Students are using AI-powered smart glasses to cheat on tests, reports CNN. "And in East Asia's test-obsessed societies, where a single exam could impact the trajectory of a student's future career and social status, educators are scrambling to get ahead of the problem." Already, countries are stepping up inspections for test-takers. For China's grueling annual college entrance exam earlier this month — which more than 10 million hopefuls take each year — authorities required screening of all glasses. In the United Kingdom, the head of England's exam watchdog warned earlier this month that AI glasses and smart devices like earpieces could worsen cheating in exams... [T]wo incidents in South Korea were the country's first reported cases of cheating with AI glasses... In Taiwan, the university where a prospective student was caught cheating is now reviewing rules and standard operating procedures for AI eyewears during examinations. But experts worry these individual cases point to a more widespread issue. "If we're seeing a few cases being reported, we're seeing a lot more cases not being reported," said Thomas Corbin, lecturer at Deakin University in Australia, who has conducted research around the usage of AI-powered glasses and other smart devices in academic assessment. With the rapid development of AI technology, however, smart glasses are becoming slimmer, less noticeable, while integrating AI models that can operate independently with connectivity, raising concerns not only about exam integrity, but also about broader privacy risks... "Wearable AI is as much of a challenge to exams as ChatGPT was to essays in 2022 and I just don't think there is any real way that we can reliably have exam practices moving forward," Corbin said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The Onion joked the new movie Supergirl is about a hero who must single-handedly save the world "after the catastrophic collapse of interest in the genre." Unfortunately, The Hollywood Reporter says the film's reviews "range from negative to tepid praise (averaging a 58 percent Rotten Tomatoes score)." Many point fingers at the film's script, with Variety's line — "a comic-book movie with the worst script I can remember" — going viral... Not to pile on, but there's another recurring gripe from the reviews that stood out: Critics bashed the film as being murky, dark and gray, with poor VFX: "Muddy CG sludge" wrote one. Another said the film was full of "sludgy browns and grays" and "the visual murkiness of the settings makes it hard to follow the already unintelligible action sequences." A third wrote the "VFX is so rough it makes The Flash look like Avatar." Moviegoers increasingly despise murky, dark visuals (often used to hide weak effects), along with obvious CGI and incoherent action. They've seen it so many times they've become allergic. The Bulwark agreesterribly lit, incoherently staged, and just generally weightless and ugly... [I]t's reminiscent of the disaster that was The Flash: It's just very obvious during certain sequences that everyone was in a big green-screen warehouse and the camera was whipping around with the knowledge that everything would be painted in later, so who really gives a crap how anything looks on the day of." They call the movie "a tremendous slog of a film, a real step backwards for the James Gunn-overseen DC Universe of movies and TV shows" that's "neither fun nor exciting" and "feels empty." The film does have one bright spot: Lobo, who is played by Jason Momoa as something like Michael Keaton's Beetlejuice by way of Jason Momoa's Aquaman. He's blustery and cantankerous and saucy and just a little menacing; it's a perfect piece of casting and a really nice performance. Unfortunately, it's the only spark of life in what is otherwise a deeply dour, deeply boring piece of filmmaking... Supergirl is just a misfire on nearly every level, one that lacks the sincerity and fun of last year's reboot of this universe or the comic pathos present in Gunn's Peacemaker series on HBO Max. Reason calls it "dark, depressive, and dull" and "a downer of a movie in nearly every way." It's not fun. It's barely even righteous. It's just miserable. At one point, Supergirl flat-out murders a guy by pushing a giant sword through his neck. Somehow, I suspect even Zack Snyder would be appalled. Time argued fans of last decade's superhero movies "should be demanding more, not less." Though "Will there be rioting in the streets once audiences get some idea of how lousy Supergirl is? Probably not."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

⚽ All the latest news from as we reach the knockouts
⚽ Player guide | Power rankings | Golden Boot | Mail us

England reaction from our writers in New York/New Jersey.

Bellingham can be dismissed a little by some as a player of moments. Is that bad? Moments win games. Bellingham is 22 and still finding his final form. He promises to do these things, walks and talks like he might do them. But then he also does them, which seems important. With England paddling here, he had the will and the craft to take out the spoons and rattle something off on his knee just when they needed it most.

The main pillars of the founding narrative have fallen on hard times. Today, its meaning is up for grabs

Writing during the carnage of the first world war, the iconoclast intellectual Randolph Bourne described the American revolutionary inheritance as a squalid marriage between the town capitalist and plantation patriarch. Glittering generalities of freedom and democracy, Bourne observed, were indelibly marked by their long captivity to the money counters and owners of human chattel.

In the land lorded over by the likes of Donald Trump, leader of one of the most indecently corrupt, violently inept administrations in the country’s history, the 250th anniversary of the American Declaration of Independence would seem to affirm this judgment. Our moment, defined by the mobilization of market frenzy, machineries of war, deportation deliriums and nativist passions, echoes Bourne’s; it is a time of social fracture, moral failure and hegemonic collapse, with cynical reason ascendant.

For most Americans, riding a bus means abandoning expectations of basic dignity – but with an increase in ridership, that could change

“It’s a grueling experience,” Greyhound bus enthusiast Miles Taylor explains. “You’re not treated very well. Everyone is yelling at you the entire time. When the bus is late, they blame you for it, like somehow you’ve done something wrong. You just get screamed at for wanting to know what’s going on, because no one says anything.”

Taylor is obsessed with public transit. “I never really grew out of my little boy train phase,” the 26-year-old said. He works as a scheduler for Boston’s MBTA and runs a popular YouTube account documenting the bus trips he takes for fun in his spare time. Taylor traveled across the country by Greyhound twice; a Boston to Seattle route took 104 hours. But even he admits that America’s bus system is far from luxurious – or even comfortable.

Universities looking for a fix to relentless controversy are flocking to ‘civility’ initiatives. Critics say these efforts mask a darker project

US college campuses have long been associated with the country’s fraying social fabric. Beset by so-called “cancel culture”, mass protests against Israel’s war on Gaza, and mounting conflicts over free speech, a notion has taken hold that colleges and universities represent a convergence of the country’s broader ills.

To meet what’s been widely described as a “polarization” crisis, a veritable industry has emerged, booming since 7 October 2023 and the protests that followed. Dozens of organizations have cropped up promising to foster “civic discourse”, “dialogue across difference” and “viewpoint diversity”. Together, they make up a fast-growing ecosystem that has ballooned, by some estimates, into a $200m a year business some skeptics have billed the “civility industrial complex”.

Church sues excommunicated member over Mormon Stories podcast but John Dehlin says name free for all to use

Trademark changes and copyright infringement disputes take many forms. Dunkin’ Donuts changed its name to Dunkin’ because Donuts did not suggest the vigorous, on-the-go attitude the coffee company wants to project.

But what happens when a church changes its name, but former adherents continue to use the original term in ways it may not like?