meta paid out billions of dollars to settle biometric privacy lawsuits in Illinois and Texas and another $5 billion to the FTC for a separate privacy case partially tied to facial recognition software. Update, April 13 2026, 4:45PM ET: This story was updated after publish with comment from Meta. This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/meta-warned-by-dozens-of-organizations-that-facial-recognition-on-its-smart-glasses-would-empower-predators-185000998.html?src=rss
Over the past couple of years, Google has found ways to stuff Gemini in nearly every app and service it offers. Whether it's Gmail with its AI inbox or Chrome with its chat sidebar , Gemini is now inescapable inside of Workspace. I don't know about you, but I don't need an AI to tell me how to write a =SUM equation in Sheets or an outline for a first draft. Most of the time, I find Gemini is a distraction. If you feel the same way, this how-to is for you. How to remove Gemini from your personal Workspace account From the "General" tab of Gmail's settings menu, look for the Smart features checkbox. Igor Bonifacic for Engadget To turn Gemini off, you will need to disable two separate sets of options. The first set covers a set of features, including smart compose, that are shared across Gmail, Chat and Meet — so if you turn them off in one app, they won't be available in any of the three. All of this is most easily done through Gmail's web client. In Gmail, tap the cog icon. Select See all settings . Under the General tab, scroll down to find Smart features . Disable Turn on smart features in Gmail, Chat, and Meet . In Japan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom or European Economic Area , smart features are turned off by default. Next, turn your attention to Workspace. In Gmail, tap the cog icon. Select See all settings . Under the General tab, scroll down and click Manage Workspace smart feature settings . Toggle off smart features in Google Workspace and Smart features in other Google products . A word of warning: completely disabling smart features in Google Workspace turns off not only Gemini integration but also access to basic capabilities like spelling and grammar corrections. You'll also lose features that have been Google staples for years. In Gmail, for example, the app will stop sorting incoming emails by priority, a notification at the top of the screen informing you that smart features are required for inbox categorization. Whatever Google's motivation for this state of affairs, it's a design decision that actively discourages users from disabling Gemini integration. Disabling Gemini in Google Workspace will also turn off other features. Igor Bonifacic for Engadget If you want to rid yourself of Gemini but would still like to use some of the other features the company offers through Gmail and its other apps, I recommend leaving the first set of smart features on while disabling the Workspace-specific ones. You can also opt to turn off some of the features included in the first group, while leaving others on. Below is a list of those features, with a brief overview of the less self-explanatory ones. Grammar Spelling Autocorrect Smart Compose — as you write an email, Gmail will generate predictive writing suggestions Smart Compose personalization — as you write, Gmail will tailor Smart Compose suggestions to your writing style Nudges — Gmail will generate notifications prompting you to respond or follow up on unanswered emails Smart Reply — Gmail will generate suggestions on how to respond to an email Package tracking — Google will display shipping updates inside of Gmail Desktop notifications — Yes, for some reason you need the power of AI to get notifications on your PC Unfortunately, Google doesn't offer this same level of granular control when it comes to smart features inside of Workspace. For instance, if you turn off Gemini in Docs, Calendar won't automatically display events from Gmail. Again, Google really wants to dissuade you from disabling Gemini. How to remove Gemini from your professional Workspace account If your workplace uses Google Workspace, all of the above options should be present in Gmail's settings menu, and you can follow the same steps to turn off most of the smart features Google offers. Unfortunately, the second part of the process does nothing. You will still see Gemini in Docs, Sheets and elsewhere, even with smart features in Workspace turned off. Only your admin can completely turn off Gemini for you. This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/how-to-de-gemini-your-google-apps-170000462.html?src=rss
The authorities said a 20-year-old Texas man charged with throwing a homemade bomb at the gate of Sam Altman’s home had written at length about the threat of A.I.
