slotvip ph

Cover Five: What to make of wild week around Nebraska football, and 5 biggest impact signees

10 Most Affordable Cities in India to Buy a House The Pros and Cons of Investing in Value Stocks Most Visited Monuments in India Investing in Small-Cap Stocks: Top 10 Tips for Absolute Beginners 10 Ways to Earn Money Online by Selling Physical Products Richest Cricket Players Across the World 10 Things You Didn’t Know About Warren Buffett’s Investment Process Top 10 Benefits of Investing in Small-Cap Stocks Priyanka Chopra Net Worth: Know How Rich is Global Actress How to Make Money Online With Writing and Blogging? Financial calculators A SIP calculator is a simple tool that allows individuals to get an idea of the returns on their This financial tool allows one to resolve their queries related to Public Provident Fund account. When investing in a fixed deposit, the amount you deposit earns interest as per the prevailing... The National Pension System or NPS is a measure to introduce a degree of financial stability... Mutual Funds are one of the most incredible investment strategies that offer better returns...

Pony AI Inc. ($PONY), a Chinese autonomous driving start-up, debuted on the Nasdaq on Wednesday with its American depositary shares climbing as much as 19%. The company’s valuation has surpassed $5 billion, attracting significant retail attention and positioning it alongside established giants like Tesla ($TSLA) and Alphabet’s ($GOOGL) ($GOOG) Waymo. The IPO and concurrent private placements raised $413.4 million for Pony AI, with the total potentially reaching $452 million if underwriters exercise their options to purchase additional shares. Separately, a group of investors — including Uber Technologies Inc. ($UBER) — agreed to purchase $153.4 million worth of shares in a private placement, according to Bloomberg News. Pony AI operates a fleet of 250 robotaxis and 190 robotrucks in China and is partnering with Toyota and GMTC to accelerate mass production of self-driving vehicles. Its “Virtual Driver” technology integrates AI-trained software with hardware like GPS, optical cameras, radar, and lidar, distinguishing itself from the technology employed by competitors like Tesla and Waymo. The company’s robotruck business is its largest revenue source, generating $27.5 million through September 2024. Robotaxis contributed $4.7 million, while the remainder came from technology licensing. Pony AI reported a $93.9 million loss on $39.5 million in revenue for the first nine months of the year, an improvement from a $104.6 million loss on $21.3 million in revenue a year earlier. Retail investors have shown keen interest, with Pony AI trending in the top 25 tickers on Stocktwits by midday Wednesday. While its U.S. operations reportedly remain “limited in scope,” Pony AI said it aims to position itself as a leader in autonomous driving in China. Pony AI enters a competitive landscape where Waymo completes 150,000 driverless taxi rides weekly in the U.S., and Tesla plans to launch its robotaxi service by late 2025. For updates and corrections email newsroom[at]stocktwits[dot]com.

Executive committee moves forward with motion to apply for federal funding to address homeless encampmentsNoneNext chapter for St. Thomas Elevated Park as it joins forces with Railworks Coalition

PlayStation 5 owners are being cautioned about a new issue that could potentially lead to a ban from the PlayStation Network (PSN). This issue revolves around the console’s “Game Trials” feature, which allows players to download and try out select games for a limited time. It seems that some users who have legitimately purchased these games after their trial period are being flagged by Sony’s anti-piracy systems and subsequently banned. This has caused a wave of concern and frustration among the PS5 community, with many players worried about being unfairly penalized. The problem appears to stem from how the trial versions of games interact with the fully purchased versions. When a trial is downloaded, it often uses a different license or product ID than the full game. If the trial data isn’t properly removed or overwritten when the full game is purchased, it can trigger a conflict in Sony’s system, leading to a false positive for piracy. This issue has been reported across various titles and regions, with no clear pattern emerging as to which games or users are most affected. Sony has yet to officially acknowledge the problem, leaving many players in the dark about how to protect themselves. Understanding the PS5 Game Trials Feature The PS5’s Game Trials feature is a relatively new addition to the PlayStation ecosystem. It allows players to download and play select games for a limited time, usually ranging from a few hours to a full day. This gives players a chance to experience a game before committing to a purchase, which can be especially helpful for titles with a hefty price tag or those that are difficult to gauge from trailers and reviews alone. While the intention behind Game Trials is undoubtedly positive, the recent issues with PSN bans have cast a shadow over the feature. Many players are now hesitant to utilize Game Trials, fearing that it might jeopardize their PSN accounts. How the Issue Affects PS5 Owners Imagine this: you’ve just spent hours immersed in the trial version of a new game, loving every minute of it. You decide to purchase the full game to continue your adventure, only to find yourself locked out of your PSN account a few days later. This is the reality that some PS5 owners are facing due to this issue. The consequences of a PSN ban can be severe, ranging from temporary suspension to a permanent ban in extreme cases. A ban prevents access to online multiplayer, digital purchases, cloud saves, and other essential PSN features. For many players, this effectively renders their expensive console useless. What Triggers the False Bans? The exact mechanism that triggers these false bans isn’t fully understood, but it appears to be related to conflicting game licenses. When you download a game trial, it’s essentially a separate version of the game with its own unique identifier. When you purchase the full game, this identifier should be replaced, but in some cases, it seems that remnants of the trial version remain on the system. This conflict can be triggered by various factors, including: Personal Experience I haven’t personally experienced this issue, but I’ve been following the discussions on Reddit and other forums closely. The stories from affected players are concerning, and it’s made me much more cautious about using the Game Trials feature. I recently wanted to try out a new racing game with a trial, but I hesitated, worried that it might put my account at risk. In the end, I decided to wait for a sale instead. It’s a shame that this issue is preventing players from taking advantage of a feature that should enhance their gaming experience. Steps to (Potentially) Avoid a Ban While there’s no guaranteed way to prevent this issue, there are some steps you can take to minimize the risk: What to Do If You Get Banned If you find yourself banned from PSN, don’t panic. Here’s what you can do: The Community’s Response The PS5 community has expressed widespread concern and frustration over this issue. Many players are calling on Sony to address the problem urgently and provide clearer guidelines on how to avoid bans. Some users have even launched online petitions and social media campaigns to raise awareness and pressure Sony to take action. Here are some common sentiments from the community: The situation with PS5 Game Trials and PSN bans remains fluid. It’s crucial for PS5 owners to stay informed about this issue and take precautions to protect their accounts. Hopefully, Sony will acknowledge the problem soon and provide a solution that restores confidence in the Game Trials feature. In the meantime, it’s essential for the gaming community to continue raising awareness and putting pressure on Sony to resolve this issue fairly and swiftly. Only then can PS5 owners enjoy their gaming experience without the fear of unwarranted bans.WASHINGTON — If there’s a theme among President-elect Donald Trump’s health Cabinet picks, it’s this: The vast majority were critics of how the Biden administration handled COVID-19. The pandemic upended Americans’ perspective on public health and health care delivery, both throughout the United States and among Republican lawmakers. Policy experts say that change is evident in Trump’s selections to lead major U.S. health agencies. That change is particularly notable in Trump’s pick for secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic who has been critical of the federal government’s pandemic response. Trump and Republicans have praised Kennedy for bucking conventional thinking when it comes to public health, even though many of Kennedy’s theories and proposals are not backed by science. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Kennedy advocated against vaccinating kids against the coronavirus. He also led the anti-vaccination group Children’s Health Defense beginning in 2018. As Trump’s presumptive HHS secretary nominee, Kennedy worked with the Trump team to pick the leaders of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health. Former Rep. Dave Weldon, Trump’s selection to head the CDC, is also a vaccine skeptic. Mehmet Oz, known more commonly as “Dr. Oz,” Trump’s choice to head CMS, promoted use of the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. FDA commissioner pick Marty Makary promoted herd immunity to stop the virus, as did Trump’s choice to lead the NIH, Jay Bhattacharya. Taken as a whole, the picks reflect a deep skepticism toward the recommendations of the very agencies these men have been tapped to lead. Trust in public health institutions plummeted in the wake of the pandemic, particularly among Republicans, according to polling, and virus prevention measures like wearing a face mask on an airplane or getting a routine vaccination have morphed into political actions in many parts of the United States. “There was a lot of misinformation, uncertain information,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said of the COVID-19 pandemic response. “In the end, when you looked at what the benefits were, the benefits were not as large as promised and some people were penalized. So I’m sure that’s reflected in [Trump’s] Cabinet choices.” But as Republicans cheer these changes to the public health sector, Democrats and medical institutions are concerned about health misinformation and how that could impact the American health care system, which spends roughly $4.5 trillion per year and accounts for 17.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. On the campaign trail, Trump won voters by promising to buck the system. But public health experts warn that moving too far from the medical establishment and rejecting scientific data could have disastrous consequences. A look at other key Trump health picks and their records on COVID-19: Mehmet Oz, CMS Oz has long been criticized for his controversial views on public health. The pandemic was no exception. The Daytime Emmy award winner served as an informal adviser during the first Trump administration, promoting the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 early in the pandemic. He reportedly tried to persuade the president’s advisers to accelerate approval of the drug for use against COVID-19, even though at the time it had not been tested against the virus. Later, the FDA and infectious disease doctors found the antimalarial would not treat the virus. Oz also urged Trump administration officials to back a study he offered to fund at Columbia University Medical Center about the impacts of the antimalarial on COVID-19 patients, according to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. In April 2020, Oz said on Fox News that reopening schools would be worth it, even if it led to increased deaths. He later retracted the statement. Marty Makary, FDA Like Kennedy, Makary has publicly questioned the broad use of COVID-19 vaccines and vaccine mandates. But unlike Kennedy and many others in Trump’s health Cabinet, Makary was an early advocate of masking to prevent the spread of the virus and restricting air travel. The Johns Hopkins surgeon and author publicly opposed COVID-19 booster shots and promoted natural immunity over vaccinations. He went as far as arguing that the federal government censored pandemic data on natural immunity in an attempt to get more people vaccinated. But Makary also promoted early vaccination strategies to protect those most at risk for severe disease, such as getting single doses of vaccines to as many people as possible before allowing people to go back for a second dose of the shot. In late 2020, he criticized the FDA for not moving fast enough to approve mRNA vaccines. Jay Bhattacharya, NIH A Stanford physician and professor, Bhattacharya made a name for himself as a skeptic who opposed COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates. He also promoted herd immunity, the concept that low-risk people should live their lives normally and build up resistance to COVID-19 through infection while only high-risk individuals took precautions. In October 2020, Bhattacharya co-authored the controversial “Great Barrington Declaration,” an open letter advocating against virus prevention measures with the hopes of quickly obtaining herd immunity. Both the World Health Organization and leading academic and public health organizations condemned the letter, with the American Public Health Association and other health organizations signing a letter calling it a “wrong-headed proposal masquerading as science” and arguing that the declaration would lead to preventable deaths. Dave Weldon, CDC Weldon, a physician who represented Florida in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 through 2009, has routinely questioned the links between vaccines and autism throughout his career. He does not specialize in infectious diseases and has never formally worked in public health, having spent his career as a military doctor, internist and politician. In 2007, Weldon introduced a bill that would remove vaccine safety research from the CDC’s domain and house it in a separate HHS agency. Although the bill didn’t advance, some privately worry it’s indicative of the way he’d strip down the public health agency. Former acting CDC Director Richard Besser said he’s concerned about Weldon’s lack of public health credentials and suspects he was nominated to the post largely because his vaccine skepticism aligns with Kennedy’s views. “What we’re seeing with a number of these nominations is a continuation of that politicization [of public health], where you know people coming in who are saying public health is the problem, not the solution,” Besser said.