ArduinoMania

2023 was an important year for patients with sickle cell disease. Prior to CRISPR, the only cure for the life-long ailment was a bone marrow transplant, which is notoriously dangerous and costly. This month, the FDA approved Vertex’s “Casgevy,” a CRISPR-based therapy for the treatment of sickle cell disease in patients 12 and older. The landmark approval made the therapeutic the first genetically edited therapy to reach the general market.

Casgevy, which also received the greenlight from regulators in the UK for another blood disorder called beta thalassemia, works by being administered in a single-infusion of genetically modified stem cells to a patient. Clinical study participants that took Casgevy were free from symptoms associated with sickle cell disease, like periodic episodes of extreme pain due to blocked blood flow through vessels, for up to a year.

CRISPR, which modifies precise regions of a human’s DNA strands, was once thought to be a far off scientific innovation. Human cells were first modified using CRISPR in clinical trials in China back in 2016. Less than a decade later, these landmark approvals have set the stage for future nods by regulators for other CRISPR-based therapies that can treat things like HIV, cancers and high blood pressure. “Gene therapy holds the promise of delivering more targeted and effective treatments,” Nicole Verdun, director of the Office of Therapeutic Products within the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research said in a recent press release.

ASSOCIATED PRESS

CRISPR-based gene editing can be designed as a therapeutic for a number of diseases. A scientist can either delete, disrupt or insert segments of DNA to treat conditions by either targeting specific genes or engineering new cell therapies. The editing process can occur ex vivo (outside the body), in the same way Casgevy does, or in vivo (inside the body). Using CRISPR, sickle cell patients’ blood stem cells are modified in a lab before they are re-infused via a single-dose infusion as part of a hematopoietic transplant.

Neville Sanjana, a core faculty member at the New York Genome Center and associate professor in the Department of Biology at New York University, runs the Sanjana lab, which develops gene therapies for complex diseases like autism and cancer. “One of the really fundamental characteristics of CRISPR is its programmability,” Sanjana told Engadget. While working at the Zhang lab at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Sanjana says he helped design the “guide RNA” that became the blueprint for Vertex’s Casgevy. “CRISPR screens can be powerful tools for understanding any disease or genetic trait,” Sanjana said. Right now, he said biomedical folks are focused on applying CRISPR-based therapies for really serious inheritable diseases.

While it does “set a precedent” to have these first CRISPR-based gene therapies out there, it could also mean that regulators and the general public will regard future innovations in the space as “less novel,” Katie Hasson, a researcher with the Center for Genetics and Society (CGS) told Engadget. The CGS is a public interest and social justice organization that is focused on making sure gene editing is developed and distributed for good. Hasson explained, it doesn't mean that because one got approved that all other innovative therapies to come after it will not get as much scrutiny.

Beyond therapeutics, gene editing has very broad applications for the discovery and understanding of diseases. Scientists can use CRISPR to explore the origins of things like cancer and pave paths for therapeutics and incurable diagnoses, but that's not all there is to it. Scientists still need to conduct “considerable experimental research” when it comes to bringing an actual therapeutic to fruition, Sanjana said. “When we focus on therapeutic activity at a particular site in the genome, we need to make sure that there will not be any unintended consequences in other parts of the genome.”

Still, the spotlight will always shine a brighter light on the flashy developments of CRISPR from a therapeutic standpoint. Currently, a new gene editing method is being developed to target specific cells in a process called “cancer shredding“ for difficult-to-treat brain cancer. Scientists have even discovered a pathway to engineer bacteria to discover tumorous cells. However, there are barriers to using CRISPR in clinical practice due to the lack of “safe delivery systems to target the tissues and cells.”

“Maybe by curing one disease, you might give them a different disease — especially if you think of cancer. We call that a secondary malignancy,” Sanjana said. While there is strong reason for concern, one cure creating a pathway for other diseases or cancers is not unique to CRISPR. For example, CAR T cell therapy, which uses an entirely different approach to cell-based gene therapy and is not reflective of CRISPR, is a lifesaving cancer treatment that the FDA discovered can, in certain situations, cause cancer.

“We definitely don't want any unintended consequences. There are bits of the genome that if you edit them by mistake, it's probably no big deal but then there are other genes that are vitally important,” Sanjana said. Direct assessment of “off-target effects” or events in which a gene edit incorrectly edits another point on a DNA strand in vivo is challenging.

The FDA recommends that after a clinical trials’ period of investigatory study looking at the efficacy of a gene editing-based therapy, there needs to be a 15-year long term follow up after product administration. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said that the agency’s approval of Casgevy follows “rigorous evaluations of the scientific and clinical data.” Right now, researchers are focused on improving the precision and accuracy of gene editing and having the proper follow up is absolutely well merited, Sanjana explained. “The process right now is a careful one.”

Hasson believes that the 15-year recommendation is a good start. “I know that there is a big problem overall with pharmaceutical companies actually following through and doing those long term post-market studies.”

That’s where new approaches come into play. Base editing, a CRISPR-derived genome editing method that makes targeted changes to DNA sequences, has been around since 2016. Drugs that use base editing have already made headway in the scientific community. Verve Therapeutics developed a gene edited therapy that can lower cholesterol in patients with a single infusion. At higher doses, Verve said the treatment has the potential to reduce proteins associated with bad cholesterol for 2.5 years. Base editing, like CRISPR, has many potential applications for treatment and discovery. For example, base editing could repair a gene mutation that causes childhood blindness. Researchers at Weill Cornell Medicine also found base editing could help understand what genetic changes influence a patient’s response to cancer therapies.

Base editors use CRISPR to bring another functional element to a specific place in the genome. “But it doesn't matter whether it's CRISPR cutting or base editing… any time you're modifying DNA…you would want to know what the off target effects are and you can bet that the FDA wants to know that too. You're going to need to collect data using standard models like cell culture, or animal models to show there are zero or near zero off-target impacts,” Sanjana said.

CRISPR-based therapies already show high therapeutic potential for conditions beyond sickle cell disease. From blood based treatments, to edited allogeneic immune cells for cancers, there are a number of human clinical trials underway or expected to start next year. Trials for gene-edited therapies that target certain cells for cancer and autoimmune diseases are expected to begin in 2024.

Boston Globe via Getty Images

It won't be until 2025 before we get a better understanding of how Excision BioTherapeutics’ CRISPR-based therapy works to treat HIV. The application of gene editing as a therapeutic for Alzhiemer’s is still in the early stages, with mice at the forefront of research. Similarly, University College London researchers proved that CRISPR has promise as a potential therapeutic for treatment-resistant forms of childhood epilepsy. In a recent study, a gene edited therapy developed in the lab was shown to reduce seizures in mice.

But the clinical process of getting CRISPR to safely and effectively work as it's intended isn’t the only hurdle. The pricing of CRISPR and related therapies in general will be a huge barrier to access. The Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), a research group that hopes to advance ethical use of these gene editing in medicine, estimates that the average CRISPR-based therapy can cost between $500,000 and $2 million per patient. The IGI has built out an “Affordability Task Force” to tackle the issue of expanding access to these novel therapies. Vertex’s sickle cell treatment costs a cool $2.2 million per treatment, before hospital costs. David Altshuler, the chief scientific officer at Vertex, told MIT Tech Review that wants to innovate the delivery of the therapeutic and make it more accessible to patients. “I think the goal will be achieved sooner by finding another modality, like a pill that can be distributed much more effectively,” Altshuler said.

“Access is a huge issue and it's a huge equity issue,” the CGS’ Hasson told Engadget. “I think we would also like to look at equity here even more broadly. It's not just about who gets access to the medication once it comes on the market but really how can we prioritize equity in the research that's leading to these treatments.” The US already does a poor job of providing equitable healthcare access as it is, Hasson explained, which is why it's important for organizations like CGS to pose roundtable discussions about implementing guardrails that value ethical considerations. “If you support people having access to healthcare, it should encompass these cutting edge treatments as well.”

Researchers from the Stanford Internet Observatory say that a dataset used to train AI image generation tools contains at least 1,008 validated instances of child sexual abuse material. The Stanford researchers note that the presence of CSAM in the dataset could allow AI models that were trained on the data to generate new and even realistic instances of CSAM.

LAION, the non-profit that created the dataset, told 404 Media that it "has a zero tolerance policy for illegal content and in an abundance of caution, we are temporarily taking down the LAION datasets to ensure they are safe before republishing them." The organization added that, before publishing its datasets in the first place, it created filters to detect and remove illegal content from them. However, 404 points out that LAION leaders have been aware since at least 2021 that there was a possibility of their systems picking up CSAM as they vacuumed up billions of images from the internet. 

According to previous reports, the LAION-5B dataset in question contains "millions of images of pornography, violence, child nudity, racist memes, hate symbols, copyrighted art and works scraped from private company websites." Overall, it includes more than 5 billion images and associated descriptive captions. LAION founder Christoph Schuhmann said earlier this year that while he was not aware of any CSAM in the dataset, he hadn't examined the data in great depth.

It's illegal for most institutions in the US to view CSAM for verification purposes. As such, the Stanford researchers used several techniques to look for potential CSAM. According to their paper, they employed "perceptual hash‐based detection, cryptographic hash‐based detection, and nearest‐neighbors analysis leveraging the image embeddings in the dataset itself." They found 3,226 entries that contained suspected CSAM. Many of those images were confirmed as CSAM by third parties such as PhotoDNA and the Canadian Centre for Child Protection.

Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque trained Stable Diffusion using a subset of LAION-5B data. Google's Imagen text-to-image model was trained on a subset of LAION-5B as well as internal datasets. A Stability AI spokesperson told Bloomberg that it prohibits the use of its test-to-image systems for illegal purposes, such as creating or editing CSAM.“This report focuses on the LAION-5B dataset as a whole,” the spokesperson said. “Stability AI models were trained on a filtered subset of that dataset. In addition, we fine-tuned these models to mitigate residual behaviors.”

Stable Diffusion 2 (a more recent version of Stability AI's image generation tool) was trained on data that substantially filtered out 'unsafe' materials from the dataset. That, Bloomberg notes, makes it more difficult for users to generate explicit images. However, it's claimed that Stable Diffusion 1.5, which is still available on the internet, does not have the same protections. "Models based on Stable Diffusion 1.5 that have not had safety measures applied to them should be deprecated and distribution ceased where feasible," the Stanford paper's authors wrote.

QR code-based phishing attacks appear to be on the rise. For this “new” hacking vector, someone gets a phishing email asking them to scan a QR code, that code redirects to a malicious link (usually to steal credentials) and an account takeover occurs. Local news organizations have warned the public to watch out, security leadership publications tell executives to be careful and security companies really, really want you to call it quishing.

To be fair, there have been some notable headlines about it lately. A large-scale version of this against an unnamed “major” US energy company went after Microsoft logins, according to a Cofense report in August. Security researchers have unanimously reported some level of uptick or spike in the attack vector this year. Even the Federal Trade Commission warned consumers of the dangers.

The fanfare around these attacks, however, mostly outweighs the threat of using QR codes in your daily life. Phishing has been, and will likely always be, a prevalent way to trap victims, and what we’re seeing when people talk about QR code attacks is just another way to do that. That’s why despite how the reports may generalize the dangers of QR codes as a whole, some common sense security practices that you already use to avoid phishing can help you avoid this tactic, too. Other, advanced QR-based attack vectors outside of phishing are likely too technically complicated and low reward for bad actors to attempt, or for you to worry about.

Phishing attacks that work by pointing a victim to a malicious link are incredibly common, and QR codes are essentially just another way to execute them. QR codes are “jumping into a security gap,” said Randy Pargman, director of threat detection at security firm Proofpoint. It forces a victim away from their computer and onto a cell phone or another device, adding a level of distraction. Plus, people are more likely to fall for a phishing link on a mobile device, according to Pargman.

The smaller scale makes it harder to tell what’s legit, for example you can’t easily see a full link to point out discrepancies, and we generally tend to feel safer in our handheld world. Scanning a QR code on a phone takes a victim away from their computer. That could mean it has fewer security plugins installed on its browser that would warn you to stay away from suspicious sites, although more browsers have automatic protections against both. Or, if it's taking you from a work device to a personal device, a security team probably supports the computer, but not your cell phone, with extra protections in place to stop you from falling victim. But on the flip side, this is a lot less efficient for scammers to set up. It assumes the victim has access to two devices, rather than just clicking a link.

Plus, people tend to scan the QR codes, even if they’re from an unfamiliar source, because we’re so used to it, according to Fae Carlisle, principal security engineer at VMware Carbon Black. “People are regularly told to scan a QR code to show them a map of a place, to vote in a competition, to visit Instagram, etc,” Carlisle said. “Because of inherent trust, people go along with it.” Hackers seemingly saw this trend and figured out they could exploit it.

While the application of QR codes to phishing attacks is fairly straightforward, the hype around their use in other malicious vectors mostly ends there. Security professionals advise against scanning unknown QR codes, in the same way you shouldn’t plug a random thumb drive into your device. But, while you should always be on guard to protect against phishing attacks, you don’t really have to worry about using QR codes in your daily life because it’s still rare to see them used as a hacking tactic.

This matters because when we think of QR codes, we don’t usually think of getting them in emails. You’re probably more familiar with them from real world interactions, like a call to action on a flier or a scan-to-order menu at a restaurant. Looking at my own inbox and desktop, the instances of getting a QR code are few and far between, with maybe the exception of some multifactor authentication apps and cross-login for VPNs. Basically, for a hacker going after everyday targets, the less effort the better, and plastering a poisoned QR code all over physical space in the hopes someone will scan it is a whole lot of work, according to Pargman. Bulk sending phishing emails is just a heck of a lot more efficient.

While it’s also possible to imagine a link takeover situation, where the destination of legitimate QR codes is redirected to a malicious URL, that really hasn’t been seen yet. Not only is it a lot of effort, but it would require an attacker to identify a widely-used QR code. That would mean sourcing the code information, and then hoping it was worth the work. “Quishing” may be legit, but avoiding QR codes at all costs probably goes a step too far.

If something seems off about scanning a QR code, pause before proceeding. “If you're scanning a menu of the restaurant's and it's asking you to login to your Gmail account to access the menu, that's a highly unexpected step,” said Olesia Klevchuk, product marketing director at security company Barracuda Networks. “Those are the kinds of things we want to be on the lookout for.” But if you just want to learn more about an exhibit at a museum or have a contactless check-in at the gym, you probably have nothing to worry about.

Apple's financial services, including Apple Pay, Apple Cash, Apple Card and Wallet, have been experiencing service disruptions for some users since 6:15AM this morning, the company reports. As of 10:04AM Eastern, those services still have outage notices on Apple's System Status page. As AppleInsider notes, it's unclear how widespread the issues are. On a personal note, I was able to use Apple Pay without issue around 9AM to make a pick-up order at Starbucks.

The PlayStation 5 has officially hit the 50 million sales milestone, Sony confirmed in a blog post. That's an impressive figure, considering the litany of supply chain issues that kept PS5s in limited supply after its November 2020 launch. And notably, the PS5 manage to reach 50 million sales just a week longer than it took the PlayStation 4, which wasn't bogged down by as many supply chain issues or a worldwide pandemic. 

Sony has also outsold the Xbox Series X and S by almost three to one this year, the Financial Times reports, based on data from Ampere Analysis. While Microsoft doesn't release official Xbox sales numbers (you can take a wild guess as to why), Ampere estimated that Microsoft sold 7.6 million next-gen systems this year (a 15 percent drop from 2022), while Sony's sales exploded by 65 percent to reach 22.5 million units sold. 

It's not hard to see why the PS5 is in more demand: Sony has pumped out far more must-have games this generation (including the recent Spider-Man 2, as well as anticipated sequels like God of War Ragnarok), while Microsoft has stumbled with its more high profile releases, like Halo Infinite and Redfall. But it could just be that Microsoft has a different goal. It's far more focused on pushing subscriptions to Xbox Game Pass, which also allows players to stream titles over the cloud and play on PC with its ultimate tier.   

When Elon Musk first took over Twitter, those of us in the tech media had all kinds of theories about how the acquisition might bring about the death of the 17-year-old platform.

Some posited that his inept attempts at cost-cutting would cause irreparable damage to Twitter’s infrastructure or that mass resignations would lead to catastrophic instability. But as is so often the case with Musk, predictions were in vain. Twitter did die this year, but the way it played out was both more boring and more stupid than anyone could have possibly imagined.

Musk killed Twitter by slowly making it useless for those who relied on it for real-time information, by choking off conversations from those not willing to pay, by flooding users’ timelines with spammy blue-check sycophants and renaming the company X. He killed it by re-platforming actual Nazis and far-right trolls and Alex Jones and boosting anti-semitism so loudly the site's largest remaining advertisers and most prominent users abandoned the platform in droves. Though you can still go to www.twitter.com and see a website that vaguely resembles the thing we used to call Twitter, it’s only a dull echo of what it once was.

- via Getty Images

The beginning of the end

While you could argue the death spiral began the second Musk walked into Twitter HQ carrying a sink 14 months ago, the platform we all knew began to die three months later, when Musk abruptly decided to ban third-party client apps from its platform and put the rest of its API behind an outrageously expensive paywall.

Twitter had long been an outlier among its social media peers for having a relatively open platform. It gave researchers tools to access the full history of all public conversations on Twitter. It allowed developers to build their own apps on top of its platform, which fostered a small but robust ecosystem of third-party Twitter clients.

Third-party apps like Tweetbot and Twitterific had a relatively small (but devoted) following, but they also played a significant role in defining the culture of Twitter. In the early days of Twitter, the company didn’t have its own mobile app, so it was third-party developers that set the standard of how the service should look and feel. Third-party apps were often the first to adopt now-expected features like in-line photos and video, and the pull-to-refresh gesture. The apps are also responsible for popularizing the word “tweet” and Twitter’s bird logo.

And while many of these apps had become less prominent in recent years, they were emblematic of the way that Twitter, at its best, empowered its users to shape the platform.

Likewise, having an open and readily-available API meant that Twitter, while not the largest social platform, could play an outsize role in shaping online culture. Because its firehose of data was easily accessible to researchers, the public conversations that happened there fueled studies into everything from global elections to public health.

By closing its API to developers and the research community, Musk made it clear he was not interested in using Twitter for anything that couldn’t make him a buck in the process. Twitter’s data was simply another part of the platform to commodify. Nearly a year later, making Twitter’s API inaccessible to all but those with the deepest pockets may not seem like even the tenth-most consequential change to happen under Musk, but it showed just how willing he was to alienate influential communities on Twitter. It was also a major warning sign of what was to come.

The blue check fiasco

If killing Twitter’s API was a quiet warning sign, the complete destruction of Twitter “verification” was a five-alarm fire. Twitter’s verification system was always flawed, but it hinged on the basic premise that the company had some evidence the accounts it verified belonged to the actual people claiming them and that those were people or organizations of some importance. When Musk rolled out his poorly thought out paid verification scheme last year, it went horribly and predictably wrong almost immediately because he failed to uphold any kind of identity check.

Despite the chaotic initial rollout, verification's now-meaningless status did not become fully apparent until this year. After a wave of thousands of spammers, scammers and Musk sycophants signed up for verification, Twitter began removing “legacy” verification from thousands of accounts.

The algorithmic boost provided to the new paid-for wave of blue checks, combined with the promise of a potential share of ad revenue, has drastically altered the dynamics of conversation on Twitter. Verified accounts are given priority ranking in replies and search results, regardless of the size of their following or their engagement — which has made Twitter even less relevant and useful. And the promise of potential ad revenue has incentivized the worst kind of engagement bait.

The result is that even the most carefully curated timelines have become filled with useless spam. And fraudsters are increasingly using pay-to-play verification to carry out scams targeting people trying to reach legitimate customer service channels.

X marks… the death of Twitter

If you were to look for a singular moment when Twitter died, however, it happened in July, when Musk announced that the company would now be known as X. The company changed its name, logo and everything formerly associated with the bird app.

This was more than an ill-considered rebrand. X, a letter with which Musk has long been fascinated, represented, literally, the end of Twitter. For as much as Musk has said it’s about creating an “everything app,” it’s also about fully severing any ties to the expectations and norms associated with Twitter. Want to break verification? Want to charge new users for the privilege of posting? Want to make news stories unreadable? Want to maliciously slow down links to competitors’ websites? Want to re-platform the most heinous peddlers of hate and conspiracy theories? Those actions may have been at odds with Twitter’s mission, but at X, it’s all just another Tuesday. As CEO Linda Yaccarino told CNBC “the rebrand represented really a liberation from Twitter.”

Justin Sullivan via Getty Images

It’s unclear if Musk will ever succeed at creating anything resembling an “everything app” where users will be able to use X to run their “entire financial world.” So far, users seem to have little interest in the somewhat random assortment of new features that have been introduced, like live shopping and aggregating job listings. What Musk has succeeded at, however, is reshaping the platform in his own image.

But if there was any doubt remaining about whether the platform had a chance, Musk has almost single handedly wiped out what remained of Twitter’s ad business. After boosting an antisemitic conspiracy theory and repeatedly failing to prevent ads from appearing near pro-Nazi content, many of the company’s largest remaining advertisers have halted their spending on the platform.

Musk, naturally, responded by telling advertisers “go fuck yourself,” while speculating that the loss of ad dollars could “kill the company.”

But it’s not just advertisers who have fled an increasingly toxic platform. Many of the biggest and most-followed accounts have stopped posting in recent weeks. X’s infrastructure continues to slowly crumble, with random features constantly breaking. Meanwhile, all this has only strengthened the growing number of X competitors, and especially the Meta-owned Threads app. Threads is surging, landing at number four on Apple’s list of most-downloaded apps of the year, despite a late summer launch. X, which has seen steady declines in traffic and engagement, did not make the list.

I’ve always been pretty money-conscious, but I didn’t really get into budgeting until I was in my mid-twenties. “Budgeting” is generous — I thought I was budgeting, but really I was using a crude Google Sheet system to track my expenses every month. I didn’t truly understand the difference between those two things until I started looking into ways to upgrade. It had been working fine for me, but as I got older and wanted to grow my savings, save up for a home down payment and a wedding and generally do more “adult” things with my money, I started to scour the internet for alternatives. I settled on You Need a Budget (YNAB) about four years ago and I’ve enjoyed it so much that I keep using it even after achieving some of those milestones.

The YNAB Method is an approach to budgeting that resonated with me then and still does today. I won’t belabor the basics here, but put simply, you’re to give every dollar a “job” as soon as you get paid by taking care of immediate needs first and then accounting for the rest of your true expenses. The way YNAB does this is basically by acting like a digital envelope system where you can customize all of your envelopes (or “categories”) and the amount of money you need for each (“targets”), and dump money into all of them every time you get paid. For example, I know I need $65 each month to pay for internet, so I have an internet category in YNAB with a target of $65 each month that’s due by the 15th, since I’ll need that money to pay the bill on the 20th of every month.

Follow that example for all of the rest of your expenses like rent or mortgage payments, groceries, electricity, insurance premiums and you’ll have a full YNAB budget in place. You can (and should) also do that for “true” expenses, which include things like hair cuts and car maintenance in the YNAB system. You may not need a specific amount of money for things like that every month, but you can plan for them by saving a little every time you get paid — so by the time you need to get that hair cut ahead of a wedding or unexpectedly need a new set of tires, you have at least some, if not all, of the money necessary to pay it.

YNAB

I was already taking stock of my standard expenses and setting aside money for those first and foremost, but YNAB made the process much easier. It’s worth noting that was already part of my routine. I was privileged enough to get a decent financial education from my parents growing up (mantras like “pay yourself first” come to mind, and I see taking care of your most necessary expenses as a way of accomplishing that).

The game-changer for me was considering my “true expenses,” which added up quickly. The inevitable weekly takeout order, veterinary bills for our cat, train and rideshare fees and the like were all things I knew I needed to pay for but didn’t previously deal with until the time came. In YNAB, you can create categories for all true expenses and plan for them each month (or week, depending on how you budget/get paid) so there’s (hopefully) never a question of how you’re going to pay for any of them.

If you’re able to do this and get your expenses in order, it’s possible that you’ll find you have money left over each paycheck. Then you can expand your budget to think about other true expenses or sinking funds you may want to address. My line between true expenses and sinking funds is blurry at best, but the latter are just allocated monies you set aside for variable expenses that you know are inevitable like home maintenance or insurance premiums.

Holiday gifts were big for me; every year, I have even more people in my life that I need to buy gifts for during the holiday season and I never planned for that in advance before using YNAB. Now, I have a “holiday gifts” category with a generous target that I put money toward every month and set to be “due” every year in early October. As soon as sales start to kick in during the fall, I have a pool of money with which I can buy all of my loved ones’ gifts.

I should say that YNAB appeals to my Type-A, über-organized personality, but you can’t plan for everything. A few years back, I unexpectedly had to spend about $500 for some car repairs and I didn’t have quite that much in my “car maintenance” sinking fund. Instead of panicking, I moved some money over from my “clothing” category to cover the remainder of the costs. It was a bit painful psychologically (I love seeing those little green progress bars in the YNAB app), but it didn’t impact my finances at all. YNAB accounts only for the money you actually have, regardless of which category it’s in, so I wasn’t spending anything that I couldn’t afford. That’s really important to me, as someone who tries to live within their means — and as much as possible, below it — to avoid lifestyle creep.

YNAB

Getting back to those “adult” priorities I mentioned before: YNAB was one of the key things that helped me and my partner save up a home down payment and the funds we’d need to pay for our wedding simultaneously, without feeling too stretched along the way. We cut down (not cut out, mind you) on all unnecessary expenses and aggressively saved during this five-year period, and YNAB made keeping track of it all easy.

But I would like to stress that the service was just one of the things that helped, and there were other factors that contributed as well. It’s not realistic to suggest budgeting alone is the answer to all of one’s money prayers. But it’s certainly a step in the right direction and a good habit to build over time.

I consider YNAB up there with 1Password as one of the few services I’m happy to pay for every year because of how much it adds to my life. However, it’s worth noting that you don’t have to pay for YNAB to start budgeting using its tenants. The YNAB method, the envelope system and zero-based budgeting are all very similar and you can do them all with less expensive tools, and even manually with physical envelopes and cash. There are plenty of online communities with flourishing examples of how you can get started without paying for yet another subscription. I recommend checking out Taylor Budgets, Budget Treasures and other similar YouTube channels for more inspiration.

Creating stickers from photos is an easily overlooked iPhone feature tucked into iOS 17. Using Apple’s machine learning algorithms that quickly separate a subject from its background, it extracts pictures of you, your friends or pets (or anything else it detects as the picture’s subject), transforming them into digital decals. It even makes animated stickers from Live Photos to slap onto iMessage chats or Markup tools. Here’s how to create your own.

What are iPhone stickers?

In Apple’s ecosystem, stickers are digital versions of their real-world counterparts. They debuted in iOS 10, Apple’s 2016 iPhone operating system, allowing users to place cut-outs of fun images onto iMessage bubbles for more personalized reactions.

Apple

Creating iPhone stickers from photos is new to iOS 17, and so is their location. In older versions of iOS, you had to navigate the iMessage App Store (in the Messages app) and app drawer to find them. In the new software’s more streamlined approach, you only have to tap the plus icon next to a message, choose Stickers and pick the one you want. (More on that below.)

How to create stickers from photos in iOS 17

Here’s how to make custom stickers from your photos on Apple’s latest iPhone software:

1. In the Photos app on your iPhone, choose a picture you want to transform into an iPhone sticker. Tap on the photo to open it in a full-screen view.

2. Touch and hold your finger on the photo’s subject. For example, if it’s a picture of your dog making a derpy face, hold your finger down on the pup until you see an animated effect highlighting the subject. (If it doesn’t work on the first try, do it again.)

3. In the popup menu that appears above the subject, choose “Add Sticker.” If you don’t see that text, tap on the arrow (>) at the right end of the options box until you find it. After tapping “Add Sticker,” the decal will appear below in the same drawer you’ll see in the Messages app.

4. Optionally, hold your finger down on it in the stickers drawer and choose “Add Effect” from the menu. You can give it a standard outline, add a comic style, transform it into a puffy sticker or make it shiny.

5. Tap the X button or swipe down to close the Stickers menu at the bottom of the screen.

How to create stickers from Live Photos in iOS 17

Apple’s Live Photo adds (roughly) three-second video clips captured before and after pressing the shutter button. If you took your source picture as a Live Photo, you can turn it into an animated iPhone sticker through the following steps:

1. Open the iOS Photos app, and tap on the Live Photo you want to turn into an animated sticker. It should now take up your phone’s entire screen.

2. Hold your finger down on the photo’s subject. Wait until you see an animated ripple effect protruding and highlighting the subject. (Try again if it doesn’t catch the first time.)

3. In the menu above the subject, choose “Add Sticker.” If you don’t see that option, tap the right arrow at the end of the menu. After tapping “Add Sticker,” you’ll see the subject appear in a drawer below with your custom stickers.

4. You should see a pop-up menu above the sticker. If you don’t, hold your finger down on the sticker in the list. Choose “Add Effect.” A new screen with effects options will appear.

5. In addition to sticker effect options, you’ll see “Off” on the upper left. Tap that until it changes to “Live.” You now have an animated sticker.

6. Press the X button or swipe down to close the sticker drawer.

How to use custom stickers in iMessage

Apple

Here’s how to use your new photo sticker in the Messages app:

1. In Messages, open a chat thread.

2. Press the + button to the left of the text box.

3. Choose “Stickers.”

4. If you don’t see your custom sticker in the “recently used” menu below, tap the sticker icon (between the 9:00 clock and smiley face icons, above the stickers but below the text box) to find it.

5. If you want to place the sticker in a reply, tap the one you want. Or, if you’re going to include it as a reaction on top of a chat bubble, hold your finger down on the sticker and drag it onto the message to which you want to react.

How to use custom stickers in Markup

You can also add stickers to photos, screenshots, PDFs, email attachments and other documents:

1. Open an image or file you want to add a sticker to. It could be through the Photos app, Files, Mail, Notes or any other app that supports Markup edits.

2. If you’re in Photos, tap “Edit,” then choose the Markup icon (upward-facing pen on the upper right). If you’re in Files or another app where you already see the icon, skip the “Edit” step and only tap the pen symbol.

3. Once you’ve opened the Markup menu, tap the + sign at the far right of the bottom toolbar (next to the color palette and pencil).

4. Tap “Add Sticker.”

5. Choose the custom sticker you just made.

6. It should appear with a blue bounding box atop the original photo or document. Drag the corners to resize, or slide your finger across the screen to move it.

7. Tap outside the bounding box to place the sticker.

8. Tap “Done” to save the changes.

For more on iOS 17, you can catch up on Engadget’s review of Apple’s 2023 iPhone operating system.

AI may or may not take people's jobs in years to come, but in the meantime, there's one thing they cannot obtain: patents. Dr. Stephen Thaler has spent years trying to get patents for two inventions created by his AI "creativity machine" DABUS. Now, the United Kingdom's Supreme Court has rejected his appeal to approve these patents when listing DABUS as the inventor, Reuters reports. 

The court's rationale stems from a provision in UK patent law that states, "an inventor must be a natural person." The ruling stipulated that the appeal was unconcerned with whether this should change in the future. "The judgment establishes that UK patent law is currently wholly unsuitable for protecting inventions generated autonomously by AI machines," Thaler's lawyers said in a statement. 

Thaler first attempt to register the patents — for a food container and a flashing light — was in 2018, as owner of the machine that invented them. However, the UK's Intellectual Property Office said he must list an actual human being on the application, and when he refused, it withdrew his application. Thaler fought the decision in the High Court and then the Court of Appeal, with Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing stating, "Only a person can have rights. A machine cannot." 

Thaler, an American, also submitted the two products to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, which rejected his application. Plus, he previously sued the US Copyright Office (USCO) for not awarding him the copyright for a piece of art DABUS created. The case reached the US District Court of Columbia, with Judge Beryl Howell's ruling explaining, "Human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright." Thaler has argued that this provision is unconstitutional, but the US Supreme Court declined to hear his case, ending any further chances to argue his stance. While the UK and US have rejected Thaler's petitions, he has succeeded in countries such as Australia and South Africa. 

The European Union says three porn sites are now subject to stricter rules under the Digital Services Act (DSA). The bloc has designated Pornhub, Stripchat and XVideos as "very large online platforms" (VLOPs) after determining that they each have an average of more than 45 million monthly users in the EU. As such, the three sites are subject to the same stringent rules as the likes of Facebook, Instagram, X and TikTok.

The European Commission (the EU's executive arm) says VLOPs have until February 17 to comply with the DSA's general requirements. Those include making it easy for users to flag illegal content, prioritizing reports from "trusted flaggers," providing a means of appeal for content moderation decisions, publishing an annual transparency report detailing content moderation processes and bolstering their systems to "ensure a high level of privacy, security and safety of minors."

The three porn sites also have four months to comply with additional obligations. For instance, they're required to have mitigation measures in place to prevent the spread of illegal content. This, according to the Commission, includes "child sexual abuse material and content affecting fundamental rights, such as the right to human dignity and private life in case of non-consensual sharing of intimate material online or deepfake pornography." The three sites must also offer researchers publicly available data and be subject to an annual external independent audit. The Commission says these measures will "empower and protect users online, including minors, and duly assess and mitigate any systemic risks stemming from their services."

The Commission says it will keep a close eye on the three porn sites to make sure they comply with the rules, "especially concerning the measures to protect minors from harmful content and to address the dissemination of illegal content."

The penalties for failing to comply with the DSA's requirements are severe. Platform holders can be fined up to six percent of their annual global revenue. The Commission may also issue penalties of up to five percent of average daily worldwide revenue for each delayed day that VLOPs fail to abide by remedies, interim measures or commitments. In extreme cases, the EC can also ask national courts to temporarily block access to a given service.

The Commission, which designated its first 19 Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines under the DSA in April, is already holding some VLOPs to account. Earlier this week, the EU opened formal infringement proceedings into X over potential violations of the DSA. Among other things, investigators are looking into whether the platform is doing enough to mitigate risks to "civic discourse and electoral processes." They're also examining the "suspected deceptive design" of features such as paid checkmarks. In October, the EU said it was looking into Meta's and TikTok's handling of the conflict between Israel and Hamas under the DSA.