Tech & IT

Big Tech’s Unwitting Role in the Spread of Nonconsensual Deepfakes: A Call for Accountability

Recent investigations have highlighted a growing and deeply concerning trend: the rise of nonconsensual pornographic deepfakes. Notably, the technology industry, including prominent players such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Cloudflare, have been found to inadvertently fuel this surge. While many of these companies may claim neutrality, critics argue that their services are providing the crucial infrastructure for deepfake websites, thereby prioritizing revenue over ethical considerations.

For a monthly subscription fee, enthusiasts can access exclusive content from various online personalities on platforms like Twitch and OnlyFans. However, a darker corner of the internet allows viewers to access AI-generated videos, known as deepfakes, portraying these personalities in fabricated explicit scenes they never participated in. The constant appearance of such content creates an endless cycle of takedowns, making it a perpetual struggle for those affected.

Independent analyst research indicates a concerning ninefold increase in such videos since 2019. By May 2023, approximately 150,000 videos, amassing 3.8 billion views, were identified across 30 sites. Many of these sites offer libraries of deepfake content featuring the faces of celebrities superimposed onto adult actors. More disturbingly, some even offer paid services to “nudify” familiar faces, be they colleagues or acquaintances.

Prominent technology giants are embroiled in this issue. Google’s search engine is a major traffic source for deepfake sites. Platforms like Amazon, Cloudflare, and Microsoft’s GitHub offer essential hosting services. With no federal law in the U.S. criminalizing the creation or sharing of non-consensual deepfake porn, and state-level legislation proving challenging to enforce, victims find themselves largely on their own.

However, there’s growing advocacy for tech corporations to take the initiative in curbing the proliferation of such content. Critics urge these companies to establish and enforce stricter regulations. At present, a simple search for a celebrity’s name combined with “deepfake” on Google can yield numerous links to malicious websites. From July 2020 to July 2023, traffic to the top 20 deepfake sites rose by 285%, with Google as the primary driver.

Bloomberg’s review revealed that major deepfake websites rely heavily on big tech for web infrastructure. Cloudflare Inc. provides web hosting for 13 of the top 20 sites, while Amazon hosts several popular deepfaking tools. Past campaigns have successfully persuaded companies to cease association with controversial platforms, suggesting potential avenues for activists to address the deepfake issue similarly.

The tools for creating deepfakes have become more advanced and user-friendly. Open-source models, like Stability AI, allow developers to craft photorealistic videos. Though these tools’ misuse is lamented by their creators, the open-source nature means control over applications is limited.

Despite policies against manipulated media, deepfakes still circulate widely on platforms like Twitter. Moreover, apps frequently used in the creation of such content are available on mainstream mobile stores, like Apple’s App Store and Google Play.

Big tech’s involvement extends further. Deepfake creators leverage Microsoft’s GitHub for hosting tools used in crafting nonconsensual pornographic content. Payment for these services often flows through mainstream processors, such as PayPal, Mastercard, and Visa.

Tech platforms undeniably hold significant influence over the trajectory of the deepfake issue. As tech permeates every facet of modern life, the need for accountability and ethical governance has never been more paramount.

Tech & IT

PICO 4 Ultra Review: Sharp Standalone VR with Solid Passthrough

The PICO 4 Ultra is a fully standalone VR headset designed for immersive entertainment, high-resolution video playback, and mixed reality experiences. It improves on the original PICO 4 with stronger performance, sharper visuals and better overall balance.

The headset uses the Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 chipset, putting it in the same performance class as the Meta Quest 3 and Quest 3S. It features 2160 x 2160 resolution per eye, a refresh rate of up to 90Hz, and support for 8192 x 4096 video decoding at 60 FPS, making it capable of handling high-resolution immersive video content.

Compared with the original PICO 4, the Ultra offers faster rendering, brighter visuals, and improved front-to-back weight distribution, which helps during longer sessions. It also ships with controllers, making it ready to use out of the box.

However, comfort is still an area where the PICO 4 Ultra falls slightly behind some competitors. Its rigid headband and stiff face pad can create more pressure during extended use, especially compared with the softer and more refined fit of the Quest 3 and Quest 3S.

Passthrough is one of the PICO 4 Ultra’s strengths. The headset provides a clean color view of nearby surroundings and offers a noticeable improvement over older VR devices. While it does not match the passthrough quality of Apple Vision Pro, it performs well for a standalone headset in its category.

The PICO 4 Ultra can be used with compatible VR apps from the PICO International Store, including media players, immersive video platforms, and mixed reality experiences. Browser-based access is also available for supported web content, giving users multiple ways to enjoy VR without needing a PC.

Overall, the PICO 4 Ultra is a strong standalone headset for users who want sharp visuals, good passthrough and solid performance. Its firmware and ergonomics may not feel as polished as Meta’s Quest lineup, but it remains a capable option for immersive entertainment right out of the box.

Cam Sites

Meta Quest 3 vs Quest 3S: Which VR Headset Is Better for Immersive Content?

Meta’s standalone Quest 3 and Quest 3S are two of the most popular VR headsets for users who want high-quality immersive entertainment without needing a PC or external tracking setup.

Both headsets share the same core chip and many of the same features, including 120Hz display support, Touch Plus controllers and hand tracking. The biggest difference is visual quality. The Quest 3 is the higher-end option, using sharper pancake lenses and offering a resolution of 2064 x 2208 pixels per eye. The Quest 3S is the more budget-friendly model, with 1832 x 1920 pixels per eye, making some compromises in display clarity to reach a lower price point.

For high-resolution video playback, both headsets are capable devices. They can handle 8192 x 4096 at 60 FPS, making them suitable for 8K immersive video when paired with compatible apps and properly encoded content. This makes either headset a strong option for users focused on detailed, wide-field VR experiences.

Both models also include Touch Plus controllers and support hand tracking, giving users different ways to navigate apps, menus, and media players. This flexibility makes the experience feel more natural, especially when switching between interactive content and video playback.

Passthrough is another important feature. The Quest 3 and Quest 3S use dual 4MP RGB cameras to provide color passthrough, allowing users to see their real-world surroundings while wearing the headset. The experience is useful and practical, though it does not match the sharpness and realism of Apple Vision Pro, which offers richer colors and more detailed environmental visuals.

Battery life remains a practical consideration. In continuous 8K streaming tests, the Quest 3 lasted about 120 minutes, while the Apple Vision Pro lasted about 150 minutes. Apple’s external battery has a larger capacity, but the runtime difference is smaller than the size gap might suggest.

For most users, the choice comes down to budget and image quality. The Quest 3 is the better pick for sharper visuals, clearer lenses, and a more premium viewing experience. The Quest 3S offers much of the same core performance at a lower price, making it a strong option for users who want modern VR features without paying for the highest display quality.

Overall, both headsets are reliable choices for immersive entertainment. Choose the Meta Quest 3 if visual clarity matters most, or the Quest 3S if you want a more affordable entry into standard

Tech & IT

“Bombs and Porn” Debate Highlights Growing AI Concerns

AI data center projects across the United States are facing delays, cancellations, and growing public opposition as concerns rise over energy use, pollution, taxes, and the overall impact of artificial intelligence.

Nearly half of the data center capacity planned for 2026 has reportedly already been delayed or canceled. Local communities and lawmakers are increasingly pushing back against large AI infrastructure projects, with some states introducing restrictions on new developments.

Critics continue to question whether AI is truly improving daily life. Instead, AI tools are frequently associated with fake content, misinformation, cheating in schools, and harmful online material. Concerns also grew after reports connected a suspect in the 2025 shooting at Florida State University to extensive conversations with an AI chatbot before the attack.

The debate also includes concerns about AI being used in military and surveillance operations. AI-powered systems are increasingly being adopted by defense and government agencies, raising ethical and privacy concerns.

Environmental impact remains another major issue. Massive AI data center projects are expected to increase electricity demand significantly, with some companies planning new gas-powered infrastructure to support future expansion. Critics warn this could lead to higher emissions and additional pressure on energy grids.

Public skepticism toward AI also remains high. Recent polls show that many Americans believe AI could negatively affect jobs, education, and everyday life, while large numbers oppose building AI data centers near their communities.

Critics argue that instead of focusing on futuristic promises about “superintelligence,” tech companies and politicians should better explain the practical benefits AI is currently providing to ordinary people.