Thursday, October 2, 2025

 
Home Blog Page 251

U.S. Parents Charge Kids Interest on Loans. Here’s How Much.

Entrepreneur
-
0
U.S. Parents Charge Kids Interest on Loans. Here’s How Much.


As young Americans struggle with high costs of living and salaries that haven’t kept pace with inflation, some of them rely on loans to make ends meet.

Nearly half (46%) of Gen Z between the ages of 18 and 27 depend on financial assistance from their family, according to a 2024 report from Bank of America.

What’s more, even though some parents are willing to help their kids out with cash, those loans don’t always come without strings attached — sometimes in the form of interest.

Related: Gen Z Is Turning to Side Hustles to Purchase ‘the Normal Stuff’ in ‘Suburban Middle-Class America’

Financial media company MarketBeat.com‘s new report, which surveyed more than 3,000 parents, found that an increasing number are charging their adult children interest on family loans.

“The Bank of Mom and Dad has always been generous, but even generosity comes with boundaries,” says Matt Paulson, founder of MarketBeat.com. “What’s striking is that while most parents don’t expect repayment — and certainly not at commercial interest rates — inflation and rising costs are starting to reshape how families think about money.”

The average interest rate charged by parents was 5.1%, according to the data. That’s still well below the costs their children might incur elsewhere: The average personal loan rate is 12.49% for customers with a 700 FICO score, $5,000 loan amount and three-year repayment term, per Bankrate.

Related: This Stat About Gen Alpha’s Side Hustles Might Be Hard to Believe — But It Means Major Purchasing Power. Here’s What the Kids Want to Buy.

Only 15% of parents would be comfortable with lending their kids $5,000 or more at one time, according to MarketBeat’s research.

Family loan repayment terms can also vary significantly by location. The top five toughest state lenders based on the interest rates parents charge were Nebraska (6.8%), Oregon (6.8%), Mississippi (6.5%), Georgia (6.4%) and Arkansas (6.3%), the report found.

Parents in Delaware and Maine tended to be the most lenient when it came to charging their children interest on loans, with 2% and 4% rates, respectively, according to the findings.

Related: Baby Boomers Over 75 Are Getting Richer, Causing a ‘Massive’ Wealth Divide, According to a New Report

Many parents who expect repayment also have a fast-tracked timeline in mind. Twenty-one percent anticipated seeing their loan repaid in one month, 15% within one year and just 8% more than a year later, per the survey.

Although 59% of parents reported being happy to help their kids with money, 27% said they would only do it if necessary, and 4% admitted to feeling resentful.

In many cases, family loans don’t just provide financial support — they’re also “emotional transactions that test trust, responsibility and family dynamics,” Paulson notes.

As young Americans struggle with high costs of living and salaries that haven’t kept pace with inflation, some of them rely on loans to make ends meet.

Nearly half (46%) of Gen Z between the ages of 18 and 27 depend on financial assistance from their family, according to a 2024 report from Bank of America.

What’s more, even though some parents are willing to help their kids out with cash, those loans don’t always come without strings attached — sometimes in the form of interest.

The rest of this article is locked.

Join Entrepreneur+ today for access.



This story originally appeared on Entrepreneur

Google must pay $425 million in class action lawsuit over invading users’ privacy, jury rules

NYPost
-
0
Google must pay 5 million in class action lawsuit over invading users’ privacy, jury rules


A federal jury determined on Wednesday that Alphabet’s Google, must pay $425 million for invading users’ privacy by continuing to collect data for millions of users who had switched off a tracking feature in their Google account.

The verdict comes after a trial in the federal court in San Francisco over allegations that Google over an eight-year period accessed users’ mobile devices to collect, save, and use their data, violating privacy assurances under its Web & App Activity setting.

The users had been seeking more than $31 billion in damages.

A federal jury ruled Google must pay $425 million for invading users’ privacy by continuing to collect data for millions of users who had switched off a tracking feature in their Google accounts. somemeans – stock.adobe.com

The jury found Google liable on two of the three claims of privacy violations brought by the plaintiffs.

The jury found that Google had not acted with malice, meaning it was not entitled to any punitive damages.

A spokesperson for Google confirmed the verdict.

Google had denied any wrongdoing.

The class action lawsuit, filed in July 2020, claimed Google continued to collect users’ data even with the setting turned off through its relationship with apps such as Uber, Venmo and Meta’s Instagram that use certain Google analytics services.

At trial, Google said the collected data was “nonpersonal, pseudonymous, and stored in segregated, secured, and encrypted locations.”


Illustration of a cracked Google logo.
Google users have wanted more than $31 billion in damages amid the jury’s ruling in the class action lawsuit. REUTERS

Google said the data was not associated with users’ Google accounts or any individual user’s identity.

US District Judge Richard Seeborg certified the case as a class action covering about 98 million Google users and 174 million devices.

Google has faced other privacy lawsuits, including one earlier this year where it paid nearly $1.4 billion in a settlement with Texas over allegations the company violated the state’s privacy laws.

Google in April 2024 agreed to destroy billions of data records of users’ private browsing activities to settle a lawsuit that alleged it tracked people who thought they were browsing privately, including in “Incognito” mode.



This story originally appeared on NYPost

The Dems have nothing better to do than to portray a ‘fantasy’ of Trump’s demise

NYPost
-
0
The Dems have nothing better to do than to portray a ‘fantasy’ of Trump’s demise

Over the Labor Day weekend, instead of enjoying the last days of summer with family and friends, Democrats and other Trump-deranged folk had nothing better to do than indulge in sick fantasies about the president’s death.

Hashtags like #trumpisdead and #whereistrump trended on X, with countless TikToks, Google searches and posts saying “TRUMP DIED” garnering millions of likes and views.

This was not a harmless meme or politics as usual. It was seeded by anonymous left-wing social media accounts and amplified by journalists and influencers to create a permission structure to fantasize about Trump’s demise.

Despite photos of Trump golfing with his grandchildren and his numerous long missives on Truth Social — including about the landscapers who ruined the new limestone paving in the Rose Garden — the rumor went viral.

Politifact traced the rumor’s origin to a tweet from a virulently anti-Trump “foreign policy” reporter named Laura Rozen, from Al-Monitor, who shared a screenshot of the White House presidential schedule and faux-innocently noted that Trump hadn’t been seen in two whole days!

Her post was viewed 34 million times and gave rise to countless copycats who dreamed up a White House coverup and all manner of ailments that might have felled the president.

Hearing of own ‘death’

“How did you find out over the weekend that you were dead?” Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asked Trump at an Oval Office press conference Tuesday.

“1.3 million user engagements as of Saturday morning about your demise.”

In the style of Mark Twain, who once famously said “reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated,” Trump made light of the rumor, and dismissed it as “fake news.”

He pointed out that he had a “very active” weekend.

“Last week I did numerous news conferences . . . and then I didn’t do any for two days, and they said, ‘There must be something wrong with him.’ Biden wouldn’t do them for months. You wouldn’t see him. And nobody ever said there was ever anything wrong with him.”

Every week, Post columnist Miranda Devine sits down for exclusive and candid conversations with the most influential disruptors in Washington. Subscribe here!

Exactly.

Joe Biden was AWOL ­almost his entire presidency and on the few occasions he was encountered by the press, he alternately whispered, yelled, fell over or shuffled about like a cadaver. Yet all the same people who turned a blind eye to Biden’s infirmities and routinely castigated the rest of us — “He’s sharp as a tack! Stop being ageist! Cheap Fakes!” — are now questioning Trump’s health.

In a 2,000-word piece written by three reporters Tuesday, The New York Times revisited the bruises on Trump’s hand that they keep pretending are sinister but just come from vigorous handshaking with large numbers of people, something Biden was never at risk of doing.

“His ankles are swollen. He is the oldest person to be elected president,” they wrote, while acknowledging a “wishful-thinking industry around Trump’s health [and] legal woes.”

At 79, the president demonstrates an enormous capacity for vigorous action, morning, noon and night. What drives his opponents mad is they can’t keep up.

That’s why the entire Democratic Party apparatus is keyed in to the elimination of Trump.

No answer to victories

He has shown them up badly, and they have no answer to his victories, whether on illegal migration, big-city crime, cutting taxes, ending wars, boosting the economy, kicking biological boys out of girls’ sports, canceling vaccine mandates, Making America Healthy Again and all the other commonsense prescriptions he is energetically putting into place.

They can’t seem to counter him or change course and have no leader other than a snake oil salesman named Gavin with slicked-back hair and bizarre hand gestures who tries unsuccessfully to imitate Trump.

So they have retreated into the delusion that, if only Trump were gone, all their problems would vanish.

Their constant framing of Trump as “Hitler,” “authoritarian fascist” and an “existential threat” who must be stopped at all costs fosters a climate in which death threats against the president are normalized.

This week, Washington, DC, grand juries let off two nutjobs charged with repeatedly threatening to assassinate the president.

One was a New York woman who posted on Facebook that she wanted to “sacrificially kill this POTUS by disemboweling him and cutting out his trachea” and was arrested by the Secret Service at a “No Fascist Takeover of DC” rally outside the White House.

After Trump survived two assassination attempts during the 2024 election campaign, liberal feeds lit up with regret.

One-third of Democratic voters surveyed by a British politics professor in a small snap poll published in UnHerd in July 2024 agreed with the statement, “I wish Trump’s assassin hadn’t missed.”

Former FBI Director James Comey typified the casual malice when he posted an Instagram photo of seashells that spelled out the numbers “8647,” which he captioned: “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”

The number 86 is a slang term meaning “to get rid of” or “kill,” and Trump is the 47th president.

So Comey’s message was a pretty clear incitement to violence for which he was investigated by the Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security.

Of course, he pretended he had no idea what the numbers meant: “I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence.”

As if a guy with decades in law enforcement who rose to the top of an intelligence agency that specializes in national security threats wasn’t adept at interpreting coded assassination threats.

Trump knew better: “That meant assassination, and it says it loud and clear. Now, he wasn’t very competent, but he was competent enough to know what that meant.”

Chi-town incitement

Then there is Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, who has no solution to the violence that claimed eight lives in his city over the weekend.

On Monday at a protest rally, he bordered on inciting violence against federal troops whom Trump has threatened to send in to clean up crime.

“Are you prepared to defend this land that was built by slaves?” he shouted.

“Are you prepared to defend this land?”

Earlier he told MSNBC: “The people of this city are accustomed to rising up against tyranny and if that’s necessary, I believe the people of Chicago will stand firm.”

Rise up or stand firm.

The message is clear.

Violence is encouraged, or at least condoned, by Democrats with nothing to offer, just as it was in 2020 when luminaries from ­Kamala Harris to Minnesota First Lady Gwen “I want to smell burning tires” Walz welcomed the mayhem of the George Floyd anti-cop riots.

This is not normal.

A collapsing political party is as dangerous as an animal in its death throes.



This story originally appeared on NYPost

Court opts for behavioral fixes over structural split – Computerworld

Computerworld
-
0
Court opts for behavioral fixes over structural split – Computerworld



Data sharing replaces divestiture as the primary remedy

Instead of a breakup, Judge Mehta imposed extensive data-sharing requirements designed to level the competitive playing field. “Google will have to make available to Qualified Competitors certain search index and user-interaction data,” the judgment stated, targeting what the court called Google’s “scale advantage” built through exclusive agreements.

The ruling requires Google to provide competitors with search index information, including web page identifiers, crawl schedules, and spam scores — data that could help rivals build more comprehensive search capabilities. Google must also syndicate search results to qualified competitors for five years, though on commercial rather than free terms.

Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst at Greyhound Research, cautioned that “interoperability and data-access remedies can lower barriers, but they seldom replicate the disruptive force of a breakup.” He noted that “mandated data-sharing must be engineered with extreme care; anonymization at scale is technically fragile.”



This story originally appeared on Computerworld

Get up to 77 percent off ExpressVPN, ProtonVPN, Surfshark and others

Engadget
-
0
Get up to 77 percent off ExpressVPN, ProtonVPN, Surfshark and others


A virtual private network (VPN) can save you a lot of money if you use it right. By changing your virtual location, you can use one streaming service to see shows that might be scattered between three or four in your home country. You can also trawl the world for discounts that only show up in a few select regions. And of course, you can’t put a price on the joy of taking back your online business from intrusive ads and trackers.

VPN providers are all competing to boost their subscriber counts, so they frequently offer massive discounts to anyone willing to sign up for one or two years at a time. Most of the deals below fit into that category. Before you jump into the list, make sure you’re OK with a longer-term commitment.

Best VPN deals

Proton

This Swiss VPN is Engadget’s top VPN of choice right now, for reasons I’ve laid out in a full Proton VPN review. It looks and feels good to use on every platform, which makes it fantastic for multiple-device households. It keeps your browsing speeds fast and latencies low, even over long distances. For those who need a VPN to stay anonymous, Proton VPN is the only service implementing full-disk encryption, which means it can manage all your traffic without any of it being visible to Proton itself. The linked deal is hard to find, but it’s a 66 percent discount on an already affordable service — the cheapest Proton VPN has sold for since I started tracking it. Grab it soon, since I can’t be sure how long it will last.

$81.36 for 24 months (66 percent off) at Proton VPN

NordVPN — $83.43 for a two-year subscription with three months free (77 percent off): NordVPN gets the most important parts of a VPN right. It’s fast, it doesn’t leak any of your data and it’s great at changing your virtual location. I noted in my NordVPN review that it always connects quickly and includes a support page that makes it easy to get live help. Although I’m sad to see it shutting down Meshnet, NordVPN still includes a lot of cool features, like servers that instantly connect you to Tor. This deal gives you 77 percent off the two-year plan, which also comes with three extra months — but there’s no expiration date, so you have a little time for comparison shopping.

ExpressVPN — $97.72 for a two-year Basic subscription with four months free (73 percent off): This is one of the best VPNs, especially for new users, who will find its apps and website headache-free on all platforms. In tests for my ExpressVPN review, it dropped my download speeds by less than 7 percent and successfully changed my virtual location 14 out of 15 times. In short, it’s an all-around excellent service that only suffers from being a little overpriced — which is why I’m so excited whenever I find it offering a decent deal. This deal, which gets you 28 months of ExpressVPN service, represents a 73 percent savings. It’s the lowest I’ve seen ExpressVPN go in some time, though like NordVPN, it’s not on a ticking clock.

Surfshark Starter — $53.73 for a two-year subscription with three months free (87 percent off): This is the “basic” level of Surfshark, but it includes the entire VPN; everything on Surfshark One is an extra perk. With this subscription, you’ll get some of the most envelope-pushing features in the VPN world right now. Surfshark has a more closely connected server network than most VPNs, so it can rotate your IP constantly to help you evade detection — it even lets you choose your own entry and exit nodes for a double-hop connection. That all comes with a near-invisible impact on download speeds. With this year-round deal, you can save 87 percent on 27 months of Surfshark.

Surfshark One — $67.23 for a two-year subscription with three months free (86 percent off): A VPN is great, but it’s not enough to protect your data all on its own. Surfshark One adds several apps that boost your security beyond just VPN service, including Surfshark Antivirus (scans devices and downloads for malware), Surfshark Alert (alerts you whenever your sensitive information shows up in a data breach) and Surfshark Search (a private search engine with no ads or activity tracking). This evergreen deal gives you 87 percent off all those features. If you bump up to Surfshark One+, you’ll also get data removal through Incogni, but the price jumps enough that it’s not quite worthwhile in my eyes.

CyberGhost — $56.94 for a two-year subscription with two months free (83 percent off): CyberGhost has some of the best automation you’ll see on any VPN. With its Smart Rules system, you can determine how its apps respond to different types of Wi-Fi networks, with exceptions for specific networks you know by name. Typically, you can set it to auto-connect, disconnect or send you a message asking what to do. CyberGhost’s other best feature is its streaming servers — while it’s not totally clear what it does to optimize them, I’ve found both better video quality and more consistent unblocking when I use them on streaming sites. Currently, you can get 26 months of CyberGhost for 83 percent off the usual price.

Private Internet Access — $79 for a three-year subscription with three months free (83 percent off): It’s a bit hard to find (the link at the start of this paragraph includes the coupon), but Private Internet Access (PIA) is giving out the best available price right now on a VPN I’d recommend using. With this deal, you can get 39 months of PIA for a little bit over $2 per month — an 83 percent discount on its monthly price. Despite being so cheap, PIA almost never comes off as a budget VPN, coming with its own DNS servers, a built-in ad blocker and automation powers to rival CyberGhost. However, internet speeds can fluctuate while you’re connected.

What makes a good VPN deal

Like I said in the intro, practically every VPN heavily discounts its long-term subscriptions the whole year round. The only noteworthy exception is Mullvad, the Costco hot dog of VPNs (that’s a compliment, to be clear). When there’s constantly a huge discount going on, it can be hard to tell when you’re actually getting a good deal. The best way to squeeze out more savings is to look for seasonal deals, student discounts or exclusive sales like Proton VPN’s coupon for Engadget readers.

One trick VPNs often use is to add extra months onto an introductory deal, pushing the average monthly price even lower. When it comes time to renew, you usually can’t get these extra months again. You often can’t even renew for the same basic period of time — for example, you may only be able to renew a two-year subscription for one year. If you’re planning to hold onto a VPN indefinitely, check the fine print to see how much it will cost per month after the first renewal, and ensure that fits into your budget.

Follow @EngadgetDeals on X for the latest tech deals and buying advice.




This story originally appeared on Engadget

How Much Money Does He Have Now? – Hollywood Life

Hollywood Life
-
0
How Much Money Does He Have Now? – Hollywood Life


Image Credit: Getty Images for Prime Video

MrBeast’s rise to fame is unmatched. The YouTuber, whose real name is Jimmy Donaldson, has redefined what it means to be a content creator. With viral stunts, massive giveaways, and a business empire that spans everything from snacks to streaming, he’s become a household name—and a serious earner.

So, just how much money has he made by now? Find out more about his massive net worth below.

How Did MrBeast Get Rich?

Donaldson began his YouTube career in 2012 at the age of 13, initially posting gaming content and reaction videos. His major breakthrough came in 2017 with a video where he counted to 100,000—an odd yet captivating stunt that went viral and marked the start of his rise. From there, he leaned into over-the-top challenges, massive giveaways, and philanthropic acts, which quickly grew his audience. As his videos racked up billions of views, he began earning significant income through YouTube’s ad revenue and brand partnerships.

But Donaldson didn’t stop at content creation. He expanded into business with ventures like Feastables, a snack company that reportedly generated $215 million in revenue in 2024, and MrBeast Burger, a virtual restaurant brand that launched in 2020.

In 2024, he announced Beast Games, a reality competition series produced by Amazon Prime Video. The show featured 1,000 contestants competing for a record-breaking $10 million prize—the largest single cash prize in reality television history. The first season premiered on December 19, 2024, and quickly became one of Prime Video’s most popular shows, drawing viewers from within and beyond the US.

On top of that, he founded Beast Philanthropy, a nonprofit that funds food banks, disaster relief, and more. These efforts collectively turned MrBeast into a media empire—and made him one of the richest and most influential creators in the world.

What Is MrBeast’s Net Worth?

As of 2025, MrBeast’s net worth is estimated at $1 billion, according to Celebrity Net Worth. This makes him the world’s youngest self-made billionaire at age 27. His business empire, Beast Industries, generated $473 million in revenue in 2024 and is projected to reach $899 million in 2025, according to Business Insider. 

Did MrBeast Buy the NFL?

No — MrBeast did not buy the NFL.

A recent video sparked the rumor after MrBeast humorously posed the question, “What if MrBeast bought the NFL?” in a playful promo alongside NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The clip, which imagines adding a special 54th roster spot on every team for YouTube creators, was released to promote YouTube’s first-ever exclusive live NFL broadcast, not any actual ownership change. The promo features creators like Dude Perfect, Valkyrae, IShowSpeed, and others—none of which indicates a real takeover.

That said, the stunt was a clever marketing move: YouTube is streaming a Week 1 matchup between the Chargers and Chiefs for free on Friday, September 5, 2025, live from São Paulo, Brazil.



This story originally appeared on Hollywoodlife

The pretty little market town that’s the UK’s most expensive – houses cost £839k | UK | Travel

Express.co.uk
-
0
The pretty little market town that’s the UK’s most expensive – houses cost £839k | UK | Travel


Residents in the UK’s most expensive market town to buy a home have revealed why it is such an attractive place to live. In today’s cost-of-living crisis, house prices are a frustration for many Brits trying to get on the property ladder. But for people who live in a market town that has some of the highest prices in the country, there are clear reasons why people want to move there. 

Beaconsfield is located between London and Oxford in the county of Buckinghamshire. Home to a relatively small population of around 12,000 residents, the town was named by Lloyd’s Bank as the most expensive market town for all types of home buyers, with first-time buyers expecting to fork out £280,582 on average, while the average cost of a home overall is a whopping £839,468. Many things can contribute to high house prices in an area, and Beaconsfield residents have shared their thoughts, revealing that the town’s location is a major factor.

One of those locals is Malcom Hann, who was born in Beaconsfield and has lived there for most of his life. “You would have trouble getting a one-bedroom flat for less than a million,” he told the Daily Express. “People who live in Beaconsfield have to be reasonably affluent.”

Malcolm is a member of the Beaconsfield 41 Club, a men’s club that organises social events. Although he says that people don’t join clubs as much as they used to, such a community group is important to people like Malcom. There is a relatively positive sense of community in Beaconsfield, but its most attractive feature, and a major driver of house prices, is its proximity to London. 

Malcolm revealed: “You can get to Marylebone Station in 24 minutes. It’s 20 minutes to Heathrow. And there’s nice countryside. You can walk out of your house and in probably in less than a quarter of a mile, you’re in woodland.”

Malcolm said that Beaconsfield has changed considerably over the last few decades. While some parts have been well preserved, the face of the town has changed with new businesses opening up and more houses being built on valuable land where older homes once stood. He explained: “It used to have plenty of shops, but now there are lots of nail bars, Turkish barbers, and places to eat. 

“Like any town, the retail shops are diminishing. I suppose I’m part of the problem. If I want something tomorrow, I’ll order it on Amazon.”

Sandy Saunders is a former mayor of Beaconsfield and is now the Chairman of the Beaconsfield Community Association. He has lived in Beaconsfield for more than 60 years and is heavily involved in the local community there. 

Speaking to the Daily Express two days after the annual fair, he echoed Malcolm’s statements about Beaconsfield’s great location and discussed the amazing nature on its doorstep.

He said: “We are at the foot of the Chilterns. We’ve got some marvellous woods around the town. And we’ve got some very good associations and societies in the town, particularly the history society and other organisations which help the old people and the young.”

He continued: “We’ve been able to keep the beauty of the old town in London end with all of its Georgian properties. We’ve got a lot of beauty that is being retained by the town in less than half an hour’s walk from the station. We’ve got the motorway, of course, which takes us up the north [of England].

“The situation of travel and getting around, as well as what we’ve got locally, with the houses that were built here. We’ve also got two major supermarkets in the town, which, for a town of our size, is great. And within a mile down the road, we’ve got another one. And of course, Amersham is very close to us as well.”

One of Sandy’s few qualms with the town is its historic planning, which he says cuts some people off from one of the “jewels” of the area. “We have a bypass now where a roundabout was built to help ease the traffic through the centre of the town, but without any thought to the crossroads,” he said. 

“It was put in the wrong place. We’ve got a beautiful ancient woodland called Walkwood in the old town. But access is not easy.”

However, Sandy’s general feelings about Beaconsfield are clear. It is a historic town that has so much to offer, from community groups to nature to easy access to the UK’s capital, which starts to paint the picture of why house prices are so high here.



This story originally appeared on Express.co.uk

Trump Is The Biggest Loser As Harvard Funding Freeze Ruled Illegal

PoliticusUSA
-
0
Trump Is The Biggest Loser As Harvard Funding Freeze Ruled Illegal


PoliticusUSA is real independent news that speaks out for democracy. You can join us by becoming a subscriber.

Donald Trump has one philosophy as president, and that is the president has unlimited power that allows the Executive Branch to do whatever it wants. Trump and his administration don’t acknowledge the limits of power, and their motto is act first, get sued later.

This reckless philosophy continues to lead to illegal actions. Because what Trump and his administration are doing in many cases is illegal, it would be foolish for any company, organization, or academic institution to either bribe Trump or pay his extortion demands.

Harvard University stood up to Trump and took him to court over the administration’s freeze of $200 billion in funds to the university, and today, Harvard won.

Video clip of Mary McCord and Mark Elias on MSNBC’s Deadline: White House:

McCord said, “They won here and it appears they won pretty big. Just like the law firms who challenged the blacklisting. They won and they won big. And it just shows there is real power to standing up against unconstitutional actions and actions that violate congressional statutes. That’s what we should be doing, and that’s what lots of people are doing and lots of people who are doing it are winning. Mark Elias, I would say all of the people that are doing it are winning.”



This story originally appeared on Politicususa

Logitech Keys to Go 2 review: a slim keyboard for nearly everyone

AppleInsider
-
0
Logitech Keys to Go 2 review: a slim keyboard for nearly everyone



Logitech’s Keys-to-Go 2 is designed as a lightweight, portable keyboard that’s easy to carry and practical enough for everyday typing on the go.

Logitech Keys to Go 2

Unless you’re an absolute devotee of the on-screen keyboard, there’s a good chance that you’ve at least researched an external keyboard for your iPhone or iPad. This is especially true if you’re a college student or someone whose job involves a lot of typing.

The market is absolutely flooded with keyboards vying to get your attention at various price points. Some are cheap in both design and price, while others trade affordability for a luxury experience.

Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums


This story originally appeared on Appleinsider

Universal Delayed Jordan Peele’s Next Movie — Is It Time To Panic?

MovieWeb
-
0
Universal Delayed Jordan Peele’s Next Movie — Is It Time To Panic?


Across his three feature films, Get Out, Us, and Nope, Jordan Peele has established himself as one of the most innovative and exciting filmmakers in the business. He’s one of the few filmmakers whose name recognition alone is enough to sell an audience on a movie (as the team behind the upcoming football horror flick Him is undoubtedly hoping). While he has been very active in helping other filmmakers bring their visions to the screen, his own projects tend to take a while.

That’s why the recent news that Universal pulled his upcoming film from their 2026 release calendar is so concerning. Originally scheduled for a December 2024 release, before being moved to October 2026, the as-yet-untitled movie was delayed by two years, and no new release date has been announced. Could Peele’s next film be going the way of so many other canceled projects before it?

Why It’s (Probably) Not Time To Panic

Jordan Peele Should Take His Time With His Next Film

Universal Pictures

Concern over the fate of Peele’s next film isn’t exactly unfounded. Although it may seem like it’s still early in development, studios have certainly not been shy about canceling projects in the past. Universal’s rival, Warner Bros. Discovery, shelved mostly completed films like Batgirl and Coyote vs. Acme, preferring to take the tax write-off rather than box office returns (though thankfully, it seems that Coyote will see the light of day). The movie industry is in a weird place right now, as risk-averse studios don’t want to gamble on anything less than a sure bet.

However, Peele is a filmmaker who still has a great deal of name recognition, and anticipation for his next work never dies down among horror fans. All three of his previous films (all distributed by Universal) made sizable returns on their relatively modest budgets, so Peele has hopefully earned some goodwill from the studio. He’s also proven that he’s not the type to rush the process or crank out a film every year: two years elapsed between Get Out and Us, and another three until Nope was released. While part of the delay was beyond Peele’s or Universal’s control (the 2023 SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes played a role), it’s possible that all involved want to ensure they take the time to make the best film possible, particularly given the significant anticipation surrounding it. According to a report from World of Reel:

This isn’t the first time Peele’s plans have shifted. He was once targeting December 25, 2024, before scrapping that project in favor of something new. Now, word is that even this second idea might have been tossed aside, with the filmmaker reportedly brainstorming yet another direction as recently as this summer. One insider suggested Peele himself doesn’t yet know what this next movie will be. Not entirely uncommon for a filmmaker of his stature, but it does cast doubt on whether 2026 was ever realistic.

While studios are undeniably wary of risking financial losses, it’s clear there’s still a large audience for the kind of clever, thoughtful horror movies that directors like Peele are known for. The smash success of Zach Cregger’s Weapons for Warner Bros., which grossed nearly $240 million on a $38 million budget, shows that audiences are still willing to turn out for a good scare in theaters. While horror might not get a lot of awards recognition, it’s always been a safe bet at the box office, particularly when it gets the kind of hype that Weapons or any of Peele’s projects have received.

It’s not that there’s no reason to be concerned about the film being pulled from the calendar; any time a release is delayed, its future becomes that much more uncertain. This holds especially true for the current era of Hollywood, where the entire industry has become heavily reliant on major, four-quadrant releases. But it seems highly unlikely that Universal would completely drop a project that has the potential to be quite lucrative. Peele has more than proven himself creatively and commercially, and Universal would be wise to just let him cook. If they decide to let it go, another studio would likely welcome the chance to snatch up whatever unsettling vision Peele is conjuring.



This story originally appeared on Movieweb

1...250251252...2,582Page 251 of 2,582

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

ABOUT US

Pagegoo.com serves as a news aggregator website. We provide the top trending news online. Our website exercises third-party content for information purpose only and are not liable for any web content related to or denoted to from these pages. All news, images & videos associated to content are hosted on third-party sites or users. We also often used third-party links.

Contact us: Info@Pagegoo.com

FOLLOW US

© 2025 Pagegoo.com. All Rights Reserved.