GoneTrending

Elon Musk may have a B.A. in Physics, but few people would likely want him rooting around inside their brain. Yet here we are. The polarizing entrepreneur, who is already trying to make driverless cars and space tourism a thing, is also apparently now ready to realize his dream of normalizing brain implants that would allow people to control a computer with just their thoughts.

As the Daily Beast reports, Musk’s company, Neuralink, is one step closer to conducting human trials—and scientists are understandably very, very worried about the implications.

“I don’t think there is sufficient public discourse on what the big picture implications of this kind of technology becoming available [are],” Dr. Karola Kreitmair, assistant professor of medical history and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told Daily Beast. “I worry that there’s this uncomfortable marriage between a company that is for-profit… and these medical interventions that hopefully are there to help people.”

Experts in the science and medical fields first caught wind of Neuralink’s ramp-up to human trials when it was announced that Neuralink was on the lookout for a Clinical Trial Director. The basic description of the job reads as follows:

“As the Clinical Trial Director, you’ll work closely with some of the most innovative doctors and top engineers, as well as working with Neuralink’s first Clinical Trial participants! You will lead and help build the team responsible for enabling Neuralink’s clinical research activities and developing the regulatory interactions that come with a fast-paced and ever-evolving environment. You are mission-driven and are able to meet tight deadlines with accuracy and efficiency.”

A “working knowledge of medical and scientific terminology” is one of the key qualifications they’re looking for (gee, ya think?).

For many scientists, the concern is a bioethical one.

“These are very niche products,” Dr. L. Syd Johnson, an associate professor in the Center for Bioethics and Humanities at SUNY Upstate Medical University, told the Daily Beast. While she noted that these tools could be helpful to some paralyzed individuals, Dr. Johnson also said that “the market is small [and] the devices are expensive.”

“If the ultimate goal is to use the acquired brain data for other devices, or use these devices for other things—say, to drive cars, to drive Teslas—then there might be a much, much bigger market,” Syd warned. “But then all those human research subjects—people with genuine needs—are being exploited and used in risky research for someone else’s commercial gain.”

Neuralink did not respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment on the story.

(Via The Daily Beast)

Anyone who has experienced or attended a birth knows how magical it can be to witness a brand new human make its entrance into the outside world. Each birth is unique, each baby born an individual with untold potential.

But some births are extra unusual. In the vast majority of births, the protective amniotic sac that holds the baby and the amniotic fluid it “breathes” in the womb breaks at some point in the labor and delivery process. En caul births, in which a baby is born inside an intact amniotic sac, only occur in about 1 in 80,000 births. It’s more common in cesarean births than vaginal births, but still very rare overall.

An en caul birth, sometimes called a “mermaid birth” or “veiled birth,” is seen as a sign of good luck for the baby and parents in some cultures. From a scientific observation point of view, en caul births can give us close-up look at what a baby’s life is like in utero.

Due to the rarity of such births (and the understandable desire for patient privacy), it’s not often that the public gets to see what it looks like. But a viral video showing a baby who was just born en caul offers a beautiful view of what it looks like. Seeing the baby curled up inside the sac and subsequently being “birthed” from it is simply mesmerizing.

Watch:

See on Instagram

The video was shared by Dr. Ignacio Perez Tomasone, an OB-GYN in Argentina, on his Instagram account. Dr. Perez Tomasone shares birth videos on his Instagram regularly, but they don’t usually garner more than 3 million views or get comments from people all over the world like this one did.

People referred to the video as “beautiful,” “magnificent,” “incredible” and “miraculous.” The video has also been shared widely on Facebook, with thousands of comments gushing over how amazing it is to see.

Every human being who has ever lived on Earth had to be born into this world, and yet every birth is still a fascinating wonder. The opportunity to see a rare and extra special birth like this one is a gift to us all. Thank you, Dr. Perez Tomasone, for sharing it.

(By the way, If you’re curious about the music played with the video, it’s the song “Devuélvete” by indie Mexican artist Carla Morrison.)

There comes a time in every artist’s life where they feel creatively burnt out. After his wildly successful 2019 album Hollywood’s Bleeding and a string of successful performances, Post Malone was feeling his creative juices depleting — especially when the pandemic hit. In fact, he thought he had completely lost his inspiration for making music until his upcoming LP Twelve Carat Toothache changed his mind.

Malone recently sat down with Billboard for a lengthy cover interview unveiling details about his upcoming album, which his manager recently noted had been delayed. During their conversation, the musician revealed he thought he lost his inspiration to write new music before launching into his new era.

Reflecting on his success, Malone said he had felt anxious about starting a new era of music. “You think about everything at the same time, and it’s f*cking overload,” he said. “There’s a lot riding on the music. There’s a lot riding on just being able to keep making songs. And that’s hard to do because you’re like, ‘F*ck — I already talked about everything.’ And you kind of run out of ideas, and that’s scary sh*t.”

He continued that he used to love playing guitar and creating beats, but he lost that inspirational spark before his collaborator Louis Bell visited his home studio: “I used to love playing the guitar — I hardly play the guitar anymore. I used to love making beats. There was a switch that flipped, and it felt like I was making Stoney. I lost that, and the hardest part is getting it back. It ebbs and flows. It’s figuring out: ‘Just because I’m not inspired to do it at the moment doesn’t mean I’m giving up.”

The Billboard feature mentions Twelve Carat Toothache is relatively brief compared to his previous releases, clocking in around 45 minutes. His aim is to avoid “filler” songs and give an honest portrayal of the “the ups and downs and the disarray and the bipolar aspect of being an artist in the mainstream.”

Check out Malone’s full interview with Billboard here.

Chillwave pioneer Toro Y Moi is gearing up to release his seventh studio album, Mahal, and along with the announcement of its release date, April 29, the musician released a pair of singles to give fans a glimpse of the album’s sound. “Postman” is accompanied by a colorful, surreal video of Toro and friends driving around San Francisco in a Filipino Jeepney (which are sort of like city buses converted from old Army Jeeps) and covering themselves with stamps.

Meanwhile, the B-side, “Magazine,” features Bay Area musician Salami Rose Joe Louis and comes with a psychedelic video harkening back to the mod era of the 60s — and its late-90s revival. Both songs are as funky as we’ve come to expect from Chaz Bear, with “Postman” featuring a stripped-down backbeat and a groovy bassline and “Magazine” tapping into the breakbeat-sampling garage rock bands from which the video borrows its aesthetic.

Mahal, which means “love” in Tagalog, the official language of the Philippines (Toro is half-Filipino on his mother’s side), will be Toro Y Moi’s first full-length album since 2019’s Outer Peace, although he did put out an EP in 2020 called C’mon Les’ Go as Les Sins with AceMo. In 2021, he changed labels, moving from Carpark, where he’d released all his previous albums, to Dead Oceans.

Watch the “Postman” and “Magazine” videos above.

Mahal is due 4/29 via Dead Oceans. You can pre-save it here.

If you’ve ever wondered what Emmy-nominated actress Shailene Woodley and Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers talk about when they sit down for dinner—which may or may not be a piping hot plate of clay—one thing we can say is that’s almost certainly not politics. The seemingly odd couple, who began dating at the beginning of the pandemic and officially announced their engagement in February 2021, reportedly don’t have a whole heck of a lot in common when it comes to political views. So for the sake of their relationship and impending happily ever after, they’ve allegedly taken a permanent “agree to disagree” stance when it comes to all things political.

A source who claims to have the inside intel on the Big Little Lies star and her pigskin-tossing fiancé told People Magazine that the couple realized early on that they would likely never agree on political matters. But rather than stop to consider whether such base-level philosophical differences could eventually lead to unavoidable incompatibility, the two instead decided to just ignore these disagreements altogether.

“They are not talking about their politics, and they never really have,” the source told People. “They disagreed on a lot of things. Early on, they decided to agree to disagree about things and not debate them.”

“She is not someone whose mind you can change, so Aaron hasn’t even tried,” the source added, which only sounds mildly terrifying.

Woodley, of course, has long seemed to eschew any of the typical Hollywood starlet tropes. The outspoken actor has never hesitated to speak her mind—even if that means telling The Hollywood Reporter that “I’ve always sort of wondered what it’d be like kissing my brother” or how she likes to “give my vagina a little Vitamin D.”

As for Rodgers? While he once stated, “I’m an athlete, not an artist,” he also recently seemed to be pushing Trump’s Big Lie by casting doubt on the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, in addition to all his controversial COVID vaccine opinions that made him quite unpopular with many, so there’s that. Whatever their differences, we’re sure these two kids can work it out over a cup of clay and a dollop of Vitamin D.

(Via People)

Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton collectively decided to confuse the audience of The Tonight Show on Monday, when they had a very cringey conversation about NFTs that led to Hilton gifting the audience NFTs, which clearly nobody wanted or asked for. Now, it looks like Fallon could actually be in trouble for trying to pump his NFT on viewers.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Fallon likely paid nearly $216,000 (!!!) for the cartoon ape in a striped shirt, and hyping up said ape could boost its price higher, effectively making Jimmy Fallon richer if he choses to sell the NFT later on. This is obviously a problem!

Comcast, NBC’s parent company, has a workplace policy which instructs NBC employees to “not let outside interests or activities interfere with [their] business judgment or responsibilities to the company.” With Fallon pushing his monkey doodles, it may be considered a conflict of interest. NBC also states that employees must “disclose and obtain approval for all outside work, financial interests and other personal activities/relationships that may create or appear to create a conflict,” and that employees should not “use company info, resources, time, etc. for personal benefit,” as stated in the NBCUniversial gifts, conflicts and corruption policy.

If Fallon’s NFT did rise in value, this could be a conflict of interest. An NBC spokesperson insisted that Fallon did not violate the company’s conflict of interest policy, since hosts are able to promote outside projects such as books and movies. But projects and investments aren’t necessarily the same thing, and there seems to be a gray area with NFTs as they become “normalized” among celebrities, despite it being a risky endeavor for everyone who isn’t already a millionaire.

Ever since the news broke that Microsoft is buying Activision Blizzard, there have been concern about what that would mean for the future of PlayStation owners. In theory, Microsoft could make Call of Duty an exclusive and prevent people with PlayStations from playing future games. Considering that Call of Duty is one of the biggest franchises in all of gaming and is a high seller on PlayStation consoles, Microsoft doing this would be a huge blow to Sony.

Most of those fears were quickly alleviated when the head of Microsoft Gaming, Phil Spencer, tweeted out reassurance to fans that Microsoft didn’t have plans to remove Call of Duty from PlayStation consoles. He also mentioned Microsoft’s desire to fulfill any of Activision Blizzard’s current contracts with other platforms. Those contracts were recently mentioned by a Sony spokesperson in regards to the possibility of Activision Blizzard games no longer being available on non-Microsoft platforms.

What are those contracts? According to Bloomberg’s Jason Schreier, it includes three upcoming Call of Duty games, and one of them is expected to be Warzone 2.

Before news of the $69 billion acquisition broke last week, Activision had already committed to make the next few Call of Duty games available on Sony’s console, according to four people with knowledge of the deal, speaking anonymously because they were not authorized to speak to press.

That includes this year’s Call of Duty, expected to be a new entry in the popular Modern Warfare sub-series being developed by Infinity Ward, and the following game, which is in development at Treyarch, both Activision-owned studios. The deal also includes a planned new iteration of Call of Duty Warzone, the lucrative free-to-play game that was released in 2020.

What is interesting about this is a portion of this report says that the future beyond those three contracted games is not quite as in stone.

Plans are hazier for the Call of Duty games further out, said the people familiar with the matter. Microsoft said it expects the acquisition to close sometime in the next six to 18 months, after which it will be able to decide whether to continue releasing future Call of Duty games on PlayStation. Top employees at Activision have also discussed spacing out Call of Duty releases rather than putting them out every year, Bloomberg has reported.

For now, all we can do is take Spencer and Microsoft at their word that they plan to keep Call of Duty on the PlayStation. What’s more interesting is the possibility of Call of Duty no longer being an annual title — a Call of Duty game has been released once a year since 2005. It is as much a constant on the video game calendar as Madden, and seeing it lose that distinction would be a major change.

Move over High Noon, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, The Magnificent Seven, and A Fistful of Dollars, because the Western canon is about to get dunked on.

On an otherwise dreary Tuesday night in January, the Houston Rockets decided to unleash upon an unsuspecting world 14 seconds of unbridled joy, confusion, triumph, and hope.

Why? Why does any master of the genre create? Would you ask renowned émigrés of Expressionism, dubbed the “Master of Darkness” by the British Film Institute, Fritz Lang, why he felt the need to make Metropolis? Or metaphysical genius, Andre Tarkovsky, why he woke up one day and went, “Huh, a movie about ennui, regret, and space, I’m gonna do it”? Absolutely not, no you wouldn’t.

Well actually the Rockets did it because it was Rodeo Night, but it’s a small digression nonetheless.

The film — let’s give it the respect of calling it what it is — opens by physically having two humble, wooden barn doors slide open, thereby inviting us into the world it is going to showcase. A subtle touch with just the right sound mixing so as not to draw our attention, now piqued, away from the figure coming toward us. What hero is this? Will we come to understand his psyche, share in his dreams? And why is he twisting his hand around like that?

“Heyyyy Rockets fans!” greets small forward, Armoni Brooks, shattering the fourth wall. Okay, we think, we can play this part, “Rockets fans.” After all, he has greeted us with such familiarity.

“It’s time for the mechanical bull cam!” Brooks says. For a second, mesmerized by the way his twirling hand has synced up with the rhythm of his words, we have zero understanding of what is going on. But then like a siren song out of the darkness, a cow makes a long, rallying moo. It’s around this point that we also recognize the backdrop as a cow’s hide — a spotty, galactic universe. Is it moving? Are we ever not in this life?

The scene cuts suddenly to a new character. His arm is up, like Armoni’s was, but his hand is out of the frame at first so we only see a bicep mid-flex as he rocks imperceptibly side to side.

“Time cowboy up,” Christian Wood calmly tells us. We want to. Whatever it means, we want to. His arm has come back from the void out of frame and he’s spinning it, too. “And hold on tight,” he adds. Your hand, perhaps on your phone, or resting on a desk, tenses. How do you hold on tight to this mystery, unfurling?

Then, an etherial flash. Bright, bracing. The sense of dawn, breaking resplendent and then Eric Gordon standing alone, smiling, wordless, looping his arm around and around in a way that suggests he might do this forever. The humble vest he wears is the same as the others, but this time, it’s been clasped confidently up — a signal, perhaps, to say give no heed to the ferocious CGI bull blotting out his torso, this man is in complete control. Will he be as victorious as Theseus, who slew the Minotaur, once was?

We have no idea because it abruptly cuts again to Brooks now atop the same beast.

In a brief cut almost too overwhelming, we get the lens flare and the lowing cow simultaneously. The stimulus is too great and your pulse ratchets up until, like a hero materializing over some distant horizon, it’s Gordon again. He takes a breath and you do too.

“Leeeeeeet’s ride!” His hand is spinning faster now, there is no imagining it. The smile on his face the purest distillation of joy.

Suddenly, the humble barn doors slam, and it’s a good thing too. You had the sense that you would follow Gordon to the ends of the earth just then, if he asked. Three steely, cartoon embossed words slam down on the doors, on the world now firmly closed to us: MECHANICAL BULL CAM. Fin.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham’s response to Kate McKinnon’s SNL impression was awkward as heck and left people unimpressed while she pasted a smile onto her face and bobbed body around while doing an impression of McKinnon’s impression. Watching this happen was as uncomfortable as the You “comedic” bit that Laura and contributor Raymond Arroyo performed a few months ago, and there’s one more observer of The Ingraham Angle who’s not holding back on how he feels: Laura’s brother.

Curtis Ingraham is a noted critic of his sister’s vaccine lies (and stream of misinformation that rivals that of Tucker Carlson), and he’s referred to her as “bonkers.” He previously called Laura “pathetic” over her Fauci criticism and for comparing climate activist Greta Thunberg to “Children of the Corn.”

In response to Laura’s not-great impression of Kate McKinnon’s impression of Laura, Curtis defended the SNL star. “Kate McKinnon is a professional actress/comedian,” he tweeted. “Laura, what is your professional excuse? Have you lost your mind?!”

It remains unclear whether SNL will respond to the impression of the impression with yet another impression. Will they ignore it? Rootin’ tootin’ Lauren Boebert was similarly triggered over Chloe Fineman’s impression of her gun-toting self, and Ingraham’s response feels so circular that followup might not be worth it, but who knows? For sure, people will be watching.

Before Lady Gaga began singing, she had studied to be an actor. She even made an uncredited appearance in an early episode of The Sopranos. At this point, Gaga has a much longer list of higher-profile acting roles in A Star Is Born, American Horror Story, and her recent film House Of Gucci. Now, the singer shares why exactly she loves acting — and it has to do with some trauma she endured while growing up.

Gaga sat down for an interview with Jake Gyllenhaal for Variety‘s Actor On Actor series where the two talked about their recent respective roles in House Of Gucci and The Guilty. During their conversation, Gaga shared the reason behind longing to be an actor, saying it was partially because acting was an “escape” from being “mercilessly bullied” as a child:

“Since I was a little girl, I was so mercilessly bullied, and I had a really strict upbringing. So acting for me was a way to totally escape who I was. And I think I’ve done it my whole career with taking on the artistic persona of whatever music I’m writing and living inside my art. And for films, it’s different, but it’s not.”

The singer went on to note the unconventional ways in which she prepared for House Of Gucci role as Patrizia Reggiani, which included watching videos of animals hunting their prey. “I watched foxes hunt and they’re really funny because they hunt mice in the snow and they leap up and they burrow,” she said. “I actually did exercises in my hotel room where I would be the animal.”

Read Gaga and Gyllenhaal’s full conversation here.