CANCUN, Mexico--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jul 14, 2023--

TikTok will now allow users to post text-only content for the first time in a challenge to Elon Musk's beleaguered X, formerly known as Twitter.

One unfortunate patient found out the hard way why you shouldn’t wear metal during an MRI after a butt plug they were using shot through their body. A post on Twitter that appeared to show a scan of a butt plug that caused “major injuries” lodged high up in someone’s body as a result of an MRI scan has gone viral, undoubtedly making many people clench in the process. In the post by Twitter user @BradiusZero, he explained why you should “Never wear a butt plug to your MRI appointment” and shared an image of a scan that appeared to show a butt plug lodged in a person's chest cavity. Alonside the image, a separate text message read: “Greatest personal injury case I've ever heard. An estimated Valley attorney, has picked up a client who is suing a sex toy company. Said client purchased a butt plug that was advertised as ‘100 percent silicone’. Client wears butt plug to MRI appointment. “Much to client's dismay, butt plug in fact has a metallic core. Butt plug is accelerated at the speed of sound…into client's chest cavity. Described in memo as an ‘anal rail gun’. Client survived with major injuries.” The post has been viewed 10.8 million times with many speculating on what was going on there. One person tweeted: “I’m glad they’re alive but I can’t help but think that the patient was trying to intentionally shock the doctors upon doing the MRI scan as a joke and it went horribly wrong.” Wearing metal in an MRI can be dangerous due to the magnetic force that is created by the machines which is approximately 1,000 times stronger than a typical fridge magnet. Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

Hong Kong indicated that crypto companies drawn by the city’s push to create a digital-asset hub should expect

HasanAbi criticized both Amouranth and xQc, noting a perceived change in their attitudes after signing lucrative deals with Kick

Google and the US Justice Department are beginning what might be the most decisive tech trial in a generation. The lawsuit could have substantial consequences – not only for the search giant, but for its rivals such as Apple and Meta, and the technology industry more broadly. The antitrust trial will examine claims from critics that Google has unfairly used its power to become dominant in a variety of parts of technology, in particular its search engine. The United States will argue Google didn’t play by the rules in its efforts to dominate online search in a trial seen as a battle for the soul of the Internet. The US Justice Department is expected to detail how Google paid billions of dollars annually to device makers like Apple, wireless companies like AT&T and browser makers like Mozilla to keep Google‘s search engine atop the leader board. DuckDuckGo has also complained, for example, that removing Google as the default search engine on a device and replacing it with DuckDuckGo takes too many steps, helping keep them to a measly 2.3% market share. DuckDuckGo, Microsoft and Yahoo are among a long list of Google competitors who will be watching the trial closely. “Google makes it unduly difficult to use DuckDuckGo by default. We’re glad this issue is finally going to have its day in court,” said DuckDuckGo spokesman Kamyl Bazbaz who said thatGoogle had a “stranglehold on major distribution points for more than a decade.” Google has denied wrongdoing and is prepared to vigorously defend itself. The legal fight has huge implications for Big Tech, which has been accused of buying or strangling small competitors but has insulated itself against many accusations of breaking antitrust law because the services the companies provide to users are free, as in the case of Alphabet’s Google and Facebook, or low price, as in the case of Amazon.com. “It would be difficult to overstate the importance of this case, particularly for monopolies and companies with significant market share,” antitrust lawyer Luke Hasskamp told Reuters. “This will be a major case, particularly for the major tech companies of the world (Google, Apple, Twitter, and others), which have grown to have an outsized role in nearly all our lives,” he added. Previous antitrust trials of similar importance include Microsoft, filed in 1998, and AT&T, filed in 1974. The AT&T breakup in 1982 is credited with paving the way for the modern cell phone industry while the fight with Microsoft is credited with opening space for Google and others on the internet. Congress tried to rein in Big Tech last year but largely missed. It considered bills to check the market power of the companies, like legislation to prevent them from preferencing their own products, but failed to pass the most aggressive of them. Big Tech’s rivals now pin their hope on Judge Amit Mehta, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The lawsuit that goes to trial was brought by former President Donald Trump’s Justice Department. In a rare show of bipartisan agreement, President Joe Biden’s Justice Department has pressed on with the lawsuit and filed a second one against Google in January focused on advertising technology. Judge Mehta will decide if Google has broken antitrust law in this first trial, and, if so, what should be done. The government has asked the judge to order Google to stop any illegal activity but also urged “structural relief as needed,” raising the possibility that the tech giant could be ordered broken up. The government’s strongest arguments are those against Google‘s revenue sharing agreements with Android makers, which requires Google to be the only search on the smartphone in exchange for a percentage of search advertising revenue, said Daniel McCuaig, a partner at Cohen Milstein who was formerly with the U.S. Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. Additional reporting by Reuters Read More AI can help generate synthetic viruses and spark pandemics, warns ex-Google executive Google boss says he wants to make people ‘shrug’ How Google reshaped the world – and is about to do it all over again AI is using vast amounts of water Elon Musk says monkeys implanted with Neuralink brain chips were ‘close to death’ Volcano discovery could power electric cars for decades, scientists say

It’s been a brutal year for the developers of Kariba, one of the planet’s largest carbon projects. That

The head of the artificial intelligence company that makes ChatGPT is set to testify before Congress as lawmakers call for new rules to guide the rapid development of AI technology

By Daniel Trotta and Rami Ayyub (Reuters) -Seven U.S. states that depend on the overused Colorado River on Monday reached

There is no clear link between mobile phones and the internet and a negative impact on mental wellbeing, the authors of a major new study have found. Researchers took data on two million people aged between 15 and 89, from 168 countries. While they found that negative and positive experiences had both increased, they found little evidence that was the result of the prevalence of the internet. The results from the major study, led by the Oxford Internet Institute, contradict widespread speculation that the internet – and especially its widespread availability through mobile devices – has damaged mental wellbeing. The researchers said that if the link between internet use and poor health were as universal and robust as many think, they would have found it. However, the study did not look at social media use, and although the data included some young people, the researchers did not analyse how long people spent online. Professor Andrew Przybylski, of the Oxford Internet Institute and Assistant Professor Matti Vuorre, Tilburg University and Research Associate, Oxford Internet Institute, carried out the research into home and mobile broadband use. Prof Przybylski, said: “We looked very hard for a ‘smoking gun’ linking technology and wellbeing and we didn’t find it.” He added: “The popular idea that the internet and mobile phones have a blanket negative effect on wellbeing and mental health is not likely to be accurate. “It is indeed possible that there are smaller and more important things going on, but any sweeping claims about the negative impact of the internet globally should be treated with a very high level of scepticism.” Looking at the results by age group and gender did not reveal any specific patterns among internet users, including women and young girls. Instead, the study, which looked at data for the past two decades, found that for the average country, life satisfaction increased more for females over the period. Data from the United Kingdom was included in the study, but the researchers say there was nothing distinctive about the UK compared with other countries. Although the study included a lot of information, the researchers say technology companies need to provide more data, if there is to be conclusive evidence of the impacts of internetuse. They explain: “Research on the effects of internet technologies is stalled because the data most urgently needed are collected and held behind closed doors by technology companies and online platforms. “It is crucial to study, in more detail and with more transparency from all stakeholders, data on individual adoption of and engagement with internet-based technologies. “These data exist and are continuously analysed by global technology firms for marketing and product improvement but unfortunately are not accessible for independent research.” For the study, published in the Clinical Psychological Science journal, the researchers looked at data on wellbeing and mental health against a country’s internet users and mobile broadband subscriptions and use, to see if internet adoption predicted psychological wellbeing. In the second study they used data on rates of anxiety, depression and self-harm from 2000-2019 in some 200 countries. Wellbeing was assessed using data from face-to-face and phone surveys by local interviewers, and mental health was assessed using statistical estimates of depressive disorders, anxiety disorders and self-harm in some 200 countries from 2000 to 2019. Read More Software firm Cloudsmith announces £8.8m investment No ‘smoking gun’ linking mental health harm and the internet – study Young people the biggest users of generative AI, Ofcom study shows Software firm Cloudsmith announces £8.8m investment No ‘smoking gun’ linking mental health harm and the internet – study Young people the biggest users of generative AI, Ofcom study shows

The human body is an extraordinary thing – and now, one video is proving just that, while simultaneously giving people nightmares. Childbirth is often regarded as one of nature's most incredible events, but have you ever questioned how a baby's face develops while in the womb? Neither have we. But thanks to the BBC, people are divided about how "beautiful" the process actually is. The simulation shows how the baby's face starts with the philtrum, the area between the bottom of your nose and upper lip. During the episode of Inside the Human Body: Creation, Michael Mosley points out: "Down the centuries, biologists have wondered why every face has this particular feature. What we now know is it is the place where the puzzle that is the human face finally all comes together." The footage then recreates a baby's facial development via an animation, which begins with two holes at the top of the head. It appears as though the features then start to merge, though this is the baby's nostrils. (Fast-forward 32 seconds in to the below video to watch:) Face Development in the Womb - Inside the Human Body: Creation - BBC One www.youtube.com "We've taken data from scans of a developing embryo so we're able to show you for the very first time how our faces don't just grow, but fit together like a puzzle," Mosley continues. "The three main sections of the puzzle meet in the middle of your top lip, creating the groove that is your philtrum." He continues: "This whole amazing process, the bits coming together to produce a recognisable human face, happens in the womb between two and three months. "If it doesn't happen then, it never will." The snippet understandably garnered a mixed response, with one viewer writing: "That was so creepy yet amazing..." Another joked: "Makes me feel better that Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise once looked like space aliens." And a third quipped: "Thank you for the enlightening information and the skin-curdling nightmares." Sign up for our free Indy100 weekly newsletter Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

Zoom Video Communications Inc. raised its profit and sales forecast for the fiscal year, a positive sign for