• Streaming
    10
  • no_ads
    8
  • AI
    5
  • News
    5
  • Tech
    5
  • Une du jour
    4
  • Music
    4
  • SĂ©ries Ă  la TV
    4
  • À la Une
    4
  • Gadgets
    4
  • actu-BP
    4
  • Culture cinĂ©
    4
  • Entertainment
    3
  • Black Friday
    3
  • Deals
    3
  • Verge Shopping
    3
  • Sex Crimes
    3
  • Brand, Russell
    3
  • London (England)
    3
  • Films Ă  la TV
    3
  • Tournages
    3
  • Television
    3
  • United States International Relations
    3
  • Trump, Donald J
    3
  • Analyse
    2
  • amazon
    2
  • Cyber Monday
    2
  • Politique
    2
  • COP31
    2
  • Environnement
    2
  • Midterm Elections (2026)
    2
  • Politics and Government
    2
  • Movies
    2
  • Society & Culture Philosophy
    2
  • Fashion
    1
  • Adobe
    1
  • Creators
    1
  • Disney
    1
  • Vu d’IsraĂ«l
    1
  • Guides fitness et bien-ĂȘtre
    1
  • Decoder
    1
  • Podcasts
    1
  • Crise
    1
  • Apps
    1
  • Web
    1
  • Justice
    1
  • Guerre du futur
    1
  • Industrie navale
    1
  • canon laser
    1
  • railgun
    1
  • canon Ă©lectromagnĂ©tique
    1
  • Naval Group
    1
  • drone sous-marin
    1
  • drone sous-marin autonome
    1
  • drone aĂ©rien
    1
  • missile hypersonique
    1
  • Guides entretien des sols
    1
  • aspirateur robot laveur de sol
    1
  • Roborock
    1
  • Giveaway
    1
  • Climat
    1
  • Social Media
    1
  • Kelly, Megyn
    1
  • Musk, Elon
    1
  • Rumble Inc
    1
  • Carlson, Tucker
    1
  • Kennedy, Robert F Jr
    1
  • Trump, Donald J Jr
    1
  • Great Britain
    1
  • BBC Newsnight (TV Program)
    1
  • Antitrust
    1
  • Policy
    1
  • Report
    1
  • RĂ©chauffement climatique
    1
  • climat
    1
  • Urgence climatique
    1
  • climatologie
    1
  • changement climatique
    1
  • The Explainer
    1
  • augmentation des gaz Ă  effet de serre
    1
  • comptabiliser les Ă©missions de gaz Ă  effet de serre
    1
  • gaz Ă  effet de serre
    1
  • CO2
    1
  • GES dioxyde de carbone
    1
  • Bombe climatique
    1
  • Indicateurs du changement climatique
    1
  • Catastrophe mĂ©tĂ©o
    1
  • TempĂ©rature
    1
  • accroissement tempĂ©rature
    1
  • Reviews
    1
  • Guides chauffage et ventilation
    1
  • radiateur
    1
  • Vu du Royaume-Uni
    1
  • MĂ©diterranĂ©e
    1
  • États-Unis
    1
  • astĂ©roĂŻde
    1
  • comĂšte
    1
  • 1998 KY26
    1
  • Hayabusa2
    1
  • Agence spatiale japonaise
    1
  • comĂšte sombre
    1
  • trajectoire
    1
  • accĂ©lĂ©ration
    1
  • Georgia Institute of Technology
    1
  • tempĂ©rature
    1
  • Glace
    1
  • Guides jardin
    1
  • Soldes et marques
    1
  • tronçonneuse
    1
  • utiliser une tronçonneuse
    1
  • utiliser tronçonneuse
    1
  • Moyen-Orient
    1
  • Instagram
    1
  • Meta
    1
  • Fleuves
    1
  • inondation
    1
  • lac
    1
  • travaux
    1
  • fleuve Colorado
    1
  • vallĂ©e
    1
  • assĂšchement
    1
  • erreur humaine
    1
  • eau
    1
  • irrigation
    1
  • cuvette
    1
  • mer de Salton
    1
  • touristes
    1
  • Ă©vaporation
    1
  • poissons
    1
  • salinitĂ©
    1
  • menaces
    1
  • sanitaire
    1
  • Ă©cologique
    1
  • Features
    1
  • Guides TĂ©lĂ©coms
    1
  • B&You
    1
  • Bouygues
    1
  • fibre
    1
  • forfait Internet
    1
  • Guides petit Ă©lectromĂ©nager
    1
  • Amazon
    1
  • machine Ă  cafĂ©
    1
  • coeur
    1
  • activitĂ© physique
    1
  • risque cardiovasculaire
    1
  • The Dropout (TV Program)
    1
  • You Can See Everything (Movie)
    1
  • Holmes, Elizabeth (1984- )
    1
  • Seyfried, Amanda
    1
  • Fielder, Nathan (1983- )
    1
  • US and Israeli Attack on Iran (2026)
    1
  • Foreign Aid
    1
  • Israel-Gaza War (2023- )
    1
  • Arms Trade
    1
  • Palestinians
    1
  • Biden, Joseph R Jr
    1
  • Netanyahu, Benjamin
    1
  • Vance, J D
    1
  • Gaza Strip
    1
  • Israel
    1
  • Geering, Lloyd (1918-2026)
    1
  • Deaths (Obituaries)
    1
  • Presbyterian Church
    1
  • Christians and Christianity
    1
  • Ministers (Protestant)
    1
  • Bible
    1
  • Jesus Christ
    1
  • New Zealand
    1
  • Ueno
    1
  • Banking and Financial Institutions
    1
  • Regulation and Deregulation of Industry
    1
  • Start-ups
    1
  • Pena, Santiago
    1
  • Paraguay
    1
  • Art
    1
  • Graffiti
    1
  • Deitch, Jeffrey, Galleries
    1
  • McGee, Barry
    1
  • Los Angeles (Calif)
    1
  • Rose, Aaron (Artist)
    1
  • California
    1
  • King, Martin Luther Jr
    1
  • Speeches and Statements
    1
  • Civil Rights Movement (1954-68)
    1
  • Auctions
    1
  • Black People
    1
  • Center for Civil and Human Rights (Atlanta, Ga)
    1
  • Christie's
    1
  • King Center
    1
  • Southern Christian Leadership Conference
    1
  • King, Martin Luther III
    1
  • Yamazaki, Takashi
    1
  • Godzilla Minus One (Movie)
    1
  • Godzilla Minus Zero (Movie)
    1
  • Dancing
    1
  • Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
    1
  • Chocolate Factory, The
    1
  • Greenberg, Neil
    1
  • Next Dance (Dance (Non-Ballet))
    1
  • Deportation
    1
  • Refugees and Displaced Persons
    1
  • Human Rights and Human Rights Violations
    1
  • Homeland Security Department
    1
  • Immigration and Customs Enforcement (US)
    1
  • Equatorial Guinea
    1
  • Ghana
    1
  • Mauritania
    1
  • Asylum, Right of
    1
  • Rap and Hip-Hop
    1
  • Chance the Rapper
    1
  • Coloring Book (Album)
    1
  • Content Type: Personal Profile
    1
  • Greatest, The (TV Program)
    1
  • Ali, Muhammad
    1
  • Jordan, Michael B
    1
  • Watkins, Ben (1971- )
    1
  • Ali, Lonnie
    1
  • Best, Jaalen
    1
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1
  • le
    1
  • pourquoi
    1
  • du
    1
  • comment
    1
  • philo
    1
  • chronique
    1
  • lundi
    1
  • 09
    1
  • novembre
    1
  • 2026
    1
  • Russian Invasion of Ukraine (2022)
    1
  • Peace Process
    1
  • International Relations
    1
  • Kushner, Jared
    1
  • Witkoff, Steven
    1
  • Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates)
    1
  • Europe
    1
  • Russia
    1
  • Ukraine
    1
  • Guides nutrition
    1
  • greenwhey
    1
  • collagĂšne bovin
    1
  • consommation de complĂ©ment alimentaire
    1
  • peptide
    1
  • MEA-NL-conso
    1
  • SociĂ©tĂ©
    1
  • Box Office
    1
  • Guides PC et tablettes
    1
  • CDiscount
    1
  • PC portable
    1
  • PC portables
    1
  • gaming
    1
  • portable gaming
    1
  • gamer
    1
  • gamers
    1
  • aux
    1
  • fondations
    1
  • bĂątir
    1
  • un
    1
  • rempart
    1
  • contre
    1
  • la
    1
  • misogynie
    1
  • croĂ»te continentale
    1
  • Les tendances
    1
  • tectonique des plaques
    1
  • plaque tectonique
    1
  • Afrique
    1
  • ocĂ©an
    1
  • rift continental
    1
  • Turkana
    1
  • lac Turkana
    1
  • Ă©volution humaine
    1
  • rupture continentale
    1
  • Afrique de l'Est
    1
  • Kenya
    1
  • striction
    1
  • plaque africaine
    1
  • plaque arabique
    1
  • ocĂ©anisation
    1
  • Vu du Canada
    1
  • Terre
    1
  • animaux
    1
  • castor
    1
  • parachute
    1
  • parachutage
    1
  • Idaho
    1
  • Reality Television
    1
  • Apple TV
    1
  • Bravo
    1
  • Hulu.com
    1
  • Netflix Inc
    1
  • Peacock Services
    1
  • Rivals (TV Program)
    1
  • Southern Charm (TV Program)
    1
  • The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives (TV Program)
    1
  • the body (TV Program)
    1
  • Merkel, Angela
    1
  • Merz, Friedrich
    1
  • Alternative for Germany
    1
  • Bode Museum
    1
  • Christian Democratic Union (Germany)
    1
  • cancer
    1
  • systĂšme immunitaire
    1
  • anticorps
    1
  • mĂ©decine
    1
  • immunothĂ©rapie
    1
  • immunothĂ©rapie anticancĂ©reuse
    1
  • immunologie
    1
  • autoanticorps
    1
  • mĂ©canismes biologiques
    1
  • rĂ©sistance aux cancers
    1
  • Cellules cancĂ©reuses
    1
  • centenaires
    1
  • facteurs de risque
    1
  • antigĂšne tumoral
    1
  • Pendant que vous dormiez
    1
  • Botanique
    1
  • LittĂ©rature
    1
  • Theater (Broadway)
    1
  • Theater
    1
  • Jones, James Earl, Theater (Manhattan, NY)
    1
  • Baum, Ross
    1
  • Boritt, Beowulf
    1
  • James, Luke (1984- )
    1
  • LaFontaine, Liisi
    1
  • Ledisi (1972- )
    1
  • Pfeiffer, Solea
    1
  • Sosa, Emilio
    1
  • Walker-Webb, Stevie
    1
  • Wanted (Play)
    1
  • Nvidia
    1
  • Colombia
    1
  • National Liberation Army (Colombia)
    1
  • Venezuela
    1
  • Rubio, Marco
    1
  • De La Espriella, Abelardo
    1
  • Rodriguez, Delcy (1969- )
    1
  • Drug Abuse and Traffic
    1
  • United States Defense and Military Forces
    1
  • Latin America
    1
  • Column
    1
  • Music Review
    1
  • Mass Shootings
    1
  • Poland
    1
  • Krakow (Poland)
    1
  • Fortnite
    1
  • Gaming
    1
  • internal-open-access-from-nl
    1
  • Orban, Viktor
    1
  • Hungary
    1
  • Democratic Party
    1
  • Voting and Voters
    1
  • Serbia
    1
  • Democracy (Theory and Philosophy)
    1
  • Les bĂątisseurs de demain
    1
  • intelligence artificielle
    1
  • 25 ans de Futura
    1
  • Algorithme
    1
  • Le futur de l'innovation
    1
  • IA
    1
  • startup
    1
  • France
    1
  • agent IA
    1
  • empathie Ă©motionnelle
    1
  • Spiders
    1
  • Endangered and Extinct Species
    1
  • Wildlife Trade and Poaching
    1
  • Conservation of Resources
    1
  • Lima (Peru)
    1
  • Tarantulas
    1
  • Smuggling
    1
  • Luggage and Packing
    1
  • Sorties cinĂ©
    1
US' Nike and Kids Of Immigrants unveil football footwear collection Fibre2fashion

Nov. 9, 2026, 5:13 p.m.

Fashion

US sportswear brand Nike has partnered with Kids Of Immigrants to unveil a football footwear collection inspired by the landscapes of Honduras and Liberia. Featuring the Tiempo Maestro Elite and Tiempo Streetgato in vibrant yellow, the collection blends performance, cultural heritage and everyday style. Following a Los Angeles debut, the collection will launch globally on November 19.

« Dommage d’ĂȘtre aussi pĂ©remptoire » : accusĂ© de s’ĂȘtre emmĂȘlĂ© dans ses notes sur CNews, Jordan Bardella se dĂ©fend Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:47 p.m.

« Dommage d’ĂȘtre aussi pĂ©remptoire » : accusĂ© de s’ĂȘtre emmĂȘlĂ© dans ses notes sur CNews, Jordan Bardella se dĂ©fend

Ilse Aigner, “la femme du peuple” qui pourrait accĂ©der Ă  la prĂ©sidence allemande
Ilse Aigner, “la femme du peuple” qui pourrait accĂ©der Ă  la prĂ©sidence allemande Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:40 p.m.

Une du jour

“Plus d’un en doutait, mais la dĂ©cision pressentie depuis des semaines est finalement tombĂ©e”, annonce Die Tageszeitung. Le 30 janvier prochain, la Bavaroise Ilse Aigner devrait devenir prĂ©sidente de la RĂ©publique fĂ©dĂ©rale d’Allemagne. Et avec elle, estime le journal de gauche, “ce n’est pas seulement une femme qui accĂšde pour la premiĂšre fois Ă  la prĂ©sidence de la RĂ©publique fĂ©dĂ©rale mais un nouveau profil politique”. Issue de l’Union chrĂ©tienne-sociale en BaviĂšre (CSU), l’actuelle prĂ©sidente du Parlement de BaviĂšre a le soutien des conservateurs chrĂ©tiens, des sociaux-dĂ©mocrates et des Verts, ce qui fait d’elle la favorite pour succĂ©der Ă  Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Mais, surtout, “Ilse Aigner a un autre atout dont ne disposaient pas [les anciens chefs d’État] Richard von WeizsĂ€cker, Roman Herzog, ou Joachim Gauck : elle est une femme du peuple”. Le prĂ©sident allemand est Ă©lu pour un mandat de cinq ans par l’AssemblĂ©e fĂ©dĂ©rale, composĂ©e des 630 dĂ©putĂ©s du Bundestag et de reprĂ©sentants des 16 LĂ€nder. “Sans diplĂŽme de droit et sans pĂ©nis” Sur sa une du 9 novembre 2026, le titre berlinois affirme qu’Ilse Aigner est une personne “sans diplĂŽme de droit et sans pĂ©nis”, considĂ©rĂ©e par beaucoup comme une personnalitĂ© agrĂ©able et empathique, proche des Ă©lecteurs malgrĂ© sa prĂ©sence au sein du gouvernement fĂ©dĂ©ral sous Angela Merkel, intransigeante face Ă  l’extrĂȘme droite. Mais ce ne sont pas ces raisons qui font d’Ilse Aigner la candidate idĂ©ale. Pour la Tageszeitung, elle ferait une prĂ©sidente parfaite parce qu’elle reprĂ©sente tout ce dont le pays a besoin. “Elle n’est pas seulement une personne sur laquelle une grande majoritĂ© des dĂ©mocrates allemands peuvent s’accorder. Plus qu’un simple dĂ©nominateur commun acceptable, elle suscite l’adhĂ©sion, et mĂȘme l’enthousiasme.” En Allemagne, la fonction du prĂ©sident fĂ©dĂ©ral est avant tout reprĂ©sentative et morale. En tant que chef de l’État, le prĂ©sident doit donc ĂȘtre en mesure de “rassembler au-delĂ  des clivages de la sociĂ©tĂ©â€. Avec un jeu de mots intraduisible, le mĂ©dia rend hommage Ă  Ilse Aigner, qui, sauf retournement de situation inattendu, devrait ĂȘtre Ă©lue en 2027. Il titre : “Bayern wird entaignert” que l’on pourrait traduire en français par “Aigner va voir ailleurs” ou “La BaviĂšre privĂ©e d’Aigner”. Allemagne : Ă  Heidenau, le souvenir des pires crimes de l’histoire est activement banni du paysage Allemagne : l’AfD “au sommet de la hiĂ©rarchie d’un Land” pour la premiĂšre fois “Gen Z regelt”, le mouvement allemand qui s’inspire des lycĂ©ens français À Berlin, les soutiens controversĂ©s de la gauche radicale sous le feu des projecteurs Le journal Tageszeitung, ou TAZ, est nĂ© en 1978 Ă  Berlin-Ouest en rĂ©action au terrorisme d’extrĂȘme gauche de la Fraction armĂ©e rouge (RAF). Se dĂ©marquant de la presse traditionnelle, il s’est imposĂ© comme le quotidien de gauche des fĂ©ministes, des Ă©cologistes et des pacifistes. Le journal est partenaire du Monde diplomatique, dont il Ă©dite l’édition allemande.

Disney and Adobe are building generative AI tools together The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:38 p.m.

Adobe AI Creators

The Walt Disney Company has teamed up with Adobe to develop proprietary “artist-led” generative AI models to support Disney’s production pipeline. The multi-year partnership was announced today at Adobe’s MAX conference, and will see Adobe providing Disney with early access to its latest technologies for everything from Disney’s theme parks and cruise line to ESPN content. Disney and Adobe will also collaborate “to explore emerging technologies, including responsibly developed AI, according to Adobe’s press release: Disney and Adobe are building generative AI tools together The partnership will give Disney ‘early access’ to AI tech for its resorts, cruise line, ESPN graphics, and more. The partnership will give Disney ‘early access’ to AI tech for its resorts, cruise line, ESPN graphics, and more. “With Adobe Firefly Foundry, Disney will work directly with Adobe on generative AI models tailored to Disney’s properties that are human-centered and artist-led. Customized on Disney properties, these proprietary models are trained on unique world knowledge (character attributes, environments, visual styles) to generate commercially safe and production-ready outputs, while accelerating work and enabling the development of more creative projects.” The announcement builds on the existing relationship between the two companies, with Adobe noting that Disney’s Imagineering R&D division is already using its Firefly AI platform for theme park development. Adobe will contribute to “expand internal creative workflows” at Walt Disney Studios, and identify how AI can be used to shape ESPN content and “enhance the engagement with sports fans.” This is the latest example of Disney embracing generative AI tools, following a previous deal with OpenAI and involvement with Character.AI’s bankruptcy. Bloomberg reported last week that Disney is gearing up to lay off thousands of staffers and targeting 20 percent annual cost savings, in what’s expected to be its fourth round of job cuts in 2026. Most Popular - Here’s the full text of Jensen Huang’s memo to Nvidia - There’s no slowing down media’s pivot-to-video 2.0 - Nvidia is investigating Jensen Huang’s relationship with an alleged Chinese spy - Apple’s M5 MacBook Air is down to its lowest price since July - Why a new report on Anthropic automating AI development is alarming researchers

Un gouvernement Eisenkot avec les partis arabes ou ultraorthodoxes ? “Le compte Ă  rebours est lancĂ©â€
Un gouvernement Eisenkot avec les partis arabes ou ultraorthodoxes ? “Le compte Ă  rebours est lancĂ©â€ Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:38 p.m.

Vu d’IsraĂ«l

Avec la dĂ©signation, dimanche, de Gadi Eisenkot, les tractations pour la formation d’un nouveau gouvernement entrent dans le vif du sujet, le chef de l’opposition ayant dĂ©sormais vingt-huit jours, reconductibles de quatorze autres jours, pour constituer une majoritĂ©. “Nous devrons tous faire des concessions”, a prĂ©venu le Premier ministre dĂ©signĂ©. Durant sa campagne, les membres du bloc du changement ont Ă©tĂ© “unis par deux principes : la conscription des ultraorthodoxes et le boycott – Ă  l’exception du parti Les DĂ©mocrates – des partis arabes”, comme l’écrit l’éditorialiste Nahum Barnea dans le quotidien Yediot Aharonot. Mais l’équilibre des forces Ă  la Knesset impose Ă  l’opposition de “renoncer Ă  au moins un de ces deux principes”. Un bras de fer semble s’ĂȘtre installĂ© au sein de l’opposition, unie pour Ă©carter Benyamin NĂ©tanyahou, pour dĂ©terminer lequel des deux il doit abandonner. Lieberman joue la carte ultraorthodoxe Avigdor Lieberman, le plus Ă  droite des figures du bloc du changement, a fait son choix. Pour “empĂȘcher la destruction du troisiĂšme Temple” – comprendre l’effondrement d’IsraĂ«l –, il s’est dit prĂȘt Ă  faire des “compromis douloureux” sur la conscription des ultraorthodoxes. Un “revirement significatif” pour le chef du parti nationaliste laĂŻque IsraĂ«l Beitenou (7 siĂšges), qui avait fait de l’enrĂŽlement des Ă©tudiants des Ă©coles talmudiques l’un de ses principaux combats politiques, souligne The Jerusalem Post. Son objectif : permettre la formation d’une majoritĂ© sans Benyamin NĂ©tanyahou, mais aussi sans les partis arabes, dont il refuse catĂ©goriquement le soutien. Sur un strict plan mathĂ©matique, les 48 siĂšges du bloc de l’opposition “sioniste” et les 13 siĂšges des partis ultraorthodoxes forment une majoritĂ© absolue de 61 dĂ©putĂ©s sur les 120 que compte le Parlement israĂ©lien. Une possibilitĂ© accrĂ©ditĂ©e par le fait que le parti haredi [“craignant Dieu” en hĂ©breu] JudaĂŻsme unifiĂ© de la Torah n’a pas exprimĂ© sa prĂ©fĂ©rence pour Benyamin NĂ©tanyahou. D’aprĂšs Lieberman, “JudaĂŻsme unifiĂ© de la Torah, qui reprĂ©sente les ultraorthodoxes ashkĂ©nazes, a dĂ©jĂ  adhĂ©rĂ© au projet, tandis que le Shas, reprĂ©sentant les ultraorthodoxes sĂ©farades, n’aura d’autre choix que de suivre, Ă©crit le quotidien de gauche Haaretz. Selon Lieberman, si ses partenaires de bloc ne sabotent pas cette initiative, elle se concrĂ©tisera.” “Obstacle majeur” Ă  un gouvernement avec les partis arabes Sur la conscription des ultraorthodoxes, il propose comme base de discussion un projet de loi concoctĂ© en 2018, Ă©crit Yediot Aharonot dans un autre article. Celui-ci ne prĂ©voyait que des rĂ©ductions partielles des subventions aux Ă©coles talmudiques si les objectifs d’enrĂŽlement n’étaient pas atteints au bout de trois ans. PrĂ©sentĂ© alors comme une avancĂ©e vers l’égalitĂ© devant le service militaire, ce texte apparaĂźt aujourd’hui comme un “immense cadeau”. Un cadeau d’autant plus paradoxal que Lieberman avait vivement combattu le projet de loi portĂ© par le gouvernement NĂ©tanyahou, pourtant plus contraignant sur plusieurs points. Face aux inquiĂ©tudes, Lieberman assure que toute loi sur la conscription devra ĂȘtre validĂ©e par la Cour suprĂȘme. Depuis une dĂ©cision de cette cour datant de 2024, l’État ne peut plus accorder d’exemptions gĂ©nĂ©rales aux Ă©tudiants des Ă©coles talmudiques sans base lĂ©gale. Et les besoins accrus de l’armĂ©e, aprĂšs plusieurs annĂ©es de guerre et de mobilisation des rĂ©servistes, rendent politiquement sensible tout nouvel assouplissement. Cette position risque de provoquer des tensions avec Eisenkot et Les DĂ©mocrates, de YaĂŻr Golan (8 siĂšges). Comme l’écrit Haaretz, “la position de Lieberman constitue un obstacle majeur aux efforts d’Eisenkot pour former rapidement un nouveau gouvernement avec le soutien de la Liste unifiĂ©e et l’abstention de Raam”. Avec les 19 siĂšges des partis arabes, l’opposition aurait une majoritĂ© confortable de 67 siĂšges. Comment le “sentiment d’aliĂ©nation” a poussĂ© les Palestiniens d’IsraĂ«l Ă  voter en masse Pour la presse israĂ©lienne de droite, seul un “consensus sioniste” sortira le pays de l’impasse IsraĂ«l : chargĂ© de former un gouvernement “d’urgence nationale”, Eisenkot tend la main Ă  NĂ©tanyahou et Ă  ses alliĂ©s

« Tous les noirs se ressemblent » : un agent du commissariat du XVe mis à la retraite aprÚs des propos racistes Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:37 p.m.

« Tous les noirs se ressemblent » : un agent du commissariat du XVe mis à la retraite aprÚs des propos racistes

« Qui connaĂźt un bar gay ici ? » : dans les Yvelines, la cause LGBT est toujours en quĂȘte de visibilitĂ© Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:32 p.m.

« Qui connaĂźt un bar gay ici ? » : dans les Yvelines, la cause LGBT est toujours en quĂȘte de visibilitĂ©

Pre-Black Friday : ce tapis de marche et de course 2-en-1 sous bureau s'effondre sous les 150 € ! Futura-science

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:30 p.m.

Guides fitness et bien-ĂȘtre Black Friday no_ads

À l'occasion des offres Pre-Black Friday, cet Ă©quipement fitness ultra-polyvalent fait l'objet d'une belle opportunitĂ© tarifaire. ProposĂ© habituellement au prix de rĂ©fĂ©rence de 178,90 €, ce tapis de marche et de course pliable bĂ©nĂ©ficie d'une remise immĂ©diate de -16 %, faisant chuter son tarif Ă  seulement 149,90 €. Une Ă©conomie nette de 29 €, complĂ©tĂ©e par un coupon supplĂ©mentaire de 5 € offert aux nouveaux clients et la livraison GRATUITE directement Ă  domicile. VĂ©ritable coup de cƓur des utilisateurs, cet appareil rĂ©colte l'excellente note globale de 4,8/5 Ă©toiles sur plus de 40 avis vĂ©rifiĂ©s. Compact et prĂȘt Ă  l'emploi, il s'impose comme une solution idĂ©ale pour faire ses 10 000 pas quotidiens tout en travaillant. Attention : cette promotion exclusive Pre-Black Friday prend fin le 18 novembre prochain. Moteur puissant de 2,5 HP, vitesse rĂ©glable de 1 Ă  10 km/h et charge maximale de 120 kg La grande force de ce tapis rĂ©side dans son architecture hybride 2-en-1. La poignĂ©e rabattue, il se glisse directement sous un bureau rĂ©glable en hauteur pour marcher tranquillement entre 1 et 4 km/h pendant vos rĂ©unions ou sessions d'Ă©criture. La poignĂ©e relevĂ©e, il se transforme en vĂ©ritable tapis de running atteignant jusqu'Ă  10 km/h pour des sĂ©ances de cardio plus intenses. Son moteur robuste de 2,5 HP assure une foulĂ©e fluide et silencieuse, capable d'accueillir des utilisateurs jusqu'Ă  120 kg. CĂŽtĂ© confort, la console intĂšgre un Ă©cran LED clair affichant le temps, la vitesse, la distance parcourue et les calories brĂ»lĂ©es. Vous contrĂŽlez l'allure du bout des doigts grĂące Ă  une tĂ©lĂ©commande compacte sans avoir Ă  quitter votre rythme. La barre de maintien dispose en outre d'un support dĂ©diĂ© pour smartphone ou tablette. Une fois votre entraĂźnement terminĂ©, son profil extra-plat permet de le ranger aisĂ©ment sous un canapĂ© ou debout contre un mur. Pourquoi se laisser tenter par ce tapis de marche pliable aujourd'hui ? Obtenir un tapis de course pliable Ă©quipĂ© d'un moteur de 2,5 HP, montant Ă  10 km/h et supportant 120 kg pour moins de 150 € reprĂ©sente un rapport qualitĂ©-prix rare sur le marchĂ© du fitness Ă  domicile. C'est l'investissement parfait pour rester actif au chaud tout au long de l'automne et de l'hiver sans encombrer votre salon. Cette opĂ©ration spĂ©ciale se termine le 18 novembre et les stocks allouĂ©s Ă  la vague Pre-Black Friday s'Ă©coulent rapidement. Ne manquez pas l'opportunitĂ© de concilier travail et remise en forme au tarif le plus bas !

Hold up — I had a great time talking to the RIAA guy The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:30 p.m.

AI Decoder Entertainment

Today, I’m talking with Mitch Glazier, who is CEO and chairman of the RIAA. Hold up — I had a great time talking to the RIAA guy This time around, RIAA CEO Mitch Glazier and music fans are fighting on the same side. This conversation was a real full-circle moment for me: I was in college when Napster hit, and the RIAA became everyone’s villain for suing kids for downloading music. That was when I decided to go be a copyright lawyer, which set the rest of my career in motion — and Mitch was in the background as a young lawyer at the RIAA working on those cases. So part of me was very deeply, very genuinely surprised to discover just how much fun I had talking to Mitch. That’s because here in 2026, Mitch, the RIAA, the record labels, the artists, and ordinary people are all pretty unhappy with the big AI companies in the same way, for training on everyone’s work without permission and flooding our feeds with slop. Verge subscribers, don’t forget you get exclusive access to ad-free Decoder wherever you get your podcasts. Head here. Not a subscriber? You can sign up here. Everyone is mad about it! And since the RIAA is both the group that lobbies for changes to the law and also the group that files lawsuits about things that affect record labels and distributors, Mitch is a pretty busy guy these days. We got deep into the legal complexity of things like AI deepfakes, how banning them might affect other kinds of expression, and how the AI detection and labeling systems that we all seem to want might actually work in practice — especially if big platforms like Spotify and YouTube don’t get on board. I just want to get right into it. This conversation is a real ride through how AI, the law, art, and commerce might all intersect. I think you’re going to be able to tell, Mitch and I had a lot of fun talking about it. Before we get going, do me a favor and subscribe to Decoder on YouTube, where we put out new episodes every Monday and Thursday. Okay: RIAA CEO Mitch Glazier. Here we go. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity. Mitch Glazier, you’re the chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America, which people know as the RIAA. Welcome to Decoder. Thank you. Thank you, Nilay. I’m excited to be here. I am very excited to talk to you. I have to tell you, this is a very full-circle moment for me. My entire career got on track when I was in college. Napster came out, my university banned Napster from the school network, and I decided right then I was going to go be a copyright lawyer. And then I was a copyright lawyer, and I defended kids who got sued for using Kazaa. I was not good at that job. It was not fulfilling. And I became a journalist because I could write about copyright law on the iPod. So talking to you is about as full circle as it gets for me. Thank you for being on the show. Good. Well then, I’m no longer sorry for the policies that we forced your school to implement because it made you a copyright lawyer. So the world benefited at the end of the day. It had some silver linings to it. When I first started at the RIAA, Napster was obviously the big issue. Nobody had seen anything like it before. The last technological change had really been CDs. I mean, it had been a long time, a much more gradual change and much less abrupt. So they decided it’d be a good idea, since I was youngish at the time, to make me go to college campuses, go to auditoriums, and convince these college students that they shouldn’t use peer-to-peer technology. Wait, wait, wait. I imagine when you said that, it was more like a 21 Jump Street situation, where you were posing in the dining hall being like, “We should pay for it.” Were you giving presentations? Yes, it was horrible. Everybody had these anti-RIAA t-shirts on. I remember one time I followed Chuck D, who was there promoting peer-to-peer. And I didn’t know what to do, and I knew I was going to get booed. So I took a garbage bag, put it over my head, and I walked out onto the stage, thinking they were going to throw tomatoes at me; I might as well make light of it. But I have to say, even though it was a very tough time, some of the conversations that we had with students at that time were some of the best conversations I’ve ever had — even now with AI — about the change in technologies, things being fan-driven, and the disconnect that can occur sometimes between an industry and the people who are out there driving change in the industry. So it was actually a good experience in the end, but it certainly did not feel like it at the time. It didn’t feel like it at the time for me. Thank you for saying the butterfly effect is real. But it was heated. It was hot. One of the things that has really occurred to me as I get older, and AI exists, and I see the platforms taking so much of the economic value out of art, is that my opinions about intellectual property enforcement have changed. It feels like I’m just giving up all of the ideals that I had when I was a kid about the internet, that open access to information was good, that... There was that meme ages ago: everything is a remix, and we should all build on each other’s art as much as we want because that will push the culture forward. I am still very idealistic about that. And I definitely did not think the recording industry suing kids was the appropriate way to protect the intellectual property of artists back then. But here we are in the age of AI, and it feels like no one is making enough money for making art except the world’s biggest artists — who are all also tech investors now in some way — and the tech platforms that collect fractions of pennies from everything and are doing data center build-outs or whatever it is. And that just existential dynamic for me is where I wanted to start. I want to talk about how the RIAA works and all the Decoder questions, but I was just thinking about what I really wanted to ask you, and it comes down to this: we have to protect the work, but there’s some balance in overprotecting the work that makes it harder for people to make new things. And my own journey with the RIAA is a reconsideration of that as more and more things get taken. Where have you landed? You’ve been there for more than 20 years. How are you feeling about that balance? Yeah, so the word balance is the right one, and it’s not an easy one. It’s one of those things where, over time, a barrier pops up here and then you kind of pivot, and then a barrier pops up here and you kind of pivot, and you sort of land in a zone that feels right because the responses that you’re getting, both from the creative community and from fans, start to line up. And I think in AI, they are lining up much more closely than they did during previous years of disruption. Some of it has been because of the democratization of the industry, where the gatekeeping roles have changed, where the partnerships between those who partner and invest with artists and the artists themselves have changed. In a world where artists and label services, like à la carte services, are a bigger part of revenue, in an area where catalog, forever exploitation, and new investors in the industry have come in, the landscape is much wider now. And it’s not like there are just two types of big actors controlling or sharing in all of the money. Now there are dozens of different types of folks meeting artists in different places where they are and meeting fans in different places where they are. And so it feels to me like this disruption, which is huge, and I hope we talk about it... The good news is, unlike Napster, I don’t feel like we are facing it at odds, which is kind of what it felt like back then. Now it feels like we’re not in the same place, but we’re kind of rowing in the same general direction, which is that everybody understands that art and commerce have always had tension, and there’s always going to have to be a balance. But authenticity and that connection between a human being artist and a fan, the preservation of that seems to be paramount in everything that we’re doing, whether you’re investing, listening, or performing. And to me, we’re not fighting in this space anymore between just a business model or an investment. We are now fighting to keep the art as human and the connection between an artist and a fan preserved and alive. And that to me just seems like a much larger purpose, I guess. So it feels very different to me. It feels like a good bookend. Like you, I started my career with Napster, but I was on the other side, learned a ton as a young lawyer, and now on the other side, we have AI, and comparing the two is so wild. I mean, the polls during Napster were like fans over here, and creators kind of hiding a little bit, and the companies over here. And now it’s like AI’s over here, and we’re all together on the other side. Yeah. I mean, again, I cannot emphasize this enough: I was a bad lawyer, and I should not have been doing that job. [Laughs] I doubt that. I was not good at it. I really wasn’t. And what I remember from that time was that it was college kids; their universities would turn over their IP addresses, and they would get their little lawsuit. We would tell them, “We’re going to go to the district court in Chicago; you’re going to settle for $5,000, because that’s what the RIAA is running this program at. It’s a $5,000 settlement to break even on the cost and to deter you, and then you’re going to go work at the pizza place for a semester, pay your bill, and move on.” And I thought, this can’t be accomplishing a goal. The thing I’m doing right now is nothing. And maybe that’s why I felt like I was a horrible lawyer. Maybe that’s why I got out of it. But what you’re describing is the poles there, where there was no pushback on, well, these kids just love music. The thing they love is just music, and now they can get it, and they have it. They weren’t thinking about the business model of CDs. That’s what Napster fundamentally disrupted. There was a scarce physical object that you could go pay $15 for, and if Metallica sold enough of those, their plane would get bigger, and everyone could kind of see that. And, “I’m listening to a lot of this music, and it should make you rich,” was nowhere close to reality. We’ve built those models now. We have built Spotify and Apple Music and all the subscription models. I want to talk about YouTube quite a bit, actually, where you can listen to a lot of music and some people will get rich, but a middle class of artists may just be totally hollowed out. And now the AI companies are like, “And we’re going to set up a competitor where you can just ask for music and no one except us will get paid.” And that is probably built on a bunch of artists that used to make money by having a lot of attention. That swirl for me is the one that I can’t decide where my ideals fit into. As a person who has opened Suno and had a good time just making some music, I’m like, well, I understand how this is great for one kind of person with an artistic bent. I understand why this is fun, as somebody who likes music. I do not understand the economics that follow from this, the same way I had no idea how the economics of disrupting the CD would shake out. I’ll actually give you one example just to make this question even longer. We had the CEO of Cloudflare on the show, and they’re trying to set up a system where, instead of websites running advertising on traffic, everyone gets paid a fraction of a cent to make content on the web, like Spotify. I was like, “Dude, Spotify changed the entire music industry. Artists have different jobs now because of that economic model.” And he was like, “No, I think the big ones are really happy.” And you can argue with him or not argue with him, but it felt to me like the tech industry did not understand what that disruption actually did to music at that moment. Now we’re standing on the precipice of it again. So again, I just want to start there. I’m feeling this existential tension; you described it as art and commerce, where commerce is going to change, and so art has to change as well. How are you thinking about that? Since we’re talking about existential things, if you go back to why copyright exists, it’s to create more opportunities for more art in the future. That’s why copyright exists. That’s the reason why the property right exists. It’s to create an incentive to allow people to protect their creations so that they will go ahead and make a living doing it. We don’t want this just to be a hobby. We want this to be... Artists are extraordinary people in our culture. They are geniuses who need to be incentivized to share that genius because they’re not normal people. They’re not me. These are incredible people who have something to share, and if they can’t make a living doing it, then they can’t and won’t share it, and we are all worse off. That’s the whole purpose of copyright, is to be able to allow them to be able to benefit from that in some way, shape, or form. Now, obviously all this infrastructure has grown up around it, all these companies have grown up around it, et cetera, but that’s sort of the basic premise. And you have to ask yourself the question: if non-human music, which can be made in two seconds without lived experience and, in my view, without a soul, can dilute or drown out the incentives for people to be able to make a living as humans making art, what happens? What happens to our culture? And I think that is an existential question that is not just academic to ask. We could talk about differentiation in the marketplace; we can talk about whether or not Taylor Swift competing with an indie grunge band is the right model for everybody to be able to get their piece of the business on these streaming services. But at its core, it’s still essentially human, and it still distributes art that took sometimes 20 years to make, sometimes three minutes to make. It depends on the genius of the artist doing it, but it still has all of those human warts and craft. It has craft. I think that if you have a system where the incentive is with the tech company that makes the AI to use everything that humanity has ever created to make money and, at the same time, then deplete the opportunity for future human music, we’re going to have a society that is one way going backwards and another way going forwards. If the culture suffers going forwards more than improving on what went backwards, we are in the wrong place, and we’re not doing the right things. And that’s what I mean about sort of rowing together. I live in the policy world. You have to ask yourself, what policies can we put in place to create the incentives to allow that better future of human-made music? It’s really hard. It’s super hard. When I say I’m having this existential dilemma
 Just to put it into clear focus for the listener: In the age of the CD, the economic value was tied to a scarce physical object. There are only so many CDs. And then you could maybe copy CDs, and Apple would get in trouble for saying that you could rip, mix, and burn CDs. That was a whole ad campaign, and Apple got in trouble for incentivizing people to copy CDs. But you would pay money for an object that existed, and then we got to the digital world, and the friction to copy the song went to zero. We had to invent a new model, and that model looks like Spotify and the rest. Now we’re in the age of AI, and the friction to create might be going to zero. So there’s even less scarcity because you can just horsepower an AI pop star into existence singing an AI song, and there’s going to be a glut of supply. Somewhere in there is marketing, somewhere in there is fandom. There’s all this stuff that can create other kinds of scarcity, but that’s the journey the music industry has been on. I always say whatever happens to the music industry happens to everybody else five years later. The music industry is always on the cutting edge. Where does the new scarcity come from in this model? Is it you doing policy work and lobbying governments for changes to the laws? Is it fans revolting and saying, “We want human artists”? Is it the platforms labeling everything? Where does the scarcity come back in? You’re the first person, I think, that I’ve listened to who has honed in on this particular question. At the end of the day, it’s always the fans, in my view. They will always win, because if you are any kind of service, with any kind of business model — I don’t care if you’re AI, I don’t care if you’re streaming — you need human beings to pay you money, usually by subscribing, as that’s the highest revenue source. And they’re not going to do that if they feel like they are losing out. I do think, given all of the focus groups, polling, everything that we’ve done, and other people have done on this, it is very clear that fans want to maintain a human connection with an artist. It’s not just about the music. It’s also about the artist, the persona, the brand, the emotional connection. Taylor Swift’s fans love her music, but they also love her. Pearl Jam’s fans love their music, but it’s also, like, Pearl Jam. You know what I mean? They’re their own piece of culture. And so we know, for example, that if a fan knows that a song is AI, then they have a different view of it than if they know that it is human. Do you think that’s going to last forever? I’m honestly curious about this. It has changed even in the last year. It has. I think that, with generative AI, it will last forever. In other words, with a completely machine-made piece of art, it will, because you lose that connection. On assistive AI, where creators are using AI, even in a broad way as a tool to get their creation out there, right now it might be a little bit suspect. In a few years, it may just be like using a synthesizer or using Auto-Tune. There might be some people who think it’s not the greatest, but it’ll be an accepted part of the art form. So I think there’s a difference between
 Are you maintaining the human connection? That’s the question. You can use AI as a big part of the tool to do that, but in some way, are you maintaining that human connection? I think that’s the test, and that doesn’t happen with a prompt. I mean, that doesn’t happen with me sitting there typing in 18 words on Pseudo, then more words to get it to a place that sounds better to my ear, and then sticking it up on Spotify through DistroKid. I just don’t think that will ever cut it, even though I think there is a bigger scale when it comes to assistive AI. So, fans rule. I think labeling is happening and will continue to happen because of fans; I think consumer reactions will happen because of labeling, and that will then drive the economics of the business. So labeling is actually a very important piece of this. But I also think that if you don’t secure the rights, fans never get a chance to then do their thing, which is to ultimately control the market. My focus all around the world is: have we secured the basic rights of creators? If we’ve done that, fans can take over and drive the market from there. I want to talk about all that. It occurs to me that I have gotten immediately as deep into my feelings as I can with you, and I forgot to ask you the very basic questions that I ask everybody who comes on the show. So obviously the RIAA is well known; it’s either a hero or a villain, depending on where you are in your story, as we have both determined. Tell people what the RIAA is, how big it is, and how it’s structured. We’re based in Washington, D.C., because that’s where the federal government is. We used to be based in New York. RIAA actually started as a tech standards association. They created the RIAA curve, the equalization curve that allowed both the recording and the playback of vinyl records in a way that would work on every single record player. So it didn’t really start out as a lobbying organization or a litigation organization; that’s how we became famous or infamous, depending on where you sit. We started out as a tech standards organization, and we still do that. We still participate in international standard-setting organizations right now to try to set the fields, for example, for the metadata that people will use, whether it’s AI or any other technological format, or in labeling, for example. But we also run the gold and platinum program, which we’re probably best known for with the general public. So we’re like those nerdy auditors that actually certify the gold and platinum records, like the PricewaterhouseCoopers lawyers that walk out on the Oscars or whatever. But that’s great because it allows us to interact directly with artists and celebrate their success, which is very cool. We also put together all the revenue from the entire recorded part of the music business, and we release that twice a year. That helps inform people about the markets, and it helps to, on the business side, give people the benchmarks that they need industry-wide. Everybody knows what their company is doing, what their management company is doing, but to know what the whole industry is doing and whether or not you are on par is quite helpful. We are the spokesperson when the industry is aligned. We’re out there talking on behalf of the industry. We technically represent the major labels, but we forge coalitions because whether you’re major or indie, whether you’re an artist or a publisher or a songwriter, most of the time our interests are aligned. Every once in a while we fight with each other, but when we are aligned, which I would say is 90 percent of the time, the RIAA is sort of the driving force in building coalitions so that we can all speak together. So we do a lot of stuff. We don’t just sue people and lobby the government, although those are big parts of what we do. And then we also take on the content protection force for the industry. Our content protection department operates 365 days per year, 24 hours per day. We work with sister organizations in London and New Zealand. So it doesn’t matter what time of day it is; we have people coordinated and working around the clock. And then we do all those take-down notices. We get a note from a manager saying, “A pre-release of this artist’s material that hasn’t come out yet is up. We need your help getting it down.” We do all of that, and we do it... The entire organization is only 46 people. Wow. Isn’t that amazing? But the most passionate music lovers you would ever imagine. It’s only 46 people? Only 46 people. How is that structured? Does everyone just do everything all day long? There aren’t as many redundancies as there should be. We’re divided into those different departments, like content protection, communications and research, public policy and industry relations, and obviously legal affairs. So we are, I would say, small and nimble, but we punch above our weight. We are high profile, but our industry, if you think about it compared to the folks that we are up against, if you want to view it that way, is really small. I mean, the entire recorded music business was $11 billion wholesale last year in the United States. The market cap of just one AI company is $2 trillion. So when we are out there lobbying, and we’ve got our three-person lobbying team at the RIAA trying to make a point to policymakers, and you’re dealing with super PAC money that equals $250 million in a midterm cycle, we don’t have that kind of revenue. But what we do have is music, and we have artists who everybody loves, who are culture makers, and who are messengers that people trust and listen to. I think we do pretty well for our tininess. The other question I ask every CEO who comes on the show is about decisions. You have a lot of decisions to make. Some of these are decisions of first impression. No one has ever decided how AI and art should work together. How do you make decisions? What’s your framework? Personally, my leadership style is that I like to have people around me who are not “yes” people. I don’t want people just sort of... If I come up with an idea, I don’t want it to be reinforced immediately. If you agree with that, great. But I like to hear from everybody. I think my team knows that I like to hear the truth, and I want to hear their raw opinion because I want to check my instincts. I usually have a gut instinct, but then I will survey people that I trust in our companies and people on my own team. I’m learning to be a better listener. When I hear people, as soon as in my mind, I feel like I know what they’re saying, I tend to then jump ahead to the next... I’m deposing them. I have a million questions. I’m learning to be a better listener and kind of understand where they’re coming from. Then I take all of it, and I synthesize it. And I would say about maybe 60 percent of the time I end up with my original gut reaction, but 40 percent of the time I take a different path because of what I’ve heard and the expertise of those who are around me. So it takes a little longer than it maybe should, and you don’t always have time. Sometimes you have to make a snap decision, but on something really big, like what strategy are we going to take? If we feel like we need to bring a lawsuit, which is going to be a major, publicized, precedent-setting lawsuit that could determine the rights that creators have, you have to take that as seriously as it is, and make sure that you are getting all the opinions that you need to get. I also have a ton of friends who work, so to speak, on the other side. These are people who I trust, and I’ve known for many years, and I will often, without disclosing anything I’m not supposed to disclose, call them and say, “What is your perspective on this? I live in this world of creator rights where I’m thinking in one direction, but what would you argue on the other side? How are you looking at this?” And when that informs your decision-making, not only are you more prepared, but sometimes you will alter the way you think about something by putting yourself in their shoes and understanding there’s another side to this that’s going to make sense to a judge or to a policymaker because they’re not crazy. They have a different take, and it’s pretty valid. Sometimes I have to be a moderating force even in my own industry, saying, “We’re living in our bubble, they’re living in their bubble, and so if we’re going to be effective at finding a solution, if that’s what we want, then we may have to think about this in a way that leads to a landing zone.” If we don’t want a solution and what we’re trying to do is make good trouble, that’s okay. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s a good thing. It can lead to good results. But if we’re trying to get to here, we better figure out a realistic path to get there. Okay. I’m very sorry for this, but it feels to me like the rest of this conversation is just going to be nightmare law school hypotheticals. This is just what we’re doing now. Nothing wrong with that. That framework applies to a lot of different problems. Particularly on the other side, they make some good points too. So I opened Instagram today, and I saw nine million deepfakes of celebrities being put in the video for Pop Star by Drake. Have you ever seen this video? Yes, yes. Drake didn’t do it himself. It’s Justin Bieber acting as Drake in the video. And I saw one with Lewis Hamilton today. I saw one with Donald Trump today. I saw a full Star Wars one where it’s Darth Vader, and he’s just been deepfaked into Justin Bieber’s mansion singing a Drake song. And I thought to myself, I can’t even count the layers of intellectual property issues here. First of all, no one has the license to any of this likeness, right? Lewis Hamilton could probably be like, “Hey, that’s me.” I don’t know under which law he gets to show up and say, “Hey, that’s me,” and to whom he says it. Is it an AI company? Is it the person who made the video? Is it Instagram? Some of the platforms have private policies like YouTube now. Even just that, where to begin? That’s very connected to you saying the scarcity is in the artist. The scarcity is in the relationship the fan has to the artist, but that has nothing to do with the copyrights you routinely enforce, which is the recording. You can see I’m just spiraling. I watched one video, eight seconds of Darth Vader doing a Drake song, and I thought, I don’t even know where to begin. Is it Disney who gets to be the angriest, or is it Drake, or is it someone in the middle? Can you help me just organize my thoughts here? First of all, I’m so glad you’re bringing this up because we literally, over the past three years, have been dealing with exactly this. Because believe it or not, and it’s so bizarre to think about, none of us right now has a right to our own voice or likeness under federal law. Most of us don’t even have it under state law. State law, which is called the right of publicity, usually only applies to advertising or endorsements. I couldn’t take your face and put it on a Wheaties box without asking you because I’m selling it and making money, and I’d be using your popularity to do so. Those are very limited rights. Now we’re in the world of deep fakes where everybody can do anything, make you say or do something you never said, you never did, and that you might not approve of — and we don’t have a basic right to ourselves under the law. It seems so weird in a country that was founded on individual liberty and individual rights that we wouldn’t have an individual right to ourselves. So we had to sort of start from scratch. And what we did was get together with YouTube in the very beginning. These things, even if they’re not created by the platforms, the avenue to the fan is through the platform. And everybody’s not going to bring a lawsuit against everybody in order to get this stuff down when it’s proliferating as fast as it is. So the question was, what responsibility does or can the platform have to give a very simple takedown mechanism that anybody could use? Because this is your face, it’s your right. It’s not like the record company owns the right to your face, or the movie company. You own the right to your face. So if you don’t like the fact that somebody used your face or your voice in a way you didn’t like, you should be able to very quickly say, “That’s me, I can prove it’s me, and I don’t want it up there.” And the platform should want to do something to protect the integrity of the platform without liability. Can I just stop you? This is why it’s a nightmare hypothetical, right? A longstanding trope at The Verge started by our former colleague, Sarah Jeong, is that copyright law is the only functional law on the internet. The only way you actually really want to regulate the internet is to take things down. That is the thing that people want to accomplish. The First Amendment basically prohibits the government from creating some mechanism to take things down, except in the case of copyright law, where we have the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. There’s a huge notice-and-takedown regime in that law, and it is frequently abused on all of these platforms to get things taken down. The purpose of that law has been stretched beyond recognition. If you issue a YouTube strike to a YouTuber on that platform, all hell breaks loose. That is an act of war because unless you’re doing it for the right purpose, they know you’re doing it to harass them. This is a lot, right? You’re describing a new notice-and-takedown regime that isn’t based in the law. It’s based on some private company’s understanding of what a likeness is. And there are all kinds of reasons that I might want to publish a video of Donald Trump. There are all kinds of reasons that I might want to publish a video of Drake that have nothing to do with using his likeness for commercial purposes. And granting those people the ability to take things down is the same problem without, I don’t know, a federal fair use regime or some other
 How do you balance that? Great. So this is why it took three years, and it’s still going on, because what you’re saying is, first of all, you need to learn from the experience with the DMCA. It is the precedent we have, and there are obviously problems on both sides. You need to learn from those. The second is you need to create a new intellectual property right, in this case, much closer to trademark than to copyright, but still an intellectual property right, because that is, as you said, sort of the functional way of balancing that against the First Amendment. If you have an intellectual property right, you are allowed to remove it despite somebody’s other free speech rights. In this case, there’s a weird analysis of, do you have a free speech right to control how your voice is used? So it’s like free speech versus free speech. What we did was, besides getting together with many First Amendment law scholars and trying to hammer this out, which was a fascinating learning process, by the way... I feel like I got to go back to law school and listen to these brilliant constitutional scholars talk about the tension between the First Amendment and intellectual property rights. What you have to do, if you’re going to create a takedown regime, is put in hurdles on both sides. You have to put in hurdles on the “I’m telling you to take it down” side. And there are lots of things we’ve learned from the past, like: Are we going to force a, in this case, First Amendment review before you can send the notice? What’s the punishment if you send a false notice? Is that punishment high enough to deter false notices? Then on the back end, you have to have a counter notice, right? And then how do you make sure that that works well and that it’s not too low a hurdle, but a little bit of a hurdle because you want to have balance on both sides? And then finally you have this middle area where there’s going to be a decision about whether or not it’s a parody, for example, which many are, and the First Amendment trumps copyright when it comes to a parody. What if it’s news? And what is news anymore? What is bona fide news versus some of the stuff I’m getting when I’m scrolling? We then created this middle period where a temporary restraining order, a very quick legal action, could take place and a judge could actually decide the constitutional question — because nobody wants the platforms deciding constitutional questions. The people on both sides are like regular people. They’re not going to be making ultimate determinations. So that’s ultimately what we came down to in the NO FAKES Act, which is the name of the federal bill that’s now being pushed. And whether the balance there is perfect or not yet, I don’t know, but I do know that we learned a lot of lessons from the DMCA. I think everybody is very aware that the First Amendment defenses are really paramount in any kind of regime like this, and that overprotecting on either side
 If you overprotect on the First Amendment side, then this also applies to a girl who’s bullied in high school and some kid takes her face and sticks it on a body that’s not hers. You don’t want that staying up when it shouldn’t. On the other hand, I have the right to use your face for certain things because that’s my free speech, and it’s really funny, or I’m making a point about underlying character or something like that. So, long answer: there’s no perfect response, but this time we had OpenAI at the table, we had YouTube at the table, we had people from Public Knowledge at the table who bring a different perspective than we would bring. We ultimately got to a place where I don’t think folks are thrilled on all sides of it, but I think they think it’s progress. It’s something. I will grant you that it’s something. It’s better than what we have now, but it’s fundamentally the creation of a new intellectual property right. Absolutely it is. And there’s some balance there that almost certainly will track the same balance that copyright law and music have undergone over the past hundred years. No question. The initial debates about copyright law and music were about player pianos. We’ve built huge institutions to manage these rights. I said I was going to talk about Google a lot, and the tension inside of Google when it comes to this is the next sort of nightmare law school hypothetical for you. Google has two conceptions of itself. YouTube describes itself as a licensing regime. There’s a lot of content on YouTube; the creators make it, and Google takes a license to it. Whether or not any creator ever gets to negotiate that license is of secondary concern. There’s a lot of music on YouTube, and the industry had to fight its way into licensing on YouTube. Music is existential for YouTube, and the industry knows it has that power. There’s a real back and forth. Maybe the only industry that has true negotiating power with YouTube is the music industry. And you can see this play out over and over and over again. On the other side of the house, Google Search is a huge business; they will describe it to you as a fair use regime. We’re going to ingest all the photos in the world and let you search them; that’s fair use, and we’re going to litigate our way through that. We’re going to ingest all the books in the world for Google Books; that’s fair use, and we’re going to litigate that. And they have done that over and over and over again. You can work with the people at YouTube. They’re very reasonable. Neal Mohan is a smart guy. He understands that he needs music on that platform to survive, and he will build you the tools that you’re asking for, and he has. And then the people running Google are like, “We’re just going to eat everything, and training an AI model is fair use.” And just in that one company, they are totally at odds with each other. They’re going to kill each other somehow. How do you make sense of that? What’s so fascinating to me about YouTube is that it is the first real lesson in the arc of the DMCA. It’s where I think a technology-based company realized that even if you win the fight on intellectual property rights, if you don’t have a partnership through a license in the actual market where fans are, you are not going to have the service that fans really want. And so it was the first time that everybody realized that you can win the case but lose the business. Music is such a driver of YouTube, and I think this applies to AI too. Having pristine copies that fans really want, and then having marketing partnerships and partnerships with people who invest in and partner with creators, is what matters. Those creators have a better sense of how to create the bond between that particular artist that they’ve been living with and sort of building a brand around. They understand that, versus sitting in a cubicle in a tech company and trying to decide how to connect the fan with the artist in the best way, that the former piece is irreplaceable. And I think YouTube realized that and developed Content ID even though they technically won in court and didn’t have to, so to speak. Now, the partnership is so ingrained that there’s a dependency, or a codependency, and that’s how it’s supposed to work. It also works because of this concept in copyright law called substitution. If what you’re creating substitutes for something else, it’s probably not fair use. That’s what we’re arguing in our case against Suno. You’re basically creating music that is competing on the same platform right next to human-made music; you can click on either one, and you’re paying the same subscription fee. And so you’re affecting the economic pool, and you’re effectively substituting in the marketplace. This is the fourth factor of the fair use regime. This is the fourth factor of fair use, which courts say is the most important: are you affecting the potential market for the underlying work? And if you are, that’s sort of problem number one. Google, unlike in the YouTube case under the DMCA, the case that they won in the Supreme Court was about creating an index. And the idea is if you click on it, it could lead you to the work that you might then buy. The search result doesn’t substitute for the work, but it could lead you to the work, which at the end of the day may not have the same economic consequence. It could even have a positive economic consequence. At least they would argue that. So there’s this weird thing: Google won its case, and YouTube won its case, but YouTube formed a partnership despite the win because that’s the best fan experience. And Google didn’t because it wasn’t as related to the fan experience. The fan experience was potentially pointed to by their activity. So that’s my weird law school take on the two cases. If you’re running Google, if you’re in charge of Google Gemini, you need all of the data in the world. That is just how it works. To make the models better and to win against OpenAI, you need more data, and all of those companies just took it. I do not think Google came to you and said, “Can we license all the music in your database even though we already have a license on YouTube?” In fact, they just scraped YouTube. I don’t think creators have woken up to the fact that they’ve given a lot of economic value to Google and its models. The other AI companies also scraped YouTube, and Google can’t yell at them because then they will have to reveal that they scraped YouTube, and this is about as tense a fight in the AI industry as there is. You’re going to come to Google at some point, and you’re going to say, “No, you got to pay us for that training.” I know you’re suing Suno, but that feels like a little test balloon for the people with the real money. At some point they’re going to say, “No, this training was fair use.” We’re watching this dynamic play out in dozens of these cases across the industry. How do you make sense of that? Where you’re going to say, “You’re going to kill us. If the AI models flood YouTube with fake music, you’re actually going to kill the supply of the data that you need.” So there’s the legal side and the business side. On the legal side, obviously we’re bringing this as a precedent-setting case to show that it is not fair use to train on music. And whatever exemption you want to think of, it’s hard for us to imagine how it applies. I don’t think national security is at risk because you have to copy Drake. I don’t think that there’s- Wait, what did we play in the war in Panama? We played Metallica at them at full volume? Right, right. Maybe it’ll be used for soft power, or propaganda blasted on the screens. The Clash was very upset when “Rock the Casbah” was the soundtrack to the Gulf War. I’m just letting you know. I bet. I bet. Going back to securing the rights. We’re bringing this case to make sure that the rights are secured, so then every company knows that you are not allowed to make reproductions of other people’s music without consent or compensation. That’s basically what we’re trying to establish. And then once you secure the right, you let the marketplace develop from there. I’m sure that the good people at Google and at other companies understand the risks. It’s fascinating. Nilay, I don’t know if you’ve read the SEC document that Anthropic just had to file in order to have their IPO, but in the risk section, it’s basically like, “Well, it could be that all this scraping that we’ve been doing actually violated all these laws and that could, if it’s willful, put us in a liability deficit of x. People who are investing as new shareholders should sort of know that information.” So they kind of acknowledge upfront this could be a high cost of doing business going forward, and yet they’re going to have a spectacular IPO despite those risks. This means that they’re willing to bear them, and they’re also willing to accept the cost if and when that comes and it is secured. Actually, I have a different view on that, and it’s related to the beginning of our conversation. I think you gave a quote to the Los Angeles Times where you said being the RIAA is more fun now because the consumers are on your side fighting the AI giants instead of you fighting consumers. I get that. The valence of the RIAA and the culture may have changed. I’m sure we’ll get some people in our comments saying it hasn’t, but in general, it’s changed, right? You’re on the side of the artist fighting the giants. Google won all of those cases about fair use when it was a baby, right? And they had slides in the office, and they were a startup, and no judge had ever used the internet before, and they’re like, “I love YouTube!” And Viacom, you’re posting your videos on YouTube because your people love YouTube, and you know the audience is there. There was something very happy about the tech industry at that time. Google, as a company, was a hero. I think these companies are villains now. But truly, and if you look at the polling, they are not beloved. AI is not beloved, particularly with young people. The idea that AI is theft is held by young people. That gives you an opportunity to actually turn the screws harder, to say maybe you shouldn’t bear these risks. Maybe the artists should be the ones getting rich, not the AI companies. Are you putting that into policy, or are you just trying to negotiate to an outcome? No, we’re putting it into policy. Everything is an arc, as you know, but in the beginning of a disruption, you try to put into policy the basic rights that are going to allow the creators to control their creation, to charge what they want for their creation, and to develop the licensing deals that they feel they want to develop. And it’s gotten to be even bigger now than in the Napster days because back then, as you said, the transition was from CDs. So the artist only made money in those days during a few months after release, and then some CDs still sold for years afterwards, but a lot of them ended up in warehouses, and you kind of had this small window. The streaming revolution allows “exploitation,” not in the negative sense, but in the positive sense. It allows it to last forever. That’s why you have all these new investors coming into the music community because it’s a little bit more like a commodity now. That’s why Goldman Sachs is buying catalogs. That’s why all of these new companies are coming in, and they’re buying catalogs of music because music’s evergreen. It’s water. People are going to love it forever. And as an artist, you now have an opportunity you never had in the past. It’s not just to make this chunk on the wholesale cost of CDs within a certain month period; it’s, “Hey, now that I’ve built up this following and people might love these songs 20 years from now, guess what? I can now sell my catalog for a large amount of money to an investor in the future.” I just want to hit pause here and say that the baby punk rocker in me is... We could do another full hour on artists who now have the opportunity to sell their catalog to Goldman Sachs. It’s another hour. I know it’s there. Listen, we are all 20-something at some time, and then we’re 50-something at another time. Everybody wants to take care of their grandkids at some point. But this is an opportunity that they have now that they didn’t have before. And so I think that this disruption
 I think there’s more skin in the game for the actual creator than there was in the past when the revenue was more bifurcated or trifurcated. Nobody on the creative side of the equation thinks that it’s right that Suno will be making all the money from all of the music that has been created in the past, and that substitutional effect is going to deprive the artist or any of their partners. If the artist is in the middle of the sun and you’ve got all the folks around them from performing rights organizations, to record companies, to publishers, to managers, to producers, to agents, et cetera, they’re all sort of partners in a piece of that larger puzzle. And now the artist has more skin in the game than they ever had before, which is another reason why I think we’re sort of rowing together a little bit longer. There are other outcomes here. I think it’s Warner that’s partnered with Suno; they made a model on Warner’s music so they don’t run into these issues. If that proliferates, then you don’t get to sue the AI music companies because they made their models with licensed music, but you’ll face a supply problem on platforms like Spotify where you can suddenly flood the platforms with music. Your solution there, at least as I understand this conversation, is labeling. You’re going to put labels on the AI stuff so the fans can make a market decision, and the bet is the fans will choose humans. Is there another solution to the glut of supply? Yeah. I think an immediate solution for the marketplace for now is labeling. But I also think that these licensing agreements matter. I’m not privy to the licensing agreements that exist with Suno or any other AI company because I represent competitors, so they would never tell me. But I would imagine that it’s about dilution: where you don’t want to put artists’ music at risk on streaming platforms, because 90 percent of what they’re competing with is AI slop, if I could use that term. The licensing agreement gives you the leverage and the ability, if your rights are secured, to say, “I’m not going to let you download all this stuff.” I mean, it’s rumored that in the Udio agreement, a walled garden had to be built so that fans could make music within the network on their own Spotify-like app. It wouldn’t discourage them from also having Spotify or Apple; it increases the revenue for everybody, but we’re not going to allow you to download from this platform and dilute that platform. I don’t know if that’ll work. That seems to be one model. It could be that the terms with Suno had a limit on it or considered supply. I’m not a business person; I’m a policy person. But I think that there are plenty of ways, if the rights are secured, that through licensing arrangements and agreements, creators could then have the leverage to affect the supply so as not to cannibalize the work that they have on other platforms. Well, I think the policy problem of supply is that it will affect the business somehow. We should talk about Spotify for a minute. It’s amazing that we haven’t spent more time talking about Spotify. I know! I think the model companies are not going to listen. You can see what they are doing. They are gluttonous for data, and they think that they can outrun the consequences. We’ll see what happens there. Spotify is not training a model. Spotify is just distributing music. That’s the thing that they’re doing; they’re a pure-play business in that way, and they have a lot of incentives for AI music to replace the music they have to otherwise pay for on that platform. They have a lot of incentives for white noise and fake streams in history to do these things, and they’ve gotten in trouble for some of it. This is a real thing that happens on this platform. Are they going to participate in a labeling scheme and say, “This is AI music?” I think so, because as much as they have an economic incentive to lower their costs, their biggest economic incentive is to keep fans paying $9.99, $12.99, $15.99 per month. And so if fans feel duped, if you are putting — Is that proven out in the market? I’m actually very curious about this. Yes. You’re saying there’s AI slop on Spotify now, or when you search for Taylor Swift, you get a bunch of weird Taylor Swift soundalikes, which is an experience everyone has on Spotify. It hasn’t churned those fans yet. There’s not some exodus to Tidal or Apple Music. Spotify is still dominant in its way. Right. I think they’re walking down the road slowly, probably a little too slowly. I’m trying to see if they can do just enough to keep those two things in balance. Right now, for example, Spotify is saying, “We will only disclose or label a recording as AI in the credits.” Well, how many people look at the credits? I wish more people looked at the credits; they would discover producers and songwriters and other awesome folks who have contributed to the recording — but they don’t. They need to do it at the track level. They’re not there yet. But they are disclosing AI personas that are made, because that’s sort of the highest on the dupe scale. And then under that, they’re looking at the fact that 90 percent of the recordings available on Spotify get 10 percent of the revenue, and 10 percent of the content gets 90 percent of the revenue. It’s because most of what’s on there gets less than 10 listens, or less than a hundred listens, and all of this slop is just going on, which means storage costs and all sorts of other things that they have to think about. So I think that they will go as far down the road as fans will demand, as their users will demand. I think we’ll get to a point where people get these recommendations in their algorithm. “If you like this song, you’ll also like this one.” And when you listen to it, it turns out it was AI, you didn’t know it was AI, and you’ll feel deceived. That’s when they’ve got a giant problem because they’re responsible for that recommendation. They’re the ones that fed that to you. And we do have lots of consumer research out there showing that subscribers, just like all consumers, want to feel like nobody’s pulling the wool over their eyes. But is there an actual market pressure? I can think of all kinds of times fans have revolted against Spotify. I love the band Stars, and every now and again they’ll tweet, “We didn’t make any money on this song on Spotify.” And everyone tweets at Spotify, and they’re mad. Spotify’s not paying artists any more money. Is there an actual market pressure that will make this labeling happen, or is it policy pressure? It’s both. It’s a combination, because there are already laws in other countries that are mandating labels. And once a market like the EU or the US — that’s such a big market — or the UK or China, once they demand labeling on a global system, it’s actually cheaper to do it all around the world than it is to just geo-block it in one country. This is the California car emission model of regulation, right? It’s amazing what California can do because these companies are headquartered there. I mean not Spotify, but Apple and Google and others. And so the transparency law in California is the reason why Suno has to, as of August, put a watermark saying, “This is AI-generated” that’s machine-readable. One state, but they’re doing it all over the world because that’s what
 So it’s a combination of policy, which obviously we are very directly engaged in, and competition. I predict that what Apple decides to do that is more fan-friendly will drive Spotify, and vice versa. There’s not that much churn between them, but if there’s some sort of perception that you’re being more subscriber-friendly than somebody else, that tends to drive results. It does the same on the privacy issue, for example, where there’s no law on it, but now companies are competing to say, “We’re the private browser. Apple, we protect your privacy.” One company says that. Let me ask you this. I’ve only got a few minutes left, and I want to take one turn at the end to talk about how you measure for platinum certification, because that’s also up in the air. But let me just ask you one more question here on labeling. We have spent a lot of time at The Verge covering labels for images and media. There are all these standards that exist. I have one poor reporter, her name is Jess Weatherbed, and she has been forced to learn everything about the C2PA standard and content, SynthID, and all these things. I’m so sorry. It’s really important, though. They’re very important, and we spend a lot of time covering them because they have to work. And they have to work in a number of different places in the chain, right? They have to work in the camera, in Photoshop, on Twitter, and everyone has to agree. If Elon Musk does not want SynthID to show up on his platform, it doesn’t matter if it worked in the camera. This is a big chain. It seems harder in music, much harder because a bunch of bedroom DJs are probably not going to participate in your technical scheme for labeling when they upload to DistroKid. An artist getting a beat from a producer over iMessage — who knows if that metadata will survive. You might have to watermark the sound files themselves in some deep intrinsic way, and that can get you into all kinds of trouble because now you’re screwing with the audio files at the software level and artists don’t like that. How do you make labeling work at all? Yeah, you’re hitting on our daily meetings. So I mean, there are the international organizations like DDEX, for example, that can help align fields and stuff like that. C2PA, which can give you a model for provenance. But at the end of the day, it has to be the platforms and the distributors that are willing to do it. Because when it comes to generative AI, the record labels are not tagging and putting generative AI up on Spotify. That’s out of the DIY world. That’s somebody going to a music generator, downloading it, and putting it up through DistroKid. So your gateway is DistroKid, TuneCore. It’s the distributors. Are they using AI detection technology to determine that it’s fully generated? You might not be able to use AI detection technology to say your song is five percent of this or use it for attribution yet, but you can definitely use it to say this is fully generated AI. And if so, are they willing to tag it so that it works with Apple and Spotify’s platform? Then, on the platforms themselves, this is sort of like the parental advisory program; it might be voluntary, and everybody might have a little bit of a different way of implementing it, but fans are pretty clear. When something’s labeled as parental advisory, which probably just draws more young people to listen to it — It did to me. But when it’s labeled as parental advisory, people kind of get it. They know. It’s become sort of a culturally known thing. I think labeling for fully generated AI can definitely get there, but the distributors have to be willing to play. It can’t just be the platforms because if it doesn’t go downstream, they’re going to go in different directions. And already, Deezer’s going in one direction, Apple’s going in another direction, Spotify’s going in another direction. To me, the fully generated problem, which is a DIY problem, is a distributor problem. And we have to provide incentives to the distributors to get them to take responsibility and play ball. Do you think that technology exists to support the policy there? You need a technology that can detect AI-generated media. I’m not sure that any of that exists or works well. I think it exists and works well for fully generated AI music. We also do a lot of testing at the RIAA. That’s another thing that our tech team does. And then we disclose the results back to the folks who gave it to us. We won’t disclose it to anybody else, but if you want to know what our test says about your technology, we’ll tell you. And I think when it comes to fully generated AI, there’s plenty of detection technologies out there that do a really good job. Once you get below that, time will make it better. So I don’t know that we could get into a lot of gradations right now. Deezer, very successfully, on a platform level, uses AI detection technology and then labels what it detects as fully generated AI, and it’s got a very low false positive rate. I want to end by talking about the certifications for platinum records and so on. It’s an important part of what you do. All the artists want their little records on their wall. It’s amazing that it’s still records. One of our jokes at The Verge is also that no one knows how to count anything, that Nielsen ratings — I should probably disclose, we are now part of the company that owns Luminate, which powers the Billboard charts. The Billboard charts and their methodology are always in flux. Actually, I think as of this year, they’re in a fight with YouTube. YouTube does not want to be counted on the Billboard charts because some methodologies are... Counting is very political. It is. You literally give awards for counting to a big number. That is in flux as artists gain more attention on TikTok. And I have probably heard that whole Nicole Kidman song, in fragments on TikTok. I’ve never listened to the whole thing all the way through, and I’m certainly never going to buy a copy of it. Again, all in flux, and then somewhere in there is a bunch of AI remixes, and now I’ve listened to “Pop Star” by Drake 10,000 times because Darth Vader is singing it to me. How are you thinking about that methodology, as to who’s creating what? AI is in the mix, and we’re listening to more and more fragments to discover songs on social platforms than anything else. I swear to God, you are in my daily meetings. Can I just tell you? I’m happy to hear that. I drive The Verge team crazy because I’m like, the music industry is the future always. And they’re like, no one wants to listen to that. So thank you for indulging me. I appreciate you. I mean, you have your finger on the pulse. This is exactly the type of stuff we’re thinking of. So right now we’re still in the world of 1500 streams equaling one unit, and what used to be the sale of a CD. Now it’s obviously singles-based more than albums-based, although we still do certify albums. And if you look at the chart eligibility program that is now being implemented outside of Billboard and OCC, in other places of the world, they have made rules to say, unless it’s substantially human, we are not going to allow it to be eligible for the chart because you’re literally taking the place of a human artist on number 49. Billboard, so far, will allow it, but they’ll label it. We haven’t, because we certify albums that were released by record companies. We have yet to run into the issue of the AI slop or the machine-created piece. But as we get more into assistive AI, as creators start to use AI more, and you look at the chart eligibility of substantially human, does a stream as part of that 1500 mean that it still has to be a human stream? Yes, I’m sure that we will come down on that side. But what does substantially human mean? I think over time that might change. It might be different three years from now than it is today. But at the core, it’s got to be in the control of the creator. And some people would argue that putting nine words into a music generator is an act of creation. Oh, they will. They’re going to. Yeah. And that they are a creator, and therefore it’s the same thing. It’s not the same thing. Not saying that craft doesn’t change over time, and that in songwriting it’s also different than in producing and creating a recording. Using AI in the songwriting process may look very different than it does in the recording process, so we have to think about that too. But as far as gold and platinum go, we are still in the reliably safe zone of being able to know with a great deal of certainty exactly what we’re doing. I think the evolution over time is going to be in how creators use AI more than it will need to be in something that’s fully machine-readable or machine-created. Well, Mitch, you’ve given us so much time. As you can tell, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed this conversation. I could keep going for hours and hours now. Me too. I mean, honestly, this has been awesome. You freaked me out a little bit because you... It’s so great to see, though, because the stuff that you’re focused on is exactly what we are trying to grapple with every single day. And I think where we’ve come to is that we can’t pretend that there are easy answers. We can’t just react sort of in a knee-jerk way. We’ve got to try to figure out a path forward that’s going to allow the industry to change and grow. This industry’s adapted more times than any other industry in the history of our country. I mean, nobody goes from wax cylinders to AI in a hundred years. Can you imagine asking Boeing to make cars? So, a very adaptable industry. I agree with you that we’re ahead of the game and that we are the future. We’re sort of living it. And the lessons that we learned from the music industry, we can apply to a lot of other things. So this has been awesome. Thank you so much for being on Decoder. Really appreciate it. You got it. Take care. Most Popular - Here’s the full text of Jensen Huang’s memo to Nvidia - There’s no slowing down media’s pivot-to-video 2.0 - Nvidia is investigating Jensen Huang’s relationship with an alleged Chinese spy - Apple’s M5 MacBook Air is down to its lowest price since July - Why a new report on Anthropic automating AI development is alarming researchers

Un si grand soleil : Alix placée en garde à vue !
Un si grand soleil : Alix placée en garde à vue ! AlloCine

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:30 p.m.

Séries à la TV

Attention, cet article contient des spoilers sur les prochains Ă©pisodes d’Un si grand soleil. Si vous ne voulez rien savoir, ne lisez pas ce qui suit ! La police de Montpellier a du pain sur la planche dans Un si grand soleil ! Le 3 novembre dernier, StĂ©phane, le compagnon d’Alix (Nadia Fossier) a Ă©tĂ© retrouvĂ© mort au pied des escaliers de sa rĂ©sidence d’artistes. Si tout laissait penser Ă  un accident, le vol de son cadavre oriente dĂ©sormais les enquĂȘteurs vers la piste d’un meurtre. En parallĂšle, le comportement de SĂ©rignan (Joffrey Platel) commence Ă  poser question. Il faut dire que l’homme d’affaires s’était disputĂ© avec son meilleur ami quelques jours avant sa mort Ă  cause d’une histoire d’argent. Il le poussait mĂȘme Ă  quitter Alix et Ă  rentrer en Argentine pour une raison encore mystĂ©rieuse. Si rien ne prouve pour le moment qu’il soit impliquĂ© dans la mort de StĂ©phane, SĂ©rignan semble en tout cas cacher quelque chose qu’il ne souhaite surtout pas que la police dĂ©couvre. Pour dĂ©tourner les soupçons des enquĂȘteurs, il a d’ailleurs engagĂ© un dĂ©tective privĂ© et lui a demandĂ© de mettre la police sur la piste d’Alix. SĂ©rignan piĂšge Alix Dans l’épisode du 10 novembre, dĂ©jĂ  disponible sur la plateforme France.tv, le dĂ©tective privĂ© passe Ă  l’action. Il parvient Ă  ouvrir la voiture d’Alix et Ă  y cacher le badge d’Hugo, celui-lĂ  mĂȘme qui a permis aux deux hommes de pĂ©nĂ©trer Ă  la morgue pour voler le cadavre de StĂ©phane. Un piĂšge qui ne va pas tarder Ă  se refermer sur l’antiquaire. Lors d’une perquisition de sa boutique, les policiers dĂ©couvrent en effet le fameux badge. SuspectĂ©e d’avoir volĂ© le cadavre de son compagnon, Alix sera alors placĂ©e en garde Ă  vue. Parviendra-t-elle Ă  prouver son innocence et Ă  dĂ©montrer qu’elle a Ă©tĂ© piĂ©gĂ©e ? Que cache SĂ©rignan pour vouloir faire accuser Alix d’un crime qu’elle n’a visiblement pas commis ? RĂ©ponse prochainement dans Un si grand soleil.

CernĂ©e par les crises, la Somalie est-elle l’homme malade de la Corne de l’Afrique ?
CernĂ©e par les crises, la Somalie est-elle l’homme malade de la Corne de l’Afrique ? Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:28 p.m.

Analyse

La crise institutionnelle a commencĂ© ce 4 novembre. La Cour suprĂȘme de Somalie a estimĂ© que le mandat du prĂ©sident de la RĂ©publique, Hassan Cheikh Mohamoud, avait bien expirĂ© le 15 mai dernier, et a ordonnĂ©, dans un second temps, la tenue d’élections dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours. Étaient Ă©galement concernĂ©es les deux chambres du Parlement, dont les mandats auraient expirĂ©, selon les cinq juges de la Cour, le 14 avril dernier. La Cour suprĂȘme a jugĂ© ainsi inconstitutionnel le maintien au pouvoir du prĂ©sident jusqu’à mai 2027, date Ă  laquelle une Ă©lection prĂ©sidentielle doit avoir lieu. Hassan Cheikh Mohamoud, s’appuyant sur une nouvelle Constitution adoptĂ©e le 4 mars dernier, estimait que cette derniĂšre avait prolongĂ© de quatre Ă  cinq ans son mandat prĂ©sidentiel. Le 11 octobre, la Cour suprĂȘme, qui se prononçait en tant que Cour constitutionnelle, a Ă©tĂ© saisie par l’ancien prĂ©sident somalien Charif Cheikh Ahmed, lequel contestait la prolongation des mandats prĂ©sidentiel et parlementaire. En se prononçant aussi nettement, la plus haute juridiction somalienne a Ă©galement, analyse Somalia Today, dĂ©clarĂ© “inconstitutionnelles, illĂ©gales, nulles et non avenues” les mesures prises par les autoritĂ©s somaliennes depuis ce 15 mai. Autrement dit, explique Geeska, la Cour invalide les ac AccĂ©dez Ă  l’intĂ©gralitĂ© de nos contenus sur le site et l’application en vous abonnant Ă  l’offre spĂ©ciale. DĂšs 2,99 €/mois Sans engagement ‱ RĂ©siliable en ligneEt si cet article n’était que le dĂ©but ? 2,99 € par mois En tant qu’abonnĂ©, accĂ©dez Ă  l’intĂ©gralitĂ© des contenus de Courrier international. Une carte de la prise de contrĂŽle du dĂ©troit de Bab El-Mandeb par les houthistes Le salaire de la peur : les Ă©quipages des pĂ©troliers payĂ©s Ă  prix d’or pour franchir Ormuz Les dĂ©boires saoudiens au YĂ©men mis Ă  profit par les Émirats et les Sudistes

Six, Bossis, Barthez, Trezeguet
 Avant Kumbedi, ces joueurs appelés chez les Bleus quand ils jouaient en D2 Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:26 p.m.

Six, Bossis, Barthez, Trezeguet
 Avant Kumbedi, ces joueurs appelés chez les Bleus quand ils jouaient en D2

Au Mexique, l’Institut national Ă©lectoral Ă©claboussĂ© par un scandale de corruption
Au Mexique, l’Institut national Ă©lectoral Ă©claboussĂ© par un scandale de corruption Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:13 p.m.

Crise

Alors que les Ă©lections fĂ©dĂ©rales mexicaines doivent se tenir en juin prochain, l’Institut national Ă©lectoral (INE), l’organisme public chargĂ© de l’organisation des scrutins au Mexique, traverse actuellement l’une de ses pires crises de son histoire. Vers la fin du mois d’octobre, plusieurs rapports et enquĂȘtes journalistiques ont commencĂ© Ă  circuler, alertant sur l’existence prĂ©sumĂ©e d’un large rĂ©seau de corruption, de conflits d’intĂ©rĂȘts et de dĂ©tournements de fonds au sein de l’institution. À la suite de ces premiĂšres rĂ©vĂ©lations, qui ont jetĂ© le doute sur la gestion de la prĂ©sidente de l’INE, Guadalupe Taddei, l’Audit supĂ©rieur de la FĂ©dĂ©ration (ASF), l’équivalent de la Cour des comptes en France, a annoncĂ© l’ouverture d’une enquĂȘte “pour utilisation abusive de ressources publiques”, explique Milenio. Le 23 octobre, l’ASF affirmait en effet avoir dĂ©tectĂ© des irrĂ©gularitĂ©s dans plusieurs contrats impliquant l’INE ainsi que plusieurs entreprises privĂ©es et sociĂ©tĂ©s de prestataires de services, spĂ©cialisĂ©es notamment dans la distribution de matĂ©riel Ă©lectoral. Des failles majeures Le 25 octobre, face Ă  la pression politique et Ă  un scandale qui ne cesse d’enfler, la prĂ©sidente de l’institution a fini par dĂ©missionner, en exprimant sa “fiertĂ©â€ d’avoir contribuĂ© au service de la AccĂ©dez Ă  l’intĂ©gralitĂ© de nos contenus sur le site et l’application en vous abonnant Ă  l’offre spĂ©ciale. DĂšs 2,99 €/mois Sans engagement ‱ RĂ©siliable en ligneEt si cet article n’était que le dĂ©but ? 2,99 € par mois En tant qu’abonnĂ©, accĂ©dez Ă  l’intĂ©gralitĂ© des contenus de Courrier international. Narcotrafic : au Mexique, la tentative de retour d’un gouverneur embarrasse Sheinbaum Au Mexique, Sheinbaum veut interdire la double nationalitĂ© aux candidats Ă  la prĂ©sidence La victoire de Lula au BrĂ©sil, “une bouffĂ©e d’air frais” pour la gauche mexicaine AprĂšs la victoire dĂ©mocrate aux États-Unis, le Mexique ne doit pas trop “se rĂ©jouir”

AprÚs son retour à la science-fiction, Steven Spielberg devrait réaliser son premier western en 2027 !

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:12 p.m.

C'est un genre majeur du cinĂ©ma auquel le lĂ©gendaire rĂ©alisateur ne s’est jamais attaquĂ©, et cette fois-ci, il pourrait enfin s'y essayer ! Steven Spielberg devrait rĂ©aliser son tout premier western l'annĂ©e prochaine. Voici ce que l'on sait.

« J’étais parti dans une autre vie » : des bureaux parisiens au podium de la Route du rhum, le roman de Louis Burton Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:11 p.m.

« J’étais parti dans une autre vie » : des bureaux parisiens au podium de la Route du rhum, le roman de Louis Burton

« Des grands restaurants de 1 000 m2 » : Le chef Eloi Spinnler annonce l’ouverture de deux nouveaux buffets Ă  volontĂ© Ă  Paris Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:07 p.m.

« Des grands restaurants de 1 000 m2 » : Le chef Eloi Spinnler annonce l’ouverture de deux nouveaux buffets Ă  volontĂ© Ă  Paris

La mort annoncĂ©e de l’hippodrome de SillĂ© dans la Sarthe : « Qu’est-ce que nous coĂ»tons Ă  France Galop ? » Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:07 p.m.

La mort annoncĂ©e de l’hippodrome de SillĂ© dans la Sarthe : « Qu’est-ce que nous coĂ»tons Ă  France Galop ? »

Medium is launching a new note-taking app called TK The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:04 p.m.

Apps Tech Web

For the first time ever, Medium is becoming more than just a blogging platform. The company is launching a new app, called TK, that combines note taking and journaling with something resembling a private social network. The app is meant to get you writing more, and help you share that writing with friends and fans. And it’s part of a much bigger idea about blogging, and a much broader thesis about the state of the internet. Medium is launching a new note-taking app called TK The company is betting that the future of blogging looks a lot like group chats. The company is betting that the future of blogging looks a lot like group chats. “I don’t think we’ve actually had a launch of anything important since 2017,” Medium CEO Tony Stubblebine tells me over Zoom, a few days ahead of the company’s biggest launch in apparently almost a decade. That was when Medium’s then-CEO, Ev Williams, decided to quit chasing ad dollars and become a subscription business. “It’s clear that the broken system is ad-driven media on the internet,” Williams wrote at the time. “It simply doesn’t serve people. In fact, it’s not designed to.” Medium began charging for access to most content. “We got out of the attention economy,” Stubblebine says now. The trend Williams saw back then, though, has only accelerated and metastasized. AI companies are hoovering up any content they can get their hands on, legality be damned; search engines and chatbots are sending less and less traffic back to the web. Medium, like most websites on the internet, relies on Google for a huge portion of its traffic — in the time of Google Zero, that’s an existential risk. “When Google started taking away all the traffic,” Stubblebine says, “what I told them is that this hurts us, but it also hurts you, because I’ll just tell you what my product roadmap is going to do: I’m going to switch to private blogging
 We’re just going to take everything underground.” All of which brings us back to TK, an app and network that has no use or need for Google referrals. The idea behind TK is fairly straightforward: It’s a barebones note-taking app, with emphasis on daily journal-style notes and longer-form writing. The app itself is nice enough, like an ultra-minimalist take on Evernote, but it’s the stuff around the writing that has Stubblebine most excited. For one thing, you can point an AI model at your writing, and use it to help organize or make sense of all the notes you’ve been taking, by searching through your notes or asking for feedback on your writing. “TK” is both the name of the app and a shortcut in it: type the letters (which writers use frequently as a placeholder — they’re easy to find later, since the letters T and K hardly ever appear next to each other otherwise) and you can summon the model to fill in a bit of information for you. Stubblebine refers to “Unix pipes” a few times in our conversation, and his idea is to use the large language models to do some of the grunt work of both creating and managing notes. Once you’ve written something – and Stubblebine emphasizes that it doesn’t have to be a blog post — you can then share it however you like. You can share it via links or email the way you’d share a Google Doc, and collaborators can write, comment, and leave emoji reactions. You can also add your writing to what TK calls Libraries. Stubblebine calls the Libraries concept “private blogging,” which is a good metaphor. The early Libraries I’ve seen in the app are mostly centered around a topic, and people can contribute their writing on that topic. There’s no public face to any of it; it’s just a blog for and by its authors. Sometimes a few of them, sometimes a few hundred. There are groups sharing their ongoing book projects, swapping recipes, and posting poetry drafts, all for the eyes of only the other people in the group. It’s blogging meets group chats. This concept of private blogging is a big part of the future of Medium. “Medium is, at some level, performative,” Stubblebine says. “You have to want to share yourself with the world.” But in a post-Google world, he says, that’s essentially impossible. TK doesn’t measure pageviews or reward authors for getting traffic. “This is a community that’s going to give you feedback and encouragement,” Stubblebine says. “It’s not about the drive to be noticed.” Features like this, he says, are coming to the broader Medium platform soon. For now, TK is available to existing Medium members. (There are apps for the web, Android, and iOS, and Stubblebine says a native desktop app is also coming.) If TK works, it could also be a crucial new way for Medium to make money. Obviously, Stubblebine says, there are ways to make money from private and paywalled content. That’s the newsletter business. But also, he wonders, what if there’s a way to package up all the best stuff from the Recipe Box library and charge people, or AI agents, for access? “The generic web is getting dumber and dumber,” Stubblebine says. If AI is the future, “it needs to be based on this layer of human intelligence.” And all that intelligence might be better off outside the confines of the Google algorithm. Most Popular - Here’s the full text of Jensen Huang’s memo to Nvidia - There’s no slowing down media’s pivot-to-video 2.0 - Nvidia is investigating Jensen Huang’s relationship with an alleged Chinese spy - Apple’s M5 MacBook Air is down to its lowest price since July - Why a new report on Anthropic automating AI development is alarming researchers

Le comédien britannique Russell Brand condamné à plus de 10 ans de prison pour viol et agressions sexuelles
Le comédien britannique Russell Brand condamné à plus de 10 ans de prison pour viol et agressions sexuelles Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:03 p.m.

Justice

[Cet article initialement publiĂ© le 5 novembre a Ă©tĂ© mis Ă  jour et republiĂ© le 9 novembre] L’humoriste et acteur britannique Russell Brand a Ă©tĂ© condamnĂ© Ă  10 ans et six mois de prison ce lundi 9 novembre, quelques jours aprĂšs avoir Ă©tĂ© reconnu coupable d’un viol et de trois agressions sexuelles par un tribunal londonien. Au cours de son procĂšs, l’homme de 51 ans a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©crit comme un “prĂ©dateur sexuel impitoyable, calculateur et manipulateur”, rapporte The Guardian. Selon l’AFP, Russell Brand, 51 ans, n’a montrĂ© aucune Ă©motion quand la peine a Ă©tĂ© prononcĂ©e ce lundi. “Il y a une vingtaine d’annĂ©es, Russell Brand, vous Ă©tiez en train de devenir cĂ©lĂšbre. Vous Ă©tiez intelligent et, aux yeux de nombreuses personnes, drĂŽle et charismatique. Mais vous Ă©tiez aussi devenu un prĂ©dateur sexuel”, lui a dĂ©clarĂ© le juge Joel Bennathan. Brand a Ă©tĂ© condamnĂ© pour avoir “violĂ© analement une jeune fan dans sa maison londonienne aprĂšs l’avoir repĂ©rĂ©e dans la foule Ă  la sortie d’un de ses concerts Ă  l’Hammersmith Apollo dĂ©but 2009”, prĂ©cisait The Guardian jeudi 5 novembre. Il a Ă©galement Ă©tĂ© reconnu coupable d’agressions sexuelles sur “une employĂ©e de MTV pour lui avoir saisi les seins lors d’une fĂȘte d’anniversaire Ă  Soho, Ă  Londres, en 2004. Il a toutefois Ă©tĂ© acquittĂ© des faits de viol oral sur cette mĂȘme femme dans des toilettes aprĂšs la fĂȘte.” Pendant ses auditions avec la police et lors de son procĂšs, Russell Brand a expliquĂ© ne pas se souvenir de plusieurs de ces faits et que, pour les autres, il s’agissait de relations consenties qui auraient Ă©tĂ© “rĂ©interprĂ©tĂ©es” ou “prĂ©sentĂ©es sous un jour dĂ©favorable”. La BBC sous pression Avant d’ĂȘtre dans le collimateur de la justice pour ses crimes sexuels, Russell Brand s’est “fait connaĂźtre Ă  Hollywood en dĂ©crochant des rĂŽles principaux dans des films tels que la comĂ©die romantique Sans Sarah, rien ne va et la comĂ©die American Trip. En 2010, il a Ă©pousĂ© la chanteuse Katy Perry, ce qui, selon ses propres dires, a entraĂźnĂ© un ‘changement radical’ dans son niveau de notoriĂ©tĂ©, retrace The Telegraph. Ces derniĂšres annĂ©es, il s’est lancĂ© dans le podcasting et le marketing d’influence en ligne, et vit dĂ©sormais en Floride, aux États-Unis. Il s’est converti au christianisme et a Ă©tĂ© baptisĂ© dans la Tamise par Bear Grylls en 2024”. Russell Brand a Ă©galement Ă©tĂ© animateur sur la BBC entre 2006 et 2008. Sa condamnation vient mettre “une nouvelle pression sur la radio publique britannique, dĂ©jĂ  critiquĂ©e pour son incapacitĂ© Ă  contrĂŽler le comportement de ses vedettes, dans la foulĂ©e des scandales d’abus sexuels impliquant Huw Edwards et Jimmy Savile”, souligne encore le Telegraph. Russell Brand n’en a peut-ĂȘtre pas fini avec la justice. Le parquet examine la possibilitĂ© de porter devant les tribunaux deux nouvelles accusations de viol contre lui : Scotland Yard a indiquĂ© qu’une enquĂȘte Ă©tait en cours aprĂšs deux plaintes dĂ©posĂ©es par deux femmes. “Tout le monde dĂ©teste Elon” ou trois façons de torpiller les ultrariches Turquie : le surtourisme pointĂ© du doigt aprĂšs la mort d’une Française en Cappadoce Midterms aux États-Unis : “MĂȘme les dĂ©mocrates ne sont pas nos amis” Alain, vendeur de merguez dans les lacrymos, le vrai hĂ©ros de la jeunesse française

Laser de 100 kW, canon électromagnétique, missiles : voici le navire de guerre futuriste imaginé par la France Futura-science

Nov. 9, 2026, 3:03 p.m.

Guerre du futur Industrie navale canon laser

Pour poursuivre la filiation avec le gĂ©nĂ©ral de Gaulle, le prochain porte-avions français s’appellera France Libre. PrĂ©vu pour 2038, Futura dresse le portrait de ce gĂ©ant des mers qui ne sera pas un porte-avions comme les autres, mais un pari sur le combat du futur.... Lire la suite Nous sommes en 2040, au milieu de la mer du Nord. L'attaque est massive, simultanĂ©e et vient de toutes parts. Des nuĂ©es de drones suicides, en l'air et sous l'eau, se ruent sur le porte-avions France Libre, et des salves de missiles, dont certains sont de type « hypersonique », s'approchent. Sur les ondes et les capteurs, de grosses perturbations dues aux armes de guerre Ă©lectronique cherchent Ă  rendre aveugle la flotte française... Pour contrer cette attaque, la marine française compte sur son couteau-suisse : le destroyer SCX-26. En silence, son puissant canon laser abat cette multitude de drones aĂ©riens. À l'avant, un railgun neutralise les missiles en les mitraillant, quand la tourelle d'un systĂšme d'artillerie crĂ©pite Ă©galement. Des missiles tirĂ©s en grappes filent intercepter les autres vecteurs. C'est intense, les systĂšmes Ă©lectroniques et les capteurs embarquĂ©s sont aux aguets et au taquet, mais les menaces sont neutralisĂ©es. L'ennemi a concentrĂ© trop de moyens pour pouvoir recommencer. Il a peut-ĂȘtre mĂȘme Ă©tĂ© dissuadĂ© de recommencer. Le SCX-26 n'existe pas encore, mais Naval Group a imaginĂ© ce navire de guerre de demain sous la forme d'un « concept ship ». Il a Ă©tĂ© prĂ©sentĂ© au salon de dĂ©fense Euronaval, qui se tenait la semaine derniĂšre Ă  Paris. Une double superstructure qui intrigue DotĂ© d'une coque, dont la proue lui donne l'allure d'un sous-marin, il est surplombĂ© par deux blocs de superstructures inhabituelles. Elles servent Ă  la redondance, tout en accueillant vraisemblablement les systĂšmes de dĂ©tection, de communication et de conduite de combat. À l'avant, une baie de lancement de missiles est dissimulĂ©e derriĂšre un imposant canon au profil furtif. À l'arriĂšre, une plateforme permet d'accueillir un hĂ©licoptĂšre ou des drones aĂ©riens. Le navire, long de 170 mĂštres pour une masse de 8 000 Ă  10 000 tonnes, est Ă©paulĂ© par des drones de surface autonomes, naviguant Ă  proximitĂ©. Ce qui caractĂ©rise cette forteresse flottante, c'est donc sa puissance de feu, mais aussi sa robustesse et sa modularitĂ©. Le navire sert non seulement de plateforme de frappe, mais Ă©galement de navire-mĂšre de commandement et de contrĂŽle, capable de collaborer avec des avions, des drones et autres navires. Sous le pont, il peut accueillir un Ă©quipage de 150 personnes, mais il est Ă©galement possible d'embarquer en plus jusqu'Ă  100 opĂ©rateurs de drones, des forces spĂ©ciales et les membres d'Ă©tat-major de la flotte. Question autonomie, le SCX-26 peut parcourir les mers sur 14 800 kilomĂštres et il est possible de pousser ses moteurs pour atteindre les 30 nƓuds, soit autour de 56 km/h. Laser et railgun embarquĂ©s L'autre vision marquante proposĂ©e par Naval Group, c'est son armement futuriste et massif. Pour les missiles de dĂ©fense aĂ©rienne, anti-sous-marine, ou encore pour les attaques terrestres, le pont enferme 128 cellules de lancement vertical (VLS). Elles sont rĂ©parties dans ses soutes avant et arriĂšre. Mais surtout, on trouve des armes inĂ©dites, comme un puissant canon laser de 100 kW conçu pour neutraliser des drones de grande taille et un railgun. Ce canon Ă©lectromagnĂ©tique de 57 mm peut tirer ses projectiles Ă  une cadence Ă©levĂ©e. Sur le salon Euronaval Ă  Villepinte, Futura a dĂ©couvert une version miniaturisĂ©e du futur dĂ©monstrateur du railgun europĂ©en. DĂ©veloppĂ© par l’institut franco-allemand de Saint-Louis, ce canon Ă©lectromagnĂ©tique pourra ĂȘtre embarquĂ© Ă  l’avant d’un navire de la marine nationale pour servir de dĂ©fense anti-missile.... Lire la suite Lors de la derniĂšre Ă©dition d'Euronaval, il y a deux ans, Futura avait pu voir la maquette du canon Ă©lectromagnĂ©tique dĂ©veloppĂ© par l'Institut franco-allemand de recherches de Saint-Louis (ISL). Un dĂ©monstrateur est d'ailleurs en cours de dĂ©veloppement. L'ISL a pour objectif de crĂ©er un canon capable de tirer en rafale ses projectiles Ă  une vitesse de 14 400 km/h pour dĂ©truire des missiles hypersoniques. Qui s'y frotte... Et lors de cette Ă©dition 2026 d'Euronaval, c'est justement sur cette base conçue par l'ISL que le ministĂšre des ArmĂ©es a annoncĂ© le projet Spale, destinĂ© Ă  accĂ©lĂ©rer le dĂ©veloppement de ce canon, qui pourrait bien ĂȘtre rĂ©ellement intĂ©grĂ© Ă  un concept comme le SCX-26. Et si l'armada technologique venait Ă  Ă©chouer face Ă  une attaque par saturation, ce navire disposerait Ă©galement d'un systĂšme d'artillerie secondaire Ă  360° tĂ©lĂ©commandĂ©, plus classique, destinĂ© Ă  supprimer les menaces immĂ©diates. Ce navire « armĂ© jusqu'aux dents » n'est donc pour le moment qu'un concept. Mais Ă©tant donnĂ© les menaces actuelles, il semble adaptĂ©. Si l'on ne sait pas encore comment celles-ci Ă©volueront Ă  l'horizon 2040, le SCX-26 a un autre atout : celui d'une conception modulaire et flexible qui lui permettrait de s'adapter aussi bien Ă  des menaces imprĂ©visibles qu'Ă  missions Ă©galement en constante Ă©volution.

À moins de 380 € sur Amazon, ce Roborock aspire et lave les sols presque tout seul Futura-science

Nov. 9, 2026, 3 p.m.

Guides entretien des sols aspirateur robot laveur de sol Roborock

Les robots-aspirateurs laveurs ne se limitent plus Ă  passer un coup de serpilliĂšre aprĂšs avoir ramassĂ© les poussiĂšres. Le Roborock Qrevo S Pro rĂ©unit justement de quoi aspirer et laver automatiquement, tout en profitant de sa propre station. Amazon affiche actuellement le modĂšle noir haut de gamme Ă  379,99 € au lieu de 589,99 € par l'intermĂ©diaire d'une remise Ă  durĂ©e limitĂ©e accessible jusqu’au 12 novembre 2026 dans la limite des stocks disponibles. Deux serpilliĂšres rotatives et une aspiration de 18 500 Pa Le Roborock Qrevo S Pro a beau mettre en avant ses technologies, il ne fait pas l’impasse sur l’aspiration, qui reste sa fonction premiĂšre. Son systĂšme HyperForce assure une puissance allant jusqu’à 18 500 Pa, destinĂ©e Ă  rĂ©cupĂ©rer toutes les petites poussiĂšres, miettes et poils aussi bien sur les sols durs que sur les tapis. La brosse principale entiĂšrement en caoutchouc et la brosse latĂ©rale anti-enchevĂȘtrement qui permet de ne pas aller manuellement nettoyer les brosses. Le lavage des sols repose quant Ă  lui sur deux serpilliĂšres qui tournent Ă  grande vitesse en exerçant une pression sur le sol. Elles peuvent se relever de 10 mm lorsque le robot dĂ©tecte un tapis, afin d'Ă©viter de le mouiller pendant un cycle. La navigation LiDAR PreciSense cartographie les piĂšces et planifie les dĂ©placements, tandis que la technologie Reactive Tech aide le robot Ă  repĂ©rer les obstacles pour les contourner. Autrement dit, une fois qu'il sait oĂč il est, il se dĂ©brouille tout seul. Une station qui lave les serpilliĂšres Ă  75 °C C'est sur l'entretien aprĂšs le nettoyage que la station multifonction de ce modĂšle prend tout son intĂ©rĂȘt et finit de vous simplifier la tĂąche. Elle vide automatiquement le bac Ă  poussiĂšre du robot, avec jusqu'Ă  65 jours sans vidage manuel. Elle assure aussi le lavage des serpilliĂšres Ă  l'eau chauffĂ©e jusqu'Ă  75 °C, une tempĂ©rature qui aide Ă  Ă©liminer les saletĂ©s et les rĂ©sidus gras. Une fois cette opĂ©ration terminĂ©e, un systĂšme de sĂ©chage Ă  l'air chaud Ă  45 °C prend le relais pour limiter l'humiditĂ© persistante et les mauvaises odeurs. La station remplit Ă©galement automatiquement le rĂ©servoir d'eau du robot. Les diffĂ©rents rĂ©glages sont accessibles depuis l'application Roborock, qui permet de programmer les cycles, de sĂ©lectionner les piĂšces Ă  nettoyer ou de dĂ©finir des zones Ă  Ă©viter. Le robot mesure 9,65 cm de haut, ce qui lui permet d'accĂ©der sous certains meubles.

Here’s when the Black Friday sales start at Walmart, Target, and other retailers The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3 p.m.

Black Friday Cyber Monday Deals

Black Friday officially kicks off on November 27th, but if you plan to make that the only day you buy gifts this holiday season, you’re missing out. Several prominent retailers, including Best Buy and Walmart, are preparing to roll out their holiday discounts both in-store and online. Best Buy is even offering price protection through the holiday shopping season on select goods, so if you buy early and the same item drops in price, you can get the better deal retroactively. Here’s when the Black Friday sales start at Walmart, Target, and other retailers Black Friday is just around the corner, and the early sales are about to begin. Black Friday is just around the corner, and the early sales are about to begin. That being said, it’s important to know how every major retailer is handling the shopping event this year, whether you plan to take advantage of the slew of early holiday deals or hold off until the day after Thanksgiving. If you plan to spend some cash, here are the schedules and expectations for Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy, and all the major retailers we know of. Amazon has yet to announce its full Black Friday playbook, but the online retailer has dropped a few early deals in its so-called Holiday Shop, including steep discounts on Sony’s WH-1000XM6 headphones, the Google Pixel 11 Pro XL, and fitness trackers like the Fitbit Inspire 3. Just be aware that Amazon does not offer price matching, so price “protection” for many Amazon shoppers means buying the item at the lower price point and returning the original — which, unfortunately, is pretty wasteful. Like in previous years, Walmart plans to roll out its Black Friday deals in three distinct waves. The first runs from November 12th through November 15th, starting online at 12:01AM ET and in stores at 6AM local time. Walmart Plus members will also get early access to some deals beginning at 12:01AM ET on November 12th, with the sale opening up to everyone at 12:01AM ET on November 13th. Walmart’s official Black Friday sale then kicks off at 12:01AM on Monday, November 23rd, with Walmart Plus members once again getting early access to select deals online. Whatever “hot Deal drops” remain will then be available to non-members at 12:01AM ET on November 24th. Walmart’s in-store Black Friday sale will then kick off at 6AM local time on November 27th. The retailer’s Cyber Monday sale, meanwhile, will kick off online at 12:01AM ET on November 30th and run through December 2nd. The retailer hasn’t shared many deal specifics yet, but did offer a sneak peek in a recent press release promising discounts across a range of categories, including toys, fashion, beauty, and home goods. Best Buy officially kicked off its Black Friday promos on October 30th, with the retailer launching its first set of doorbuster deals on Halloween. Like last year, Best Buy will drop subsequent deals every Friday in the run-up to the holidays, and those who sign up for My Best Buy Plus or My Best Buy Total will also get up to $25 in bonus rewards during select doorbuster events. As for Best Buy’s main Black Friday event, the promos are slated to begin on November 19th and run for 10 days. The retailer will then hold its Cyber Sunday and Cyber Monday sale, followed by another round of Cyber Week deals, which will run from December 1st through the 6th. Best Buy also plans to hold a Last-Minute Savings event from December 18th through the 24th, giving shoppers yet another opportunity to save on holiday gifts. Additionally, Best Buy shoppers get holiday price protection, which means that if you purchase a qualifying item and its price drops at Best Buy during the eligible holiday period, you can request a refund for the difference. The retailer is also extending its holiday return window, allowing most purchases made between October 30th and December 31st to be returned through January 15th, 2027, or January 31st for My Best Buy Plus and Total members. Target’s early Black Friday sale ran from November 5th through November 7th, but the retailer also announced that it will introduce new limited-time deals every weekend throughout the holiday season. In addition, Target has brought back its “Deal of the Day” promotion, offering a new deal every day from November 1st through December 24th, with a one-day preview of upcoming offers. GameStop has yet to announce its full Black Friday 2026 sale lineup, including specific discounts on games, consoles, and accessories. In prior years, the retailer has opened as early as 7AM local time on Black Friday, though the exact hours may vary by location. We’ll update this post as more details become available. Newegg is kicking off the holiday shopping season with its Black November event, offering a new round of doorbuster deals every day from November 1st through November 30th. New discounts drop daily at 12PM ET, with deals available in limited quantities while supplies last. Shoppers can also preview the following day’s offers starting at 12PM ET. Costco has already kicked off its Black Friday sale, with deals rolling out in two waves: October 30th through November 15th and November 16th through the 30th. The wholesale retailer will also offer online deals on Thanksgiving Day (Costco stores will be closed on the holiday itself), followed by a larger Black Friday sale, which runs from November 27th through the 30th. A separate, online-only Cyber Monday event will take place on November 30th. Update, November 9th: Added new details for Walmart, Best Buy, and other retailers for the 2026 shopping season. Most Popular - Here’s the full text of Jensen Huang’s memo to Nvidia - There’s no slowing down media’s pivot-to-video 2.0 - Nvidia is investigating Jensen Huang’s relationship with an alleged Chinese spy - Apple’s M5 MacBook Air is down to its lowest price since July - Why a new report on Anthropic automating AI development is alarming researchers

The Verge’s guide to Black Friday 2026 The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3 p.m.

Black Friday Cyber Monday Deals

Whether you’re hoping to finally upgrade your TV or simply get a head start on your holiday shopping, Black Friday still offers one of the best opportunities to save on the gadgets we prize most at The Verge. From wireless earbuds and smartwatches to robot vacuums and the latest gaming gear, retailers have already begun offering discounts across a wide swath of electronics, with more expected to drop as we approach the big day on November 27th. Love it or hate it, what once was a singular shopping day is now a drawn-out, monthlong affair. The Verge’s guide to Black Friday 2026 With the proper playbook, you can cut your holiday spending and become a true deal-hunting maestro. But with hundreds of thousands of items on sale, figuring out which deals are actually worth your time (and cold, hard cash) is easier said than done. Fortunately, to help you navigate another tariff-riddled shopping season, we’ve compiled all our Black Friday coverage in one place. Here, you’ll find the best deals we’ve spotted on our favorite gadgets, along with tips for making the most of your money. We’ll also be updating this page regularly in the weeks leading up to the holiday so you can keep up with the latest discounts as they arrive. As holiday shopping ramps up this month, one lucky reader will win a big gift from yours truly. As holiday shopping ramps up this month, one lucky reader will win a big gift from yours truly.

Demain nous appartient : rebondissement, Christelle passe voir Sylvain au Mas !
Demain nous appartient : rebondissement, Christelle passe voir Sylvain au Mas ! AlloCine

Nov. 9, 2026, 3 p.m.

Séries à la TV

Attention, cet article contient des spoilers sur les prochains Ă©pisodes de Demain nous appartient. Si vous ne voulez rien savoir, ne lisez pas ce qui suit ! MariĂ©s depuis de nombreuses annĂ©es, Sylvain (Arnaud Henriet) et Christelle (Arianne SĂ©guillon) Ă©taient toujours parvenus Ă  affronter les Ă©preuves main dans la main dans Demain nous appartient. Mais comme toujours dans le feuilleton quotidien de TF1, la route du bonheur est parfois semĂ©e d’embĂ»ches. AprĂšs avoir vĂ©cu des vacances cauchemardesques au KalĂ©sia et avoir eu peur pour sa santĂ©, la fleuriste des Halles a commencĂ© Ă  remettre son couple en question. Ne supportant plus son mari qu’elle trouvait trop Ă©touffant, Christelle avait mĂȘme fini par le quitter. Un crĂšve-cƓur pour Sylvain qui n’a pas eu d’autre choix que de quitter le domicile conjugal et de s’installer dans son camping-car. Depuis, le plombier tente par tous les moyens de reconquĂ©rir le coeur de sa femme. Si jusqu’à prĂ©sent Christelle n’était pas rĂ©ceptive aux attentions de son mari, cette derniĂšre pourrait bien changer d’avis. Christelle et Sylvain vont-ils se rĂ©concilier ? La rĂ©ponse est bien Ă©videmment oui ! Dans l’épisode prĂ©vu Ă  la diffusion ce lundi 9 novembre, dĂ©jĂ  disponible sur la plateforme TF1+, Christelle se rend au mas pour discuter avec Sylvain. "On vieillit et notre couple aussi, c’est normal. Mais c’est vrai que ces derniers temps, je trouvais que tu ne faisais plus beaucoup d’efforts. Et du coup, ça m’a fait un peu douter. Beaucoup mĂȘme. Je te prie de m’excuser", lui dit-elle. Pour Sylvain, elle n’a pas Ă  s’excuser, prĂ©cisant que de son cĂŽtĂ©, il met du temps Ă  comprendre les choses. "Il n’y a pas que toi", assure Christelle avant d’ajouter : "Moi aussi, j’avais envie d’autre chose. Je me dis que cet autre chose, on pourrait peut-ĂȘtre le trouver ensemble. Enfin, si ça te dit bien sĂ»r. On peut essayer en tout cas." Bien Ă©videmment, Sylvain est partant. Heureuse, Christelle poursuit : "Charlie a raison : tu me manques trop. J’ai essayĂ© mais il faut se rendre Ă  l’évidence, je n’y arrive pas. Du coup, on pourrait peut-ĂȘtre se laisser une nouvelle chance. Si tu en as envie." AprĂšs avoir acceptĂ©, Sylvain embrasse sa femme tendrement avant de lui dire combien il l’aime. Tout est bien qui finit bien !

We’re giving away a bag filled with almost $900 worth of tech for Black Friday The Verge

Nov. 9, 2026, 3 p.m.

Deals Gadgets Giveaway

As we inch toward the gift-giving season, which officially kicks off with Black Friday, we thought it’d be the perfect time for another giveaway. As with previous sweepstakes, we raided The Verge’s tech closet and stuffed as much tech as possible into a single bag, and one lucky person will receive the winnings just in time for the holiday season. You can keep the goodies all for yourself or re-gift them — you decide. You won them, after all. We’re giving away a bag filled with almost $900 worth of tech for Black Friday As holiday shopping ramps up this month, one lucky reader will win a big gift from yours truly. As holiday shopping ramps up this month, one lucky reader will win a big gift from yours truly. The rules for entry are easy. Just fill out the fields below in the Viralsweep embed. Once you enter (and then verify your entry with a unique code sent to your provided email address), you’ll become a subscriber to our Verge Shopping newsletter, which goes out multiple times a week and contains the latest deals we covered on the site, as well as exclusive savings that only subscribers can see. Beyond discounts, we include links to recent buying guides, in-depth reviews, hands-ons, and other articles we think you’ll enjoy. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. VOID WHERE PROHIBITED BY LAW. Sweepstakes begins at 10:00am ET on 11/09/2026 and ends at 10:00am ET on 11/23/2026. Open to legal residents of the 50 U.S. states and Washington D.C., who are at least 18 years of age (or the age of majority in their jurisdiction, if greater) and have access to the internet, and a valid email address. Odds of winning depend on number of eligible entries received. Governed by and subject to the Official Rules, additional eligibility restrictions apply. VM Publishing, LLC Privacy Policy Sponsor: VM Publishing, LLC, 475 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10017. Most Popular - Here’s the full text of Jensen Huang’s memo to Nvidia - There’s no slowing down media’s pivot-to-video 2.0 - Nvidia is investigating Jensen Huang’s relationship with an alleged Chinese spy - Apple’s M5 MacBook Air is down to its lowest price since July - Why a new report on Anthropic automating AI development is alarming researchers

L’ex-comĂ©dien britannique Russell Brand condamnĂ© Ă  10 ans de prison pour viol et agressions sexuelles Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 2:57 p.m.

L’ex-comĂ©dien britannique Russell Brand condamnĂ© Ă  10 ans de prison pour viol et agressions sexuelles

En IsĂšre, un lama pour protĂ©ger ses brebis du loup : « Pas d’inquiĂ©tude avec les randonneurs » Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 2:57 p.m.

En IsĂšre, un lama pour protĂ©ger ses brebis du loup : « Pas d’inquiĂ©tude avec les randonneurs »

PrĂ©sidentielle 2027 : Teddy Riner candidat Ă  l’élection, Ă  combien est-il dans les sondages ? Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 2:57 p.m.

PrĂ©sidentielle 2027 : Teddy Riner candidat Ă  l’élection, Ă  combien est-il dans les sondages ?

2026 sera-t-elle l’annĂ©e la plus chaude historiquement documentĂ©e ?
2026 sera-t-elle l’annĂ©e la plus chaude historiquement documentĂ©e ? Courrier international

Nov. 9, 2026, 2:53 p.m.

Climat

Cette annĂ©e, un phĂ©nomĂšne mĂ©tĂ©orologique El Niño exceptionnel accentue le rĂ©chauffement planĂ©taire liĂ© aux activitĂ©s humaines. Si bien que certains scientifiques se demandent si 2026 sera l’annĂ©e la plus chaude historiquement documentĂ©e. C’est ce que pense Berkeley Earth, groupe indĂ©pendant de chercheurs amĂ©ricains, qui est “sĂ»r Ă  95 %, mĂȘme s’il reste deux mois avant la fin de l’annĂ©e, que 2026 dĂ©passera le prĂ©cĂ©dent record de 2024”, indique la BBC. Parue le lundi 9 novembre, la derniĂšre analyse de l’Organisation mĂ©tĂ©orologique mondiale (OMM) avance, elle, “plus prudente”, que 2026 “fera partie des quatre annĂ©es les plus chaudes jamais enregistrĂ©es”, rapporte le mĂ©dia britannique. L’organisme des Nations unies souligne que la tendance se poursuivra dans les prochaines annĂ©es, et en premier lieu en 2027. Car El Niño provoque en gĂ©nĂ©ral une augmentation de 0,1 Ă  0,2 °C en moyenne des tempĂ©ratures annuelles mondiales. “Nous devrions nous prĂ©parer pour un nouveau record en 2027”, a dit Ă  la presse la secrĂ©taire gĂ©nĂ©rale de l’OMM, Celeste Saulo, rapporte Le Temps. DĂ©passement du seuil de + 1,5 °C en 2026 Partout dans le monde la population sera confrontĂ©e Ă  des manifestations dramatiques du dĂ©rĂšglement climatique semblables Ă  celles qui ont ponctuĂ© 2026 (incendies, vagues de chaleur, inondations). Directeur scientifique de Berkeley Earth, le physicien Robert Rohde confirme : “C’est ce Ă  quoi nous devons nous attendre Ă  mesure que le rĂ©chauffement mondial progresse
 Des glaciers qui s’effondrent, des vagues de chaleur record et des sĂ©cheresses.” Quant aux donnĂ©es de l’observatoire europĂ©en Copernicus pour octobre, elles ont Ă©tĂ© dĂ©voilĂ©es le 5 novembre. D’aprĂšs ce bulletin mensuel, il est “dĂ©sormais quasi certain” que les tempĂ©ratures mondiales dĂ©passeront en 2026 le seuil de 1,5 °C au-dessus des niveaux prĂ©industriels. En revanche, pour les responsables de Copernicus, 2026 ne sera pas l’annĂ©e la plus chaude mais serait en deuxiĂšme position derriĂšre 2024. Au moins 35 000 morts en excĂšs en Europe pendant les canicules de 2026 Le changement climatique doit ĂȘtre reconnu comme une “urgence sanitaire mondiale” En Turquie, une COP31 tout Ă©lectrique Avant la COP31, le BrĂ©sil prĂ©sente un plan mondial pour la sortie des Ă©nergies fossiles

« Avec une histoire pareille, le monde va nous regarder » : les dessous de l’improbable retour de Ronaldinho Ă  la compĂ©tition Le Parisien

Nov. 9, 2026, 2:51 p.m.

« Avec une histoire pareille, le monde va nous regarder » : les dessous de l’improbable retour de Ronaldinho Ă  la compĂ©tition

Page 1/10

Javier Milei - Savior or destroyer? | DW Documentary

Formerly a political outsider, in November 2023 Javier Milei was elected president of Argentina. A libertarian and self-described ...

Why the President is BANNED from the final
 đŸ˜łđŸ‡ŠđŸ‡· #worldcup2026 #argentina #messi #fifa #soccer

Argentina's President Javier Milei just shocked the football world by officially refusing to attend the World Cup final against Spain.

How Javier Milei crushed inflation and restored Argentina’s economy

Argentina was once a byword for economic chaos — triple-digit inflation, soaring poverty, chronic deficits, and relentless money ...

Milei Tells UN Argentina Has "Unequivocally Aligned" With US and Israel Against Iran | AC1G

Argentina's President Javier Milei told the 81st UN General Assembly that his country has unequivocally aligned itself with the ...

Argentina President Javier Milei Addresses United Nations General Assembly | Dawn News English

Argentine President Javier Milei addresses the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York, outlining Argentina's ...

War and Peace | Full Audiobook by Leo Tolstoy

Listen to War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy, the complete, unabridged audiobook in the translation by Aylmer and Louise Maude.

The Kingdom of God Is Within You, Part 2: Tolstoy on Non-Resistance to Evil | Full Audiobook

The Kingdom of God Is Within You, Part 1 by Leo Tolstoy: chapters 8-12 of the book that made the case for Christian ...

Watching Wall Street, Deadly Mass Shooting in Poland, Back to Work After Blue Wave

The news doesn't stop when markets close. Hosts David Gura, Christina Ruffini and Lisa Mateo bring clarity, context and a bit of ...

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez told to give translation after speaking Spanish in Congress | USA TODAY #Shorts

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was told to provide a translation after speaking Spanish in support of statehood for Puerto Rico.

Abdul El-Sayed's Victory: Has Israel Lost America? | Sami Hamdi

Donate to our charity partner Baitulmaal here: http://btml.us/thinkingmuslim Tickets - This Is Syria Documentary Screening: ...

Chemins de la philosophie ▾
Tina ▾