Picking out something new to watch from Netflix’s slew of kid’s titles can be overwhelming, for both parents and children. And sometimes kids are just indecisive. But the streaming service’s new “Mystery Box” feature on Netflix Kids — available today — can leave the decisions up to the algorithm. Similar to the “Play Something” option for the adult set, the Mystery Box feature will pick a new title that viewers haven’t watched before. Rest assured, the new show or film that Mystery Box selects won’t be a complete wildcard pick — the titles will be similar to shows that viewers have already deemed their favorites.

In order to try out the Mystery Box, select a kid’s profile on Netflix on any platform of your choice. Then go to the “Favorites Row” on top of the homepage. Finally, hover over the “Mystery Box” option to see a selection of new titles.

When it comes to children’s programming, Netflix has more competition than ever before. Its main rival in the space — Disney+ — is planning on a $32 billion content spend for the 2022 fiscal year. Hulu, HBOMax and Apple TV+ all offer children’s programming. Netflix last year acquired some high-profile IP, including the Roald Dahl Story Company. But given its current commitment to trim costs in light of a historic drop in subscribers earlier this year, we’re likely to see Netflix be more cautious moving forward. A number of kids titles that were in production recently got the chopping block, including an animated series by Meghan Markle and Ava DuVernay’s Wings of Fire.

Netflix will expand its accessibility features in 10 additional languages, part of an effort to accommodate users who are hearing and vision-impaired. Starting this month and through early 2023, Netflix will roll out Audio Descriptions (AD), Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (SDH) and dubbing for its entire library of original content, in languages including French, Spanish, Portuguese, German and Italian. Eventually, the streamer plans to add even more languages from the Asia-Pacific region and local European languages. The expansion will be available to all Netflix users globally and only apply to Netflix Originals. 

The streamer said its aim was to allow even more viewers to watch content that is not in their native language. “For decades, the entertainment you had access to was determined by where you lived and what language you spoke, meaning people who needed AD or SDH could not enjoy stories made outside of where they were from,” wrote Netflix’s director of accessibility Heather Dowdy in a blog post.

For those who are deaf or vision-impaired, watching a new show or film on a streaming platform means turning on assistive technologies like subtitles or audio descriptions. But such accessibility features aren’t widely available across all platforms. Advocacy groups for the deaf and blind such as the National Federation of the Blind and the National Association for the Deaf have pushed streaming services to include more accessibility features over the years. Thanks to a 2012 settlement with the NAD, Netflix makes closed captioning available for all of its content. Netflix began rolling out audio descriptions for the blind and visually impaired in 2015, with the release of the show Daredevil. But the entertainment industry has been slow to embrace the newer technology, at the expense of its vision-impaired audience.

Currently, there are over 11,000 hours of audio description available globally on Netflix, and the streaming service plans to keep adding more. Netflix is also adding new badges for subtitles and audio descriptions on iOS and the web version.

“Our ambition is to entertain the world, and by increasing our SDH and AD language availability to now cover over 40 languages we hope to give all of our members the ability to see their lives reflected on screen,” wrote Dowdy.

More than a million Illinois residents will receive a $397 settlement payment from Facebook this week, thanks to a legal battle over the platform’s since-retired photo-tagging system that used facial recognition. It’s been nearly seven years since the 2015 class-action lawsuit was first filed, which accused Facebook of breaking a state privacy law that forbids companies from collecting biometric data without informing users. The platform has since faced broad, global criticism for its use of facial recognition tech, and last year Meta halted the practice completely on Facebook and Instagram. But as Voxnotes, the company has made no promises to avoid facial recognition in future products.

Even though it was first filed in Illinois, the class-action lawsuit eventually wound up on Facebook’s home turf — at the U.S. District Court for Northern California. Nevertheless, the court repeatedly denied the platform’s many motions to dismiss the lawsuit and eventually certified the Illinois class-action. Facebook tried to appeal the case certification with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but was rejected. After Facebook initially agreed to settle the lawsuit for $550 million — which at the time was the largest payout from an online privacy class-action lawsuit — a federal judge fought back and said the amount was too small. Finally, the company last year agreed to a settlement total of $650 million.

The issue at hand was Facebook’s old photo-tagging system, which relied on facial recognition to recognize users in photos and videos. Attorneys representing Illinois residents argued that the platform’s “Suggested Tags” feature violated the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act. Any Facebook user in Illinois who posted a photo of themselves or was tagged on the platform during a certain time period was eligible to file a claim. Nearly 1.6 million Illinois residents in total were included in the settlement.

A number of Redditors reported receiving their settlement checks via direct deposit or in the mail this week, though not everyone has received their payment yet. “I did mine and my wife’s at the same time and got one yesterday and the other today. This was through Zelle,” noted one user on Reddit.

Some who opted to receive a check in the mail were a little thrown off by its non-descript appearance. “Honestly I almost threw mine away. It was sent in a brown envelope made of recycled paper. Felt just like a paper bag. I thought for sure it was junk mail,” said a user on Reddit.

Grubhub’s offer of free lunch to anyone in the New York City metro area today led to sheer chaos. Many were unable to access the promotional deal — which was scheduled to run from 11 am to 2 pm ET this afternoon — when both the website and app started to crash, according to tweets from many frustrated users. A large number of restaurants were overwhelmed with orders from hungry customers, prompting them to pause taking on new orders or “close” for the day. Although Grubhub’s “free lunch” promo was actually just a deep discount (the offer was good for $15, and customers were responsible for additional taxes, tip and delivery fee), turns out few people will turn down the offer of a cheap meal, especially in one of the world’s most expensive cities. While access to the website and app was eventually restored, a number of customers still complained about delayed or canceled orders.

At its peak, Grubhub said its platform was receiving 6,000 orders per minute. “The initial demand temporarily overwhelmed our app, causing some diners to experience an error message when they used their promo code. However, this was quickly rectified, and along with our restaurant and driver partners, we were able to successfully fulfill more than 400,000 lunch orders connected to the promotion,” a spokesperson for Grubhub told Engadget. 

But workers and restaurant owners faced worse problems than merely going hungry on their lunch breaks. Buzzfeedspoke to several Grubhub delivery people and restaurant owners and workers, all who recounted a harrowing, stressful day filled with non-stop orders. Many workers and restaurants told various outlets that they weren’t informed about the promo in advance.

“We really got slammed by it today,” Ching, a worker from Greenberg’s Bagels told Buzzfeed. “It was just non-stop all day.”

Grubhub denied claims that it didn't inform restaurants of the promo beforehand. "Grubhub isn’t just a delivery logistics app, we are a marketplace for restaurants. And as we do with any promotions, we notify our entire restaurant network in advance via multiple points of communication," a Grubhub spokesperson told Engadget in a statement. 

Despite the advance warning, it's clear many restaurants were unprepared for the barrage of orders and the extra strain on staff and food supply that such an offer incurred. 

Netflix terminated the roles of 150 mostly US-based staff today in an ongoing effort to cut costs following a historic drop in subscribers, reportedDeadline. The impacted employees reportedly include a number in senior-level positions. It’s the second round of layoffs at the company— which numbers roughly 11,000 employees — in recent weeks. An undisclosed number of writing and editing staff attached to Netflix's in-house fan website, Tudum, were let go last month.

A company spokesperson said the layoffs were directly tied to a slowdown in Netflix’s revenue growth. “As we explained on earnings, our slowing revenue growth means we are also having to slow our cost growth as a company. So sadly, we are letting around 150 employees go today, mostly US-based,” a Netflix spokesperson said in a statement to Engadget. “These changes are primarily driven by business needs rather than individual performance, which makes them especially tough as none of us want to say goodbye to such great colleagues. We’re working hard to support them through this very difficult transition.”

Varietyreported today that the streaming service has also cut a number of in-development animated projects, including Wings of Fire from executive producer Ava DuVernay, a preschool series called Antiracist Baby and With Kind Regards From Kindergarten. But according to Variety's sources, these projects were dropped due to creative reasons and not as an effort to cut costs. 

The streaming service also dropped the documentary Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, And You, a companion piece to Stamped From the Beginning.

Employee morale has been low at the Los Gatos, California-based company since it indicated during its last earnings call that it plans to tighten its belt, according to the Los Angeles Times. The company also updated its cultural memo this month to warn prospective employees that the streaming services “may not be the best place” for those who cannot work on content they disagree with.

“As employees we support the principle that Netflix offers a diversity of stories, even if we find some titles counter to our own personal values. Depending on your role, you may need to work on titles you perceive to be harmful. If you’d find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you,” reads the culture guidelines.

Netflix reported it lost subscribers in the first quarter of 2022, which it chalked up to a rise in password sharing, increased competition from other streaming platforms and dropping its entire subscriber base in Russia. The streaming service is exploring adding a lower-priced, ad-supported tier as well as cutting a number of projects that were in development. The company anticipates losing another 2 million subscribers in the second quarter of 2022.

Billionaire Elon Musk is continuing to clash with Twitter over the accuracy of its bot count, and hinted today that he may try to renegotiate the $44 billion deal. Musk told attendees at a Miami conference that a deal at a lower price wasn’t “out of the question," reportedBloomberg. Musk's potential bid for a lower price is an unexpected twist, given that the SpaceX exec agreed to pay a 38 percent premium on Twitter when he reached a deal with the company's board back in April.

“Currently what I’m being told is that there’s just no way to know the number of bots,” Musk said at the conference. “It’s like, as unknowable as the human soul."

Musk's potential bid for a lower price is an unexpected twist, given that the SpaceX exec agreed to pay a 38 percent premium on Twitter when he reached a deal with the company's board back in April. 

Last Friday, Musk had announced that a buyout of Twitter was “temporarily on hold” due to concerns that the number of bots on the platform was much higher than the company estimated. The billionaire tweeted that his team would do an independent analysis on bot count and also tried to crowdsource bot estimates from his own followers. Musk was later reprimanded by Twitter’s legal team for revealing — in a tweet, of course — the company's methodology for estimating the proportion of bot accounts across the platform.

Earlier today, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal explained in a series of tweets that external estimates of bots are likely wrong, since the platform includes private data in its count.

“Unfortunately, we don’t believe that this specific estimation can be performed externally, given the critical need to use both public and private information (which we can’t share),” tweeted Agrawal.

Musk responded to Agrawal’s explanation with a series of his own tweets, one that included a single poop emoji. Musk also suggested that Twitter verify whether users are human or not by calling them on the phone.

Tesla expert Dan Ives — an analyst at financial advisory firm Wedbush Securities — put the chances of Musk going through with the deal at under 50 percent. If Musk chooses to walk away, he’ll be subject to a $1 billion “kill fee”. But according to legal experts who spoke to The Washington Post, Twitter could sue Musk for the financial damages inflicted on the company due to the hasty reversal of the deal.

Americans are mixed about whether the government should do more to hold tech companies accountable, and fewer are in favor of more regulation than they were last year, according to results released today from a Pew survey. Last year, more than half (56 percent) of Americans wanted more regulation of Big Tech. Now, only 44 percent of Americans want to see more government enforcement of tech companies. And the number of respondents who want less government regulation of the tech industry has doubled this year, from nine percent to 20 percent.

But those results shouldn’t suggest that the public has a rosier view of Big Tech or trusts that tech companies are getting it right. The majority of respondents still feel — as they have in years past — that platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and others censor political points that the companies find objectionable. More than three-quarters (or 77 percent) of Americans believe that social media platforms behave this way in 2022, which is only a slight increase from recent years. 

As we’ve seen in the past, more Republicans than Democrats feel certain political views are targeted on social media — 92 percent of Republicans say censoring is likely occurring, compared to 66 percent of Democrats. And over recent years, the belief that social platforms possess and act on biases against conservatives has become such a frequent talking point amount right-wing lawmakers that the Senate held hearings on that very subject during the Trump presidency. According to a Politico analysis however, posts from conservative media outlets and right-wing media influences are more likely to go viral. Similarly, a New York University study found that social media platform algorithms are more likely to amplify conservatives than non-partisan or liberal figures. But even among left-wing respondents, the belief in political censorship among platforms has steadily increased in the last two years, according to Pew's polling. While not as drastic as their Republican counterparts, a plurality Democrats (66 percent) maintain a belief that platforms censor based on political beliefs, up from 62 percent in 2018, and only 59 percent in 2020.

Spotify has promoted The Ringer’s Bill Simmons to a new role as head of global sports strategy, reported Deadline. Simmons has worked under the streaming service’s umbrella since it bought his sports and culture podcast network The Ringer back in 2020. In his new role, we’ll likely see Simmons expand upon the current lineup of NBA, MLB and NFL-focused podcasts and dive into international territory. We’ve already gotten a hint of that with shows like The Rugby Pod with Andy Goode, Big Jim Hamilton and host Andy Rowe.

Spotify’s non-US audience is getting larger — the service is currently available in 178 countries. Its number of subscribers actually grew by 2 million in the first quarter of 2022 (despite losing all of its Russian subscribers), which it pinned on "outperformance in Latin America and Europe". Last year, the streaming service expanded to 86 new countries, with the goal of eventually streaming to over 1 billion users. Earlier this year, Spotify announced it was going to become the main partner of FC Barcelona, as well as its official audio streaming partner. Given the fact that no global sports coverage would be complete without soccer, we’re likely to see even more from this space. There’s no doubt an appetite amongst Spotify’s global audience for shows focused on the Premier League, FIFA and the World Cup, as well as other international sports topics.

The promotion of Simmons is a part of a broader shake-up in Spotify’s exec structure. Parcast founder Max Cutler will become Spotify’s head of creator content and partnerships, overseeing originals and heading an entirely new division of “creator-focused” content. Julie McNamara will oversee studio partnerships and Hollywood-produced works.

In Spotify’s latest earnings call, it announced it reached a record 422 million global monthly active users. But despite its strong growth, the initial concerns that Spotify may have bitten off more than it can chew with its $1 billion investment in podcasts hasn’t faded. While podcast listening hours skyrocketed during the pandemic, there’s no guarantee that Spotify will be able to hold on to that momentum in the future. 

Fans of Alan Wake aren’t getting an update on the sequel this summer — but can look forward to a new TV series and a remastered version of the original game for the Switch. Remedy Entertainment’s creative director Sam Lake today revealed what’s in store for the franchise during the game’s 12th-anniversary celebration video. Switch owners can anticipate Alan Wake Remastered to be available on Nintendo’s eShop sometime this fall. The remastered original title is already available on the PS5, Xbox and PC.

The original 2010 Alan Wake game — which features a thriller novelist who tries to solve the mystery of his wife’s disappearance — has become a cult classic in recent years. Remedy and Microsoft Studios then released Alan Wake's American Nightmare in 2012. Since then, the franchise has mostly been dormant, but that’s about to change.

Lake revealed that AMC bought the rights to the Alan Wake franchise and will be adapting it into a TV series. “We have been collaborating on making a TV show happen. Nothing more to share at the moment, but we will certainly let you know when there is something to announce,” said Lake.

Alan Wake 2, which many expected to preview this summer, is currently deep in the development stages. Unfortunately, Lake confirmed that the studio won’t be releasing any further updates on the game. It did release a number of stills from the upcoming sequel. As we’ve known for a while, the game is slated to arrive in 2023 for PS5 and other platforms.

“Everything [with Alan Wake 2] is going really well, and a great deal of the game is playable,” Lake said. “But we’ve been talking for the past couple of months and have come to a decision that we will not be showing anything big this summer,” said Lake.

Alan Wake devotees should watch the anniversary video in full, which also includes interesting behind-the-scene details about the remastered original and upcoming sequel. You can watch it below:

OpenSea is putting in place a new system to spot NFT fakes and verify accounts, in an effort to cut down on the industry’s growing fraud problem. In a couple of blog posts, the NFT marketplace detailed what changes users can expect, including opening up verification to more users, automated and human-assisted removal of so-called “copymints” or fake copies of authentic NFTs and changes to how collection badges — which identify NFT collections with high sales volume or interest — are doled out on the marketplace.

First off, OpenSea will use a two-part system to detect fakes that combine both image recognition tech and human reviewers. The company says its new system will continuously scan all NFT collections (including newly minted assets) to spot any potential fakes. Human reviewers will vet any removal recommendations.

“Our new copymint prevention system leverages computer-vision tech to scan all NFTs on OpenSea (including new mints). The system then matches these scans against a set of authentic collections, starting with some of the most copy-minted collections — we’ll look for flips, rotations & other permutations,” wrote OpenSea’s Anne Fauvre-Willis in the post. The company says it has already spotted some fakes with its copymint detection system and plans to scale up the technology in the weeks to follow.

The company has also made some updates to its verification and badging system. OpenSea will open up account verification to any creator who holds at least 100 ETH of collection volume, which currently is equivalent to roughly $205,000 USD. This essentially means sellers will have to already own a significant collection of NFTs to be verified by OpenSea. The marketplace stated that it plans to broaden the eligibility criteria for verification as it continues to learn more. NFT collections will also get a collection badge if they’ve generated more than 100 ETH in trading volume. OpenSea will also require a profile name, username, verified email address and a connected Twitter account for account verification. 

All these changes will likely create a number of obstacles for NFT scam artists. Scammers have grown increasingly sophisticated in their tactics — some going as far as to create fake Discord servers and websites or pose as actual employees of NFT companies. Verifying the real-life identity of sellers is a long-standing problem in the world of NFTs, where anonymity is a key part of the culture. NFT artists normally go by aliases instead of their real names, and the same goes for NFT buyers. Unfortunately, it's a culture that has allowed NFT thieves and copycat artists to thrive.