• Police seek suspects in deadly birthday party shooting
  • Lawmakers launch inquires into U.S. boat strike
  • Nov. 29, 2025, 10:07 PM EST / Updated Nov. 30, 2025,…
  • Mark Kelly says troops ‘can tell’ what orders…

Be that!

contact@bethat.ne.com

 

Be That ! Menu   ≡ ╳
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics Politics
☰

Be that!

Cardi B teams up with DoorDash for her new album

admin - Latest News - September 21, 2025
admin
41 views 2 mins 0 Comments


IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

  • Impromptu wedding for bride’s terminally ill father

    00:48

  • Armed man arrested at stadium ahead of Kirk memorial

    00:40

  • D.C. resident removes alligator from Washington Channel

    01:18

  • Arrest made after shots fired at ABC-affiliate station

    00:34

  • Investigators believe remains of Travis Decker found

    00:32

  • CDC panel votes to limit who is eligible Covid vaccine

    01:13

  • The fight to be the fastest wiener dog in Cincinnati

    00:32

  • ‘Plant bandit’ targets Bay Area neighborhood

    00:22

  • Now Playing

    Cardi B teams up with DoorDash for her new album

    00:26

  • UP NEXT

    Former Trump lawyer compares Trump to Putin

    01:16

  • Tear gas used on protesters outside Illinois ICE site

    00:46

  • Here’s the Scoop: U.S., China and TikTok

    01:49

  • Gov. Shapiro says Trump is silencing opposing views

    02:07

  • ‘Love Is Blind’ alum sues Netflix, show producers

    00:56

  • Rescuers save a moose trapped in an open Maine well

    00:19

  • Songwriter Brett James dead at 57

    00:45

  • AOC reminds House of ‘who Charlie Kirk was’

    01:38

  • Autopsy says student found hanging died by suicide

    00:18

  • CDC advisory panel postpones hepatitis B vaccine vote

    00:30

  • Trump and China’s Xi talk TikTok deal in call

    00:30

Cardi B teams up with DoorDash for her new albumSept. 19, 2025

  • UP NEXT

    Impromptu wedding for bride’s terminally ill father

    00:48

  • Armed man arrested at stadium ahead of Kirk memorial

    00:40

  • D.C. resident removes alligator from Washington Channel

    01:18

  • Arrest made after shots fired at ABC-affiliate station

    00:34

  • Investigators believe remains of Travis Decker found

    00:32

  • CDC panel votes to limit who is eligible Covid vaccine

    01:13



Source link

TAGS:
PREVIOUS
Trump administration raises fee for H-1B visas to $100,000 
NEXT
Former Trump lawyer compares Trump to Putin
Related Post
November 30, 2025
Nov. 30, 2025, 6:00 AM ESTBy David CoxIn early 2023, Liana Shatova began taking low doses of an antidepressant to ease symptoms of a premenstrual disorder marked by mood swings, anxiety and depression. At first, the difference was remarkable for her. “I felt full of energy and could juggle multiple things at once,” said Shatova, 40, a business development manager from the Greater Boston area. Then, after around 18 months on the medication, she started to fear she was becoming emotionally numb.“My best friend’s mom died unexpectedly, everyone was in shock and sobbing, and I couldn’t cry at all,” said Shatova. “I just felt nothing.” When Shatova asked her doctor if she could stop taking the medication sertraline, an antidepressant better known by its brand name Zoloft, she said she was reassured that she was on the lowest prescribed dose and that coming off it wouldn’t be difficult.Initially all seemed well, but after a month, Shatova said she experienced her first bout of what would become chronic insomnia, followed by panic attacks. Other symptoms emerged, including night sweats, muscle and joint pain and mood swings that left her unable to work. She said her doctor told her that the symptoms were a relapse of her premenstrual dysphoric disorder, and suggested a different antidepressant. Shatova declined the new drug.Antidepressants, primarily SSRIs, or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, are some of the most widely prescribed medications in the United States, taken by tens of millions of adults. About twice as many women as men report using an antidepressant in the past 30 days, with antidepressant use highest among women aged 60 and older, according to government data.Side effects are a key reason people choose to go off their medication, but stopping the drugs can also lead to withdrawal symptoms, research indicates. Along with the growing awareness, a deprescribing movement is building up in the field of psychiatry, aimed at helping patients reduce or stop their medications when no longer considered necessary. In a recent large analysis published in The Lancet in November, researchers at King’s College London found that physical side effects, including quick weight gain, significantly increased heart rate or elevated blood pressure, may be more common than once thought, depending on the drug. The review analyzed results from 151 clinical trials and 17 reports from the Food and Drug Administration, involving about 30 different prescription drugs used to treat depression, anxiety, and bipolar and panic disorders. The researchers examined the effects of antidepressants on weight, blood glucose, total cholesterol, blood pressure and heart rate. They didn’t look at emotional changes experienced by patients such as Shatova, although the lead study author said it should be examined further in future studies. “Not all antidepressants are built the same when it comes to their physical health side effects,” said Dr. Toby Pillinger, an academic clinical lecturer at King’s College London, who led the study. “Up until recently, we’ve approached antidepressant prescribing with a one-size-fits-all policy, and I think we need to move away from that.”Separately, in August, psychiatry researchers in the U.K. found that serious withdrawal effects may be more common than previously suspected, especially with longer-term use, although the study was small with just 18% of participants responding to the survey. The results showed that among people who had been taking antidepressants for more than two years, 63% reported moderate or severe withdrawal effects, with a third describing withdrawal issues that lasted more than three months. Symptoms ranged from insomnia to confusion, electric sensations, muscle cramps, agitation, mood swings and derealisation or an alteration in the person’s perception of the world. Dr. Mark Horowitz, a clinical research fellow at University College London who led the withdrawal study, said other research has found that roughly a quarter of patients experience severe symptoms when they abruptly stop taking their medications, from burning pain in the skin or limbs, balance problems, ongoing panic attacks, and sound and light sensitivity. Abrupt cessation of antidepressants is not recommended, but research has found that withdrawal symptoms can occur even when people attempt to taper. A review of various existing studies published last year by a group of German psychiatrists concluded that as many as 1 in 3 antidepressant users will experience some kind of withdrawal symptoms, with severe symptoms occurring in 1 in 30 users. Dr. Joseph Goldberg, clinical professor of psychiatry at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, said that antidepressants have long been known to cause “discontinuation symptoms,” mainly nausea and dizziness, particularly if stopped abruptly.It’s unclear why some patients have severe symptoms after stopping their medications. Some researchers, concerned by reports of antidepressant withdrawal, suggest that the underlying mechanisms are similar to those faced by people suffering from alcohol and opiate withdrawal. “Withdrawal symptoms tell you that your brain is trying to restore a balance that it was forced to change by the presence of a drug,” said David Cohen, professor of social welfare at the University of California Los Angeles. “I think it’s the best accepted explanation for why stopping any centrally active drug, whether its antidepressants, coffee or heroin, leads to some discomfort.”The challenge for psychiatrists is that the drugs, which are often prescribed along with therapy, do help many people, particularly in the short term. Dr. Jonathan Alpert, a psychiatry professor at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, said that anecdotes of extreme withdrawal do not reflect his own professional experience. In his practice, Alpert estimated that two-thirds of his patients have been on antidepressants for more than five years, and only a small handful had experienced protracted withdrawal symptoms lasting more than a few days.“There’s been this very inflated idea that it’s really difficult to come off psychiatric medications,” said Alpert. “Even though I respect people’s narratives of their own experience, it feels very different from what we see in clinical practice and research studies.”Goldberg also expressed skepticism as to whether antidepressants themselves are actually responsible for the symptoms being reported by patients. “If somebody, after years of treatment, develops some frankly rather peculiar and unexpected neurological problems, I’m not sure how confident one can attribute that to medicine,” he said. “Anything is possible. But I think we have to consider the more likely possibility that the thing they’re encountering may be unrelated.” More than a year after Shatova first attempted to taper off the medication, she said she’s still undergoing a painstaking process of tiny, gradual reductions to try to avoid exacerbating her symptoms. “I am still tapering and now at 0.835 mg of Zoloft, doing it very slowly and carefully,” she said. “My sleep has gotten better, but I still have windows and waves triggered by life stresses and hormonal fluctuations.” It’s important not to dismiss people’s experiences, Goldberg said, and anyone going through symptoms should undergo further testing. A past president of American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology, Goldberg said that the organization is now completing new guidelines on deprescribing. The goal is to help doctors explain what to expect when stopping psychiatric medications so patients don’t self-taper without medical supervision.Alpert suggested analyzing different types of data stored in electronic health records to get insight into the characteristics of patients who have prolonged withdrawal symptoms. “Do they have abnormal MRIs or blood tests with inflammatory markers? Through looking at large datasets, it will be more possible to identify predictors of this subset of people who seem to have unusually prolonged symptoms.”Cohen feels that the field of psychiatry needs to speed up research. However, in the wake of the 43% cut to the National Institutes of Health annual budget proposed to Congress by the current administration, a figure which is equivalent to $20 billion per year, it is likely that such studies would need to be carried out by either U.K. or European researchers. “We need large, nonindustry funded trials to examine what happens when people stop antidepressants, using various tapering strategies and long enough follow-up,” Cohen said. “We need dozens of such trials now.”If you or someone you know is in crisis, call or text 988, or go to 988lifeline.org, to reach the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. You can also call the network, previously known as the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, at 800-273-8255, or visit SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources.David CoxDavid Cox is a freelance journalist focusing on all aspects of health, from fitness and nutrition to infectious diseases and future medicines. Prior to becoming a full-time journalist, he was a neuroscientist attempting to understand how and why the brain goes wrong.
November 8, 2025
Nov. 7, 2025, 4:49 PM EST / Updated Nov. 7, 2025, 6:01 PM ESTBy Corky SiemaszkoFlying anywhere for the Thanksgiving holiday is likely to be tortuous for legions of travelers — even if the government shutdown ends today, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy warned on Friday.Hundreds of flights during one of the busiest travel weeks of the year could be affected by staffing shortages of air traffic controllers. The shortages have been exacerbated by the shutdown, prompting the Federal Aviation Administration to implement unprecedented flight reductions.Follow live coverage here. And those staff shortages — at least for now — appear to be set in stone for Thanksgiving, Duffy said.’It’s been awful’: Passengers experience rough travels amid FAA flight disruptions03:36″So if the government opens on day one, will I see an immediate response from controllers? No, the union is telling me it’s going to take time to get them all back in,” Duffy told CNN on Friday when asked if the flight reductions would spill into the holiday. “I don’t wish this was the circumstance in which I was dealing with,” he said. “So I imagine, as we see the data change and more controllers come to work, we are as quickly as possible going to take these restrictions away.”The FAA announced it would begin cutting the number of flights in the “high traffic” parts of the country while the government shutdown grinds on and local airports contend with the staffing shortages.The flight reductions went into effect Friday, on Day 38 of the federal government shutdown, now the longest such shutdown in U.S. history.The FAA is requiring 4% of flights in and out of 40 of the nation’s busiest airport to be cut and that percentage will gradually increase to 10% by next Friday.Duffy, in an interview Friday with Fox News, also raised the possibility of reducing up to 20% of flights at some airports. “I don’t want to see that,” he said. The airports facing reductions include Chicago O’Hare, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Miami International Airport and all three New York-area airports.FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said Thursday the move to reduce the number of flights was sparked by “fatigue” plaguing air traffic controllers, who have been working without pay since the start of the shutdown.Bedford said airports across the country were already contending with staffing shortages before most government operations ground to a halt.Air traffic controllers are considered essential workers and are not allowed to walk off their jobs. But they’re also exhausted, said Nick Daniels, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.“It’s unprecedented to go through two full paychecks, 37 days, and receive no compensation,” he said Thursday. “So it’s not a matter of calling in sick. They’re calling their employer and saying, ‘I don’t have gas. I have not received pay in 37 days. What do you want me to do?’”Patrick Penfield, a Syracuse University professor of supply chain practice, said cutting flights could also make it harder for retailers to replenish their stocks of “hot” items for the holiday season.”Forty percent to 50% of all air freight is shipped in the belly of passenger planes,” Penfield said. “If you eliminate 10% of airline capacity, air freight prices will rise, and we could see delays in getting materials via air.”Corky SiemaszkoCorky Siemaszko is a senior reporter for NBC News Digital.Jay Blackman contributed.
November 6, 2025
Tesla shareholders approve $1 trillion pay package for Elon Musk
November 18, 2025
Savewith a NBCUniversal ProfileCreate your free profile or log in to save this articleNov. 18, 2025, 5:00 AM ESTBy Jared PerloJudge Victoria Kolakowski sensed something was wrong with Exhibit 6C.Submitted by the plaintiffs in a California housing dispute, the video showed a witness whose voice was disjointed and monotone, her face fuzzy and lacking emotion. Every few seconds, the witness would twitch and repeat her expressions.Kolakowski, who serves on California’s Alameda County Superior Court, soon realized why: The video had been produced using generative artificial intelligence. Though the video claimed to feature a real witness — who had appeared in another, authentic piece of evidence — Exhibit 6C was an AI “deepfake,” Kolakowski said.The case, Mendones v. Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., appears to be one of the first instances in which a suspected deepfake was submitted as purportedly authentic evidence in court and detected — a sign, judges and legal experts said, of a much larger threat. Citing the plaintiffs’ use of AI-generated material masquerading as real evidence, Kolakowski dismissed the case on Sept. 9. The plaintiffs sought reconsideration of her decision, arguing the judge suspected but failed to prove that the evidence was AI-generated. Judge Kolakowski denied their request for reconsideration on Nov. 6. The plaintiffs did not respond to a request for comment.With the rise of powerful AI tools, AI-generated content is increasingly finding its way into courts, and some judges are worried that hyperrealistic fake evidence will soon flood their courtrooms and threaten their fact-finding mission. NBC News spoke to five judges and 10 legal experts who warned that the rapid advances in generative AI — now capable of producing convincing fake videos, images, documents and audio — could erode the foundation of trust upon which courtrooms stand. Some judges are trying to raise awareness and calling for action around the issue, but the process is just beginning.“The judiciary in general is aware that big changes are happening and want to understand AI, but I don’t think anybody has figured out the full implications,” Kolakowski told NBC News. “We’re still dealing with a technology in its infancy.”Prior to the Mendones case, courts have repeatedly dealt with a phenomenon billed as the “Liar’s Dividend,” — when plaintiffs and defendants invoke the possibility of generative AI involvement to cast doubt on actual, authentic evidence. But in the Mendones case, the court found the plaintiffs attempted the opposite: to falsely admit AI-generated video as genuine evidence. Judge Stoney Hiljus, who serves in Minnesota’s 10th Judicial District and is chair of the Minnesota Judicial Branch’s AI Response Committee, said the case brings to the fore a growing concern among judges. “I think there are a lot of judges in fear that they’re going to make a decision based on something that’s not real, something AI-generated, and it’s going to have real impacts on someone’s life,” he said.Many judges across the country agree, even those who advocate for the use of AI in court. Judge Scott Schlegel serves on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana and is a leading advocate for judicial adoption of AI technology, but he also worries about the risks generative AI poses to the pursuit of truth. “My wife and I have been together for over 30 years, and she has my voice everywhere,” Schlegel said. “She could easily clone my voice on free or inexpensive software to create a threatening message that sounds like it’s from me and walk into any courthouse around the country with that recording.”“The judge will sign that restraining order. They will sign every single time,” said Schlegel, referring to the hypothetical recording. “So you lose your cat, dog, guns, house, you lose everything.”Judge Erica Yew, a member of California’s Santa Clara County Superior Court since 2001, is passionate about AI’s use in the court system and its potential to increase access to justice. Yet she also acknowledged that forged audio could easily lead to a protective order and advocated for more centralized tracking of such incidents. “I am not aware of any repository where courts can report or memorialize their encounters with deep-faked evidence,” Yew told NBC News. “I think AI-generated fake or modified evidence is happening much more frequently than is reported publicly.”Yew said she is concerned that deepfakes could corrupt other, long-trusted methods of obtaining evidence in court. With AI, “someone could easily generate a false record of title and go to the county clerk’s office,” for example, to establish ownership of a car. But the county clerk likely will not have the expertise or time to check the ownership document for authenticity, Yew said, and will instead just enter the document into the official record.“Now a litigant can go get a copy of the document and bring it to court, and a judge will likely admit it. So now do I, as a judge, have to question a source of evidence that has traditionally been reliable?” Yew wondered. Though fraudulent evidence has long been an issue for the courts, Yew said AI could cause an unprecedented expansion of realistic, falsified evidence. “We’re in a whole new frontier,” Yew said.Santa, Calif., Clara County Superior Court Judge Erica Yew.Courtesy of Erica YewSchlegel and Yew are among a small group of judges leading efforts to address the emerging threat of deepfakes in court. They are joined by a consortium of the National Center for State Courts and the Thomson Reuters Institute, which has created resources for judges to address the growing deepfake quandary. The consortium labels deepfakes as “unacknowledged AI evidence” to distinguish these creations from “acknowledged AI evidence” like AI-generated accident reconstruction videos, which are recognized by all parties as AI-generated.Earlier this year, the consortium published a cheat sheet to help judges deal with deepfakes. The document advises judges to ask those providing potentially AI-generated evidence to explain its origin, reveal who had access to the evidence, share whether the evidence had been altered in any way and look for corroborating evidence. In April 2024, a Washington state judge denied a defendant’s efforts to use an AI tool to clarify a video that had been submitted. Beyond this cadre of advocates, judges around the country are starting to take note of AI’s impact on their work, according to Hiljus, the Minnesota judge.“Judges are starting to consider, is this evidence authentic? Has it been modified? Is it just plain old fake? We’ve learned over the last several months, especially with OpenAI’s Sora coming out, that it’s not very difficult to make a really realistic video of someone doing something they never did,” Hiljus said. “I hear from judges who are really concerned about it and who think that they might be seeing AI-generated evidence but don’t know quite how to approach the issue.” Hiljus is currently surveying state judges in Minnesota to better understand how generative AI is showing up in their courtrooms. To address the rise of deepfakes, several judges and legal experts are advocating for changes to judicial rules and guidelines on how attorneys verify their evidence. By law and in concert with the Supreme Court, the U.S. Congress establishes the rules for how evidence is used in lower courts.One proposal crafted by Maura R. Grossman, a research professor of computer science at the University of Waterloo and a practicing lawyer, and Paul Grimm, a professor at Duke Law School and former federal district judge, would require parties alleging that the opposition used deepfakes to thoroughly substantiate their arguments. Another proposal would transfer the duty of deepfake identification from impressionable juries to judges. The proposals were considered by the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules when it conferred in May, but they were not approved. Members argued “existing standards of authenticity are up to the task of regulating AI evidence.” The U.S. Judicial Conference is a voting body of 26 federal judges, overseen by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. After a committee recommends a change to judicial rules, the conference votes on the proposal, which is then reviewed by the Supreme Court and voted upon by Congress.Despite opting not to move the rule change forward for now, the committee was eager to keep a deepfake evidence rule “in the bullpen in case the Committee decides to move forward with an AI amendment in the future,” according to committee notes. Grimm was pessimistic about this decision given how quickly the AI ecosystem is evolving. By his accounting, it takes a minimum of three years for a new federal rule on evidence to be adopted.The Trump administration’s AI Action Plan, released in July as the administration’s road map for American AI efforts, highlights the need to “combat synthetic media in the court system” and advocates for exploring deepfake-specific standards similar to the proposed evidence rule changes. Yet other law practitioners think a cautionary approach is wisest, waiting to see how often deepfakes are really passed off as evidence in court and how judges react before moving to update overarching rules of evidence. Jonathan Mayer, the former chief science and technology adviser and chief AI officer at the U.S. Justice Department under President Joe Biden and now a professor at Princeton University, told NBC News he routinely encountered the issue of AI in the court system: “A recurring question was whether effectively addressing AI abuses would require new law, including new statutory authorities or court rules.”“We generally concluded that existing law was sufficient,” he said. However, “the impact of AI could change — and it could change quickly — so we also thought through and prepared for possible scenarios.”In the meantime, attorneys may become the first line of defense against deepfakes invading U.S. courtrooms. Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal Judge Scott Schlegel.Courtesy of Scott SchlegelJudge Schlegel pointed to Louisiana’s Act 250, passed earlier this year, as a successful and effective way to change norms about deepfakes at the state level. The act mandates that attorneys exercise “reasonable diligence” to determine if evidence they or their clients submit has been generated by AI. “The courts can’t do it all by themselves,” Schlegel said. “When your client walks in the door and hands you 10 photographs, you should ask them questions. Where did you get these photographs? Did you take them on your phone or a camera?”“If it doesn’t smell right, you need to do a deeper dive before you offer that evidence into court. And if you don’t, then you’re violating your duties as an officer of the court,” he said.Daniel Garrie, co-founder of cybersecurity and digital forensics company Law & Forensics, said that human expertise will have to continue to supplement digital-only efforts. “No tool is perfect, and frequently additional facts become relevant,” Garrie wrote via email. “For example, it may be impossible for a person to have been at a certain location if GPS data shows them elsewhere at the time a photo was purportedly taken.”Metadata — or the invisible descriptive data attached to files that describe facts like the file’s origin, date of creation and date of modification — could be a key defense against deepfakes in the near future. For example, in the Mendones case, the court found the metadata of one of the purportedly-real-but-deepfaked videos showed that the plaintiffs’ video was captured on an iPhone 6, which was impossible given that the plaintiff’s argument required capabilities only available on an iPhone 15 or newer. Courts could also mandate that video- and audio-recording hardware include robust mathematical signatures attesting to the provenance and authenticity of their outputs, allowing courts to verify that content was recorded by actual cameras. Such technological solutions may still run into critical stumbling blocks similar to those that plagued prior legal efforts to adapt to new technologies, like DNA testing or even fingerprint analysis. Parties lacking the latest technical AI and deepfake know-how may face a disadvantage in proving evidence’s origin.Grossman, the University of Waterloo professor, said that for now, judges need to keep their guard up.“Anybody with a device and internet connection can take 10 or 15 seconds of your voice and have a convincing enough tape to call your bank and withdraw money. Generative AI has democratized fraud.”“We’re really moving into a new paradigm,” Grossman said. “Instead of trust but verify, we should be saying: Don’t trust and verify.”Jared PerloJared Perlo is a writer and reporter at NBC News covering AI. He is currently supported by the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism.
Comments are closed.
Scroll To Top
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics
© Copyright 2025 - Be That ! . All Rights Reserved