Beginning April 4th at 3PM ET, users will “no longer be able to use your Claude subscription limits for third-party harnesses including OpenClaw,” according to an email sent to users on Friday evening. Instead, if users want to use OpenClaw with Claude, they’ll have to use a “pay-as-you-go option” that will be billed separate from their Claude subscription.

The technical reality, according to Anthropic, is that its first-party tools like Claude Code, its AI vibe coding harness, and Claude Cowork, its business app interfacing and control tool, are built to maximize “prompt cache hit rates” — reusing previously processed text to save on compute. Third-party harnesses like OpenClaw often bypass these efficiencies… [Claude Code creator Boris Cherny explained on X that “I did put up a few PRs to improve prompt cache hit rate for OpenClaw in particular, which should help for folks using it with Claude via API/overages.”] Growth marketer Aakash Gupta observed on X that the “all-you-can-eat buffet just closed,” noting that a single OpenClaw agent running for one day could burn $1,000 to $5,000 in API costs. “Anthropic was eating that difference on every user who routed through a third-party harness,” Gupta wrote. “That’s the pace of a company watching its margin evaporate in real time.”

However, Peter Steinberger, the creator of OpenClaw who was recently hired by OpenAI, took a more skeptical view of the “capacity” argument.“Funny how timings match up,” Steinberger posted on X. “First they copy some popular features into their closed harness, then they lock out open source.” Indeed, Anthropic recently added some of the same capabilities that helped OpenClaw catch-on — such as the ability to message agents through external services like Discord and Telegram — to Claude Code…

User @ashen_one, founder of Telaga Charity, voiced a concern likely shared by other small-scale builders: “If I switch both [OpenClaw instances] to an API key or the extra usage you’re recommending here, it’s going to be far too expensive to make it worth using. I’ll probably have to switch over to a different model at this point.”

“I know it sucks,” Cherny replied. “Fundamentally engineering is about tradeoffs, and one of the things we do to serve a lot of customers is optimize the way subscriptions work to serve as many people as possible with the best mode…” OpenAI appears to be positioning itself as a more “harness-friendly” alternative, potentially using this moment as a customer acquisition channel for disgruntled Claude power users.

By restricting subscription limits to their own “closed harness,” Anthropic is asserting control over the UI/UX layer. This allows them to collect telemetry and manage rate limits more granularly, but it risks alienating the power-user community that built the “agentic” ecosystem in the first place. Anthropic’s decision is a cold calculation of margins versus growth. As Cherny noted, “Capacity is a resource we manage thoughtfully.” In the 2026 AI landscape, the era of subsidized, unlimited compute for third-party automation is over. For the average user on Claude.ai, the experience remains unchanged; for the power users running autonomous offices, the bell has tolled.

Maybe it’s because AMD stock sits around $196 while Intel hovers near $41, or perhaps it’s the poetic justice of the underdog finally eating the giant. The semiconductor world has witnessed stranger reversals, but none quite this dramatic. Your gaming rig’s CPU battle represents decades of corporate warfare, legal grudges, and technological leapfrogging that makes Game of Thrones look like a friendly board game.

Picture this: In 1975, AMD reverse-engineered Intel’s 8080 processor, creating the Am9080 clone. The audacity was breathtaking — AMD spent 50 cents per chip to manufacture something they sold for $700. That’s a 1,400% markup on borrowed technology, making today’s GPU prices look reasonable. This relationship evolved from copying to partnership to bitter rivalry. The companies signed second-sourcing deals in the late 1970s, with AMD becoming Intel’s official backup supplier. Then came the lawsuits. AMD sued Intel for antitrust violations in 2005, eventually settling for $1.25 billion in 2009. That settlement money helped fund the Ryzen revolution that’s currently eating Intel’s lunch. The historical irony runs deeper than your typical tech rivalry. AMD literally started as Intel’s shadow, creating chips by studying Intel’s designs under microscopes. Today, Intel engineers probably study AMD’s Zen architecture the same way…

This April Fool’s joke works because it captures something true about power shifts in technology.

The NLRB said in its ruling that Amazon “has engaged in unfair labor practices” by refusing to bargain with the labor group or to recognize its legitimacy… Amazon said on Thursday it disagreed with the NLRB’s ruling. “Representatives of the NLRB improperly influenced this election,” the company said in a statement, suggesting it planned to appeal. “We’re confident an unbiased court will overturn the original certification, and we look forward to the opportunity for our team to fairly voice their opinions.” An appeal would likely preclude Amazon from having to comply with the NLRB’s order while it makes its way through the courts…

Related to the Staten Island case, Amazon has argued that the NLRB itself is unconstitutional and sued to block the agency from ruling on it. The matter is still pending.

This includes seven of the top ten core committers of all time (excluding release engineers) currently working for Collabora Productivity. The move is the culmination of TDF losing a large number of founders from membership over the last few years with: Thorsten Behrens, Jan ‘Kendy’ Holesovsky, Rene Engelhard, Caolan McNamara, Michael Meeks, Cor Nouws and Italo Vignoli no longer members. Of the remaining active founders, three of the last four are paid TDF staff (of whom none are programming on the core code).

This gives a chance to innovate faster in a separate place on a smaller, more focused code-base with fewer build configurations, much less legacy, no Java, no database, web-based toolkit and more. We are excited to get executing on that.

To make this process easier, and to put to bed complaints about having our distro branches in TDF gerrit [for code review], and to move to self-hosted FOSS tooling we are launching our own gerrit to host our existing branch of core… We will continue to make contributions to LibreOffice where that makes sense (if we are welcome to), but it clearly no longer makes much sense to continue investing heavily in building what remains of TDF’s community and product for them — while being excluded from its governance. In this regard, we seem to be back where we were fifteen years ago.

When it comes to large language model-powered tools, there are generally two broad categories of users. On one side are those who treat AI as a powerful but sometimes faulty service that needs careful human oversight and review to detect reasoning or factual flaws in responses. On the other side are those who routinely outsource their critical thinking to what they see as an all-knowing machine. Recent research goes a long way to forming a new psychological framework for that second group, which regularly engages in “cognitive surrender” to AI’s seemingly authoritative answers. That research also provides some experimental examination of when and why people are willing to outsource their critical thinking to AI, and how factors like time pressure and external incentives can affect that decision.

Overall, across 1,372 participants and over 9,500 individual trials, the researchers found subjects were willing to accept faulty AI reasoning a whopping 73.2 percent of the time, while only overruling it 19.7 percent of the time. The researchers say this “demonstrate[s] that people readily incorporate AI-generated outputs into their decision-making processes, often with minimal friction or skepticism.” In general, “fluent, confident outputs [are treated] as epistemically authoritative, lowering the threshold for scrutiny and attenuating the meta-cognitive signals that would ordinarily route a response to deliberation,” they write. These kinds of effects weren’t uniform across all test subjects, though. Those who scored highly on separate measures of so-called fluid IQ were less likely to rely on the AI for help and were more likely to overrule a faulty AI when it was consulted. Those predisposed to see AI as authoritative in a survey, on the other hand, were much more likely to be led astray by faulty AI-provided answers.

Despite the results, though, the researchers point out that “cognitive surrender is not inherently irrational.” While relying on an LLM that’s wrong half the time (as in these experiments) has obvious downsides, a “statistically superior system” could plausibly give better-than-human results in domains such as “probabilistic settings, risk assessment, or extensive data,” the researchers suggest. “As reliance increases, performance tracks AI quality,” the researchers write, “rising when accurate and falling when faulty, illustrating the promises of superintelligence and exposing a structural vulnerability of cognitive surrender.” In other words, letting an AI do your reasoning means your reasoning is only ever going to be as good as that AI system. As always, let the prompter beware.

The state’s new automated vehicle identification systems (AVIS) use several cameras to calculate your average speed between them, and if it is 10 miles per hour or more over the limit, you get a ticket. No longer will you be able to slow down as you approach a camera and speed back up after passing it, not that you should be speeding on public roads in the first place.

Colorado began deploying this new camera system after legislators changed the law in 2023, allowing AVIS for law enforcement use. The systems, installed on various roads and highways throughout the state, first began issuing warnings, but police began issuing tickets late last year.

The most recent section of road to fall under surveillance is a stretch of I-25 north of Denver, which brought the state’s growing panopticon to our attention. It began issuing tickets on April 2. The Colorado Department of Transportation installed the cameras along a construction zone. The fine is $75 and zero points for exceeding the speed limit, and the police issue it to the vehicle’s owner, regardless of who is driving.

The astronauts — the Americans Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover and Christina Koch, and a Canadian, Jeremy Hansen — spent their first day in space performing checks on the spacecraft, which had never carried humans before. Later they had time to speak to US TV networks. “I’ve got to tell you, there is nothing normal about this,” Wiseman told ABC News from the cramped interior of the capsule. “Sending four humans 250,000 miles away is a herculean effort, and we are now just realising the gravity of that.”

Orion will travel about 4,000 miles (6,400km) beyond the moon before turning back, providing unprecedented and illuminated views of the lunar far side. If all proceeds smoothly, the astronauts will set a record by venturing farther from Earth than any human before — more than 250,000 miles. The mission is part of a longer-term plan to repeatedly return to the moon, with the aim of establishing a permanent base that will offer a platform for further exploration.

The game in question is Stormgate, a crowdfunded revival of the real-time strategy genre that has languished in the last decade or so. The developer Frost Giant Studios told its players on Discord (spotted by PC Gamer) that it would be unable to continue multiplayer access past the end of this month. The “game server orchestration partner” was bought by an AI company — the developer’s words, not mine — which means that the multiplayer aspects of the game will have a “planned outage.”

The devs say the game will be patched for offline play, presumably including its single-player campaign mode and co-op modes, but “online modes will not be available at that point.” They’re hoping to bring back online play in a later update, but that’ll depend on “finding a partner to support ongoing operations.” That sounds like old-fashioned player-hosted games with lobbies aren’t in the cards, at least not yet.

Frost Giant’s server provider is Hathora, which was bought by a company called Fireworks AI last month. Fireworks describes its offerings as “open-source AI models at blazing speed, optimized for your use case, scaled globally with the Fireworks Inference Cloud.” So, yeah, Hathora’s infrastructure will likely be used for yet more generative “AI.” And according to GamesBeat, it’s planning to shut down the game service aspect of its company completely. That means Stormgate probably isn’t going to be the last game affected. Hathora also provides online services for Splitgate 2, among others. I’m contacting Hathora for comment and will update this story if I receive a response.

With the war now nearing its sixth week, Iran has made Amazon infrastructure in the Gulf an economic target and is now eyeing its peers. Amazon’s Bahrain facilities have been hit multiple times, including a Wednesday strike that caused a fire. And its facilities in the UAE also sustained multiple hits. The IRGC is threatening multiple other U.S. tech giants, including Microsoft, Google, and Apple.

Amazons infrastructure in Bahrain and Dubai each have three ‘availability zones’ or clusters of compute. Both Bahrain and Dubai have a zones that are “hard down” and and “impaired but functioning,” per the internal communication. “We do not have a timeline for when DXB and BAH will return to normal operations,” the internal post said.

The investment includes the training of 1 million engineers and developers by 2030, Microsoft said, which was unveiled during a visit to Tokyo by Vice Chair and President Brad Smith. In a statement, the company said the plan aligns with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s goal to boost growth through advanced, strategic technologies while safeguarding national security.

Microsoft will work with domestic firms including SoftBank and Sakura Internet to expand Japan-based AI computing capacity, allowing Ecompanies and government agencies to keep sensitive data within the country while accessing Microsoft Azure services, it said. It will also deepen cooperation with Japanese authorities on sharing intelligence related to cyber threats and crime prevention.

The lawsuit was brought by Italian consumer advocacy group Movimento Consumatori, which alleged that the price hikes violate the Consumer Code, Italian legislation that aims to protect consumer rights. The Consumer Code says it’s unlawful for a “professional to unilaterally modify the clauses of the contract, or the characteristics of the product or service to be provided, without a justified reason indicated in the contract itself,” according to a Google-provided translation.

The court’s April 1 ruling determined that Netflix’s contracts were required to explain in advance why prices or other terms might change in the future. Because the price hikes were found to be imposed without providing customers with valid justifications, the court ruled that the new prices are invalid and ordered Netflix to refund affected subscribers. This comes despite Netflix reportedly providing a 30-day advance notice of the higher fees and allowing customers to cancel their subscriptions to avoid price hikes.

The court gave Netflix 90 days to inform millions of current and former customers via email, mail, its website, and Italian newspapers of their right to refunds or else face a penalty of 700 euros per day, Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore reported today. Per Italian law, price increases that Netflix has issued or will issue beyond April 2025 are legal. At that time, Netflix adjusted its terms to state that contract terms could one day change due to technological, security, or regulatory needs, to clarify clauses, or to provide changes to the service, Il Sole 24 Ore reported.

Today at a hearing of the Colorado Senate Business, Labor, and Technology committee, lawmakers voted unanimously to move Colorado state bill SB26-090 — titled Exempt Critical Infrastructure from Right to Repair — out of committee and into the state senate and house for a vote. The bill modifies Colorado’s Consumer Right to Repair Digital Electronic Equipment act, which was passed in 2024 and went into effect in January 2026. While the protections secured by that act are wide, the new SB26-090 bill aims to “exempt information technology equipment that is intended for use in critical infrastructure from Colorado’s consumer right to repair laws.”

The bill is supported by tech manufacturers like Cisco and IBM, according to lobbying disclosures. These are companies that have vested interests in manufacturing things like routers, server equipment, and computers and stand to profit if they can control who fixes their products and the tools, components, and software used to make those upgrades and repairs. They also cite cybersecurity concerns, saying that giving people access to the tools and systems they would need to repair a device could also enable bad actors to use those methods for nefarious means. (This is a common argument manufacturers make when opposing right-to-repair laws.)

[…] During the hearing, more than a dozen repair advocates spoke from organizations like Pirg, the Repair Association, and iFixit opposing the bill. YouTuber and repair advocate Louis Rossmann was there. The main problem, repair advocates say, is that the bill deliberately uses vague language to make the case for controlling who can fix their products. […] The Colorado Labor and Technology committee advanced the bill, but it still needs to go through votes on the Colorado Senate and House floors before going into effect. Those votes may take place as early as next week. Regardless of how the bill goes in the state, it’s likely that manufacturers will continue their push to alter or undo repair legislation in other states across the country.

Sitting in his dorm room at the Rochester Institute of Technology, Benjamin Brundage was closing in on a mystery that had even seasoned internet investigators baffled. A cat meme helped him crack the case. A growing network of hacked devices was launching the biggest cyberattacks ever seen on the internet. It had become the most powerful cyberweapon ever assembled, large enough to knock a state or even a small country offline. Investigators didn’t know exactly who had built it — or how. Brundage had been following the attacks, too — and, in between classes, was conducting his own investigation. In September, the college senior started messaging online with an anonymous user who seemed to have insider knowledge.

As they chatted on Discord, a platform favored by videogamers, Brundage was eager to get more information, but he didn’t want to come off as too serious and shut down the conversation. So every now and then he’d send a funny GIF to lighten the mood. Brundage was fluent in the memes, jokes and technical jargon popular with young gamers and hackers who are extremely online. “It was a bit of just asking over and over again and then like being a bit unserious,” said Brundage. At one point, he asked for some technical details. He followed up with the cat meme: a six-second clip that showed a hand adjusting a necktie on a fluffy gray cat. Brundage didn’t expect it to work, but he got the information. “It took me by surprise,” he said.

Eventually the leaker hinted there was a new vulnerability on the internet. Brundage, who is 22, would learn it threatened tens of millions of consumers and as much as a quarter of the world’s corporations. As he unraveled the mystery, he impressed veteran researchers with his findings — including federal law enforcement, which took action against the network two weeks ago. Chad Seaman, a researcher at Akamai, joked at one point that the internet could go down if Brundage spent too much time on his exams.

When it comes to using AI, it seems some lawyers just can’t help themselves. Last year saw a rapid increase in court sanctions against attorneys for filing briefs containing errors generated by artificial intelligence tools. The most prominent case was that of the lawyers for MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, who were fined $3,000 each for filing briefs containing fictitious, AI-generated citations. But as a cautionary tale, it doesn’t seem to have had much effect. The numbers started taking off last year, and the rate is still increasing. He counts a total of more than 1,200 to date, of which about 800 are from U.S. courts.