A child logs 13,000 watched YouTube videos in a span of 3 months…during school hours.
The Wall Street Journal (gift link):
AMY WARREN’S “mom siren” went off when her seventh-grader in Wichita, Kan., seemed to know too much about Fortnite, a battling-and-shooting videogame he is barred from playing.
When Warren signed into his school Google account, she was aghast: Her son Ben had accessed more than 13,000 YouTube videos during school hours from December 2024 through February 2025, according to viewing data she provided the Journal.
His feed was rife with inappropriate content. Videos glorifying gun culture, asking about silencers on Nerf guns, “head shots” where children realistically portray being killed, a video with sexually explicit jokes about neighbors sleeping together.
YouTube had served up “shorts”—video after video that it algorithmically determined that he might like.
“It made me cry,” Warren said. “All of a sudden it’s this kind of gun slop, by no fault of his own. ” She later ran for school board and won in November, eager to galvanize change.
Kudos to the mother for taking action and striving for change, but I think it would require a huge infrastructure change to go back to the older and more proven style of learning when teachers themselves rely on YouTube and videos for teaching. I do think YouTube is a great tool as a supplement for learning in a controlled environment, but the creation of Shorts on all platforms was a sign of mental destruction, and now we have some numbers - 13,000 videos watched in 3 months during school hours.
There’s more numbers stated in the article:
A second-grader in New York watched more than 700 videos in two months during school hours, including one featuring pole dancing. A tenth-grader in Oregon scrolled through more than 200 between 9 and 11:40 a.m. on March 6.
Who do you blame in this instance? It’s hard to pinpoint the problem because you can make a case for all parties involved, be it parents, Google, Apple, school districts, etc.
However you frame it, this is one of those “first world problems” that truly is a problem:
The concern about YouTube arrives during a crisis in education. American math and reading scores have slid to their lowest point in decades. Many educators, families and learning scientists say they can no longer blame pandemic learning loss; the decline has coincided with a dramatic increase in school screen time, turbocharged by the embrace of 1:1 devices by more than 88% of public schools, according to government survey data. YouTube and Meta recently lost a landmark social-media addiction trial, with a jury finding the companies negligent for operating products that harmed children. YouTube said it’s appealing the ruling.
Chromebooks—primed for Google software and YouTube—have about 60% of the K-12 mobile device market, according to Futuresource Consulting. Apple iPads are also a popular school device. YouTube is a top-viewed website on school devices, sometimes accounting for half of student traffic, according to administrators and web-filtering companies. […]
In some school districts, including Wichita, efforts to block all or part of the platform proved futile. Students found workarounds: logging out of their district accounts, sharing YouTube links in Google Slides and Docs and other backdoors in, parents, teachers and students say. Google says it’s fixed the Slides and Docs bug.
The Wall Street Journal (gift link):
AMY WARREN’S “mom siren” went off when her seventh-grader in Wichita, Kan., seemed to know too much about Fortnite, a battling-and-shooting videogame he is barred from playing.
When Warren signed into his school Google account, she was aghast: Her son Ben had accessed more than 13,000 YouTube videos during school hours from December 2024 through February 2025, according to viewing data she provided the Journal.
His feed was rife with inappropriate content. Videos glorifying gun culture, asking about silencers on Nerf guns, “head shots” where children realistically portray being killed, a video with sexually explicit jokes about neighbors sleeping together.
YouTube had served up “shorts”—video after video that it algorithmically determined that he might like.
“It made me cry,” Warren said. “All of a sudden it’s this kind of gun slop, by no fault of his own. ” She later ran for school board and won in November, eager to galvanize change.
Kudos to the mother for taking action and striving for change, but I think it would require a huge infrastructure change to go back to the older and more proven style of learning when teachers themselves rely on YouTube and videos for teaching. I do think YouTube is a great tool as a supplement for learning in a controlled environment, but the creation of Shorts on all platforms was a sign of mental destruction, and now we have some numbers - 13,000 videos watched in 3 months during school hours.
There’s more numbers stated in the article:
A second-grader in New York watched more than 700 videos in two months during school hours, including one featuring pole dancing. A tenth-grader in Oregon scrolled through more than 200 between 9 and 11:40 a.m. on March 6.
Who do you blame in this instance? It’s hard to pinpoint the problem because you can make a case for all parties involved, be it parents, Google, Apple, school districts, etc.
However you frame it, this is one of those “first world problems” that truly is a problem:
The concern about YouTube arrives during a crisis in education. American math and reading scores have slid to their lowest point in decades. Many educators, families and learning scientists say they can no longer blame pandemic learning loss; the decline has coincided with a dramatic increase in school screen time, turbocharged by the embrace of 1:1 devices by more than 88% of public schools, according to government survey data. YouTube and Meta recently lost a landmark social-media addiction trial, with a jury finding the companies negligent for operating products that harmed children. YouTube said it’s appealing the ruling.
Chromebooks—primed for Google software and YouTube—have about 60% of the K-12 mobile device market, according to Futuresource Consulting. Apple iPads are also a popular school device. YouTube is a top-viewed website on school devices, sometimes accounting for half of student traffic, according to administrators and web-filtering companies. […]
In some school districts, including Wichita, efforts to block all or part of the platform proved futile. Students found workarounds: logging out of their district accounts, sharing YouTube links in Google Slides and Docs and other backdoors in, parents, teachers and students say. Google says it’s fixed the Slides and Docs bug.
Tim Cook’s biggest legacy - keeping encryption alive.
One of the most important precedents set by Apple during Tim Cook’s reign was undoubtedly maintaining Security and Privacy as a pillar for Apple. The lengths with which Apple goes to make sure their customers’ devices and information is safe and secure is beyond what many other companies do.
Apple has set the bar, but that bar came under attack after one of the biggest showdowns between tech companies and the U.S. Government:
The FBI vs. Apple incident of 2016
In December 2015, a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California left 14 people dead and 22 injured. The suspect and his wife were eventually caught and killed in a shootout with US authorities. The main suspect, Syed Rizwan Farook, was using an iPhone, and the FBI wanted to get inside his phone and bypass the passcode to get more information. After being unable to bypass the device themselves and being afraid that too many unsuccessful attempts might factory reset the device, they requested Apple to make an unprecedented move - create a custom backdoor to iOS to allow the FBI full access to his device.
In other words, break device encryption completely by creating an unsecured version of iOS.
Tim Cook declined to make a custom version of iOS with a “backdoor key” because it would fundamentally put every single iPhone user at risk, and once Apple sets this precedent, all other phone makers would have to follow suit, leading to the demise of encryption, security, and privacy as we know it.
Tim Cook and Apple formally addressed this issue in a Customer Letter released on February 16, 2016:
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.
The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control. […]
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them. […]
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
The question is, if the terrorist had an Android phone, what would the outcome have been? Would Google allow a backdoor? I believe the answer still is not obvious today even though privacy has become more appreciated within the past 10 years, but in 2016, Apple was the best company to have been in that position.
Sundar Pichai at the time did support Apple’s decision, but with a set of tweets and not a formal letter:
The long wait for Google's response, and the extremely careful wording of Pichai's statements, hint at the difficult position Google now finds itself in with this issue. You can almost hear the PR and legal departments laboring for hours on whether and how to respond.
In the end, Google chose to put out a statement in a series of semi-formal tweets from a top executive, rather than releasing an official press release, blog post or open letter similar to Cook's. Likewise, Microsoft, Facebook and other technology giants mostly stayed quiet throughout that first day and let an independent coalition they belong to speak on their behalf.
It wasn't until more than 24 hours later that Facebook and Twitter put out statements of their own -- and Twitter, like Google, only did so through its CEO's Twitter account.
Sundar’s Tweets:
1/5 Important post by @tim_cook. Forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users’ privacy
2/5 We know that law enforcement and intelligence agencies face significant challenges in protecting the public against crime and terrorism
3/5 We build secure products to keep your information safe and we give law enforcement access to data based on valid legal orders
4/5 But that’s wholly different than requiring companies to enable hacking of customer devices & data. Could be a troubling precedent
5/5 Looking forward to a thoughtful and open discussion on this important issue
Apple’s multitude of major products under Tim Cook, such as the Apple Watch, AirPods, and even Apple Silicon have changed the game, but none of that would matter if we didn’t have encryption, privacy, and security.
One of the most important precedents set by Apple during Tim Cook’s reign was undoubtedly maintaining Security and Privacy as a pillar for Apple. The lengths with which Apple goes to make sure their customers’ devices and information is safe and secure is beyond what many other companies do.
Apple has set the bar, but that bar came under attack after one of the biggest showdowns between tech companies and the U.S. Government:
The FBI vs. Apple incident of 2016
In December 2015, a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California left 14 people dead and 22 injured. The suspect and his wife were eventually caught and killed in a shootout with US authorities. The main suspect, Syed Rizwan Farook, was using an iPhone, and the FBI wanted to get inside his phone and bypass the passcode to get more information. After being unable to bypass the device themselves and being afraid that too many unsuccessful attempts might factory reset the device, they requested Apple to make an unprecedented move - create a custom backdoor to iOS to allow the FBI full access to his device.
In other words, break device encryption completely by creating an unsecured version of iOS.
Tim Cook declined to make a custom version of iOS with a “backdoor key” because it would fundamentally put every single iPhone user at risk, and once Apple sets this precedent, all other phone makers would have to follow suit, leading to the demise of encryption, security, and privacy as we know it.
Tim Cook and Apple formally addressed this issue in a Customer Letter released on February 16, 2016:
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.
The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control. […]
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them. […]
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
The question is, if the terrorist had an Android phone, what would the outcome have been? Would Google allow a backdoor? I believe the answer still is not obvious today even though privacy has become more appreciated within the past 10 years, but in 2016, Apple was the best company to have been in that position.
Sundar Pichai at the time did support Apple’s decision, but with a set of tweets and not a formal letter:
The long wait for Google's response, and the extremely careful wording of Pichai's statements, hint at the difficult position Google now finds itself in with this issue. You can almost hear the PR and legal departments laboring for hours on whether and how to respond.
In the end, Google chose to put out a statement in a series of semi-formal tweets from a top executive, rather than releasing an official press release, blog post or open letter similar to Cook's. Likewise, Microsoft, Facebook and other technology giants mostly stayed quiet throughout that first day and let an independent coalition they belong to speak on their behalf.
It wasn't until more than 24 hours later that Facebook and Twitter put out statements of their own -- and Twitter, like Google, only did so through its CEO's Twitter account.
Sundar’s Tweets:
1/5 Important post by @tim_cook. Forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users’ privacy
2/5 We know that law enforcement and intelligence agencies face significant challenges in protecting the public against crime and terrorism
3/5 We build secure products to keep your information safe and we give law enforcement access to data based on valid legal orders
4/5 But that’s wholly different than requiring companies to enable hacking of customer devices & data. Could be a troubling precedent
5/5 Looking forward to a thoughtful and open discussion on this important issue
Apple’s multitude of major products under Tim Cook, such as the Apple Watch, AirPods, and even Apple Silicon have changed the game, but none of that would matter if we didn’t have encryption, privacy, and security.
I’m doubling down on an upgraded MagSafe system for iPhone Ultra.
The latest dummy leaks for the iPhone 18 Pro, Pro Max, and Ultra by Vadim Yuryev from Max Tech seem to confirm all the sizes and dimensions for the 3 devices, but there is some important information that is missing…📓
The latest dummy leaks for the iPhone 18 Pro, Pro Max, and Ultra by Vadim Yuryev from Max Tech seem to confirm all the sizes and dimensions for the 3 devices, but there is some important information that is missing.
There are no official dimensions for the iPhone Ultra, and the model seems incomplete. It is missing some key feature such as a flash and the MagSafe ring. My guess is the Ultra’s dummy unit isn’t a final unit unlike the 18 Pro and Pro Max models. This makes sense because even if the final dimensions for the device were available, how would case manufacturers really approach the device since the hinge mechanism has not been detailed? Any case that is made for the device will be useless without proper hinge details.
The cases will also be useless because most people will want the proper MagSafe layout, and in this case, an updated layout for more stability as I quickly conjured up on X:
I’m doubling down on MagSafe being on this device since it is an essential iPhone feature available on all iPhones Apple sells today. The logic of excluding it for their most expensive phone does not compute.
My theory - the lack of MagSafe rings on the dummy model isn’t a bad sign, but a good sign because Apple is trying to keep this new MagSafe system a secret.
More details about my MagSafe Ultra theory (from a previous post):
Instead of a single line of vertical stabilizer magnets currently in iPhones (pg 194), we get corner magnets to make MagSafe even more stable - I’m talking rock solid stable since iPhone Ultra, in its fully open position, will start swiveling on a circular charger due to weight asymmetry. Think of a square shaped mount with rounded corners that matches the iPhone Ultra’s back with 4 corner magnets, and the circular MagSafe ring in the middle. That’s the only way to keep the phone from rotating when fully opened. In the closed position, iPhone Ultra will be backwards compatible with standard circular MagSafe chargers, and this new square with rounded corners should still work with older iPhones.
For accessories, expect most older rectangular accessories to work, but they will jut out and look out of place on iPhone Ultra. I’m talking wallets, battery banks, and weird stands.
Since Apple is going all out in trying new things, how about we get custom MagSafe Ultra Battery Packs that fit flush with iPhone Ultra? If they could make a one-off battery for iPhone Air, surely the Ultra also deserves one?
Lung cancer risk is higher in people who eat…fruits and vegetables??
The new study, which surveyed 187 young patients diagnosed with lung cancer, has found an infuriating link between the incidence of lung cancer and these patients’ statistically higher consumption of healthy foods, including dark green vegetables and legumes. Medical oncologist Jorge Nieva at USC Keck, a coauthor on the new research, noted that past studies have also documented higher rates of lung cancer in agricultural workers exposed to pesticides—evidence that would support their theory of pesticides’ causal relationship to the disease.
“Our research shows that younger non-smokers who eat a higher quantity of healthy foods than the general population are more likely to develop lung cancer,” Nieva, a specialist in lung cancer, said in a statement.
“These counter-intuitive findings raise important questions about an unknown environmental risk factor for lung cancer related to otherwise beneficial food,” he noted, “that needs to be addressed.” […]
Most patients had reportedly never smoked, possibly not even once or twice at house parties.
But what most of these young cancer patients had done is eat a statistically higher daily amount of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains compared to the average member of the general public.
Here’s what Nieva’s team found when comparing this lung cancer cohort’s data to data on the eating habits recorded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Young lung cancer patients averaged about 4.3 servings of dark green vegetables and legumes per day, compared to the average American’s 3.6 servings. These patients also averaged 3.9 servings of whole grains daily, compared to the average American’s 2.6 servings.
One of the more blood-boiling things about these fruits and vegetables, according to Nieva, is that the non-organic varieties tend to also have higher pesticide residues than the food less health-conscious people are likely to enjoy, including dairy, meat, and many processed foods.
The part that pisses me off:
And it bears repeating that their survey-based research has only found a troubling overlap in these pesticide exposures and incidences of lung cancer, not concrete proof of a biochemical mechanism confirming these compounds are carcinogenic.
OK, so pesticides like the most infamous one (glyphosate) might cause cancer, but it’s not proven yet - there’s just a “troubling overlap” between pesticide exposures and cancer.
My family has been going organic with certain foods and we have discontinued the use of GMO cereal at our house, but everyone needs to go as organic as possible. In the back of my mind, that still won’t be enough to solve this issue.
A more recent therapeutic oil that I have been “dailying” these days is black seed oil. Great for many ailments including inflammation, blood sugar regulation, lowering bad and raising good cholesterol, and relevant to this story, great at neutralizing cancer-causing free radicals. One teaspoon a day is a good start, and probably enough for most people.
The other route? All food is bad for you and will kill you, so go all in and enjoy, and blame genetics at the end of the day. Honestly, this option is starting to feel more and more palatable.
The new study, which surveyed 187 young patients diagnosed with lung cancer, has found an infuriating link between the incidence of lung cancer and these patients’ statistically higher consumption of healthy foods, including dark green vegetables and legumes. Medical oncologist Jorge Nieva at USC Keck, a coauthor on the new research, noted that past studies have also documented higher rates of lung cancer in agricultural workers exposed to pesticides—evidence that would support their theory of pesticides’ causal relationship to the disease.
“Our research shows that younger non-smokers who eat a higher quantity of healthy foods than the general population are more likely to develop lung cancer,” Nieva, a specialist in lung cancer, said in a statement.
“These counter-intuitive findings raise important questions about an unknown environmental risk factor for lung cancer related to otherwise beneficial food,” he noted, “that needs to be addressed.” […]
Most patients had reportedly never smoked, possibly not even once or twice at house parties.
But what most of these young cancer patients had done is eat a statistically higher daily amount of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains compared to the average member of the general public.
Here’s what Nieva’s team found when comparing this lung cancer cohort’s data to data on the eating habits recorded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Young lung cancer patients averaged about 4.3 servings of dark green vegetables and legumes per day, compared to the average American’s 3.6 servings. These patients also averaged 3.9 servings of whole grains daily, compared to the average American’s 2.6 servings.
One of the more blood-boiling things about these fruits and vegetables, according to Nieva, is that the non-organic varieties tend to also have higher pesticide residues than the food less health-conscious people are likely to enjoy, including dairy, meat, and many processed foods.
The part that pisses me off:
And it bears repeating that their survey-based research has only found a troubling overlap in these pesticide exposures and incidences of lung cancer, not concrete proof of a biochemical mechanism confirming these compounds are carcinogenic.
OK, so pesticides like the most infamous one (glyphosate) might cause cancer, but it’s not proven yet - there’s just a “troubling overlap” between pesticide exposures and cancer.
My family has been going organic with certain foods and we have discontinued the use of GMO cereal at our house, but everyone needs to go as organic as possible. In the back of my mind, that still won’t be enough to solve this issue.
A more recent therapeutic oil that I have been “dailying” these days is black seed oil. Great for many ailments including inflammation, blood sugar regulation, lowering bad and raising good cholesterol, and relevant to this story, great at neutralizing cancer-causing free radicals. One teaspoon a day is a good start, and probably enough for most people.
The other route? All food is bad for you and will kill you, so go all in and enjoy, and blame genetics at the end of the day. Honestly, this option is starting to feel more and more palatable.
Two instances of “Face ID” like I’ve never imagined.
I spoke about my daughter not too long ago, and this past week she finally had her first cleft lip repair surgery. She was born with a mid-line cleft lip that extended into her nose and with the first surgery, the most visual defect has been corrected. She still has more surgeries in the future, but we’re taking it one step at a time. This “before” image represents what she looked like prior to surgery, and she is working her way to the “after” photo as she gets older.
The biggest change from our perspective so far is her smile. Her top lip is much narrower leading to a thinner smile, but it’s beautiful in a different way.
Speaking of other unexpected face changes, we saw multiple nurses throughout the week she spent in the hospital, and a lot of them wore face masks. Your brain subconsciously tries to complete the face of the masked person that you’re seeing day in and day out, but then you get surprised when the mask comes off and the face is not what you expected. There were no defects in their faces, but your subjective brain’s reality distortion field was expecting a certain look based on their other facial features and speech.
It’s like those AI experiments people do where they cover half their face with a hand, and ask AI to remove the hand and generate the rest of the face. It’s close, but you can tell there’s something off. My brain’s result was similar to Google’s Magic Eraser and not Apple’s Clean Up, which I consider a huge win for the human mind.
From a digital authenticity and reality point of view, Apple’s Clean Up is better because it is so bad you know the edited photo is not real and the line between reality and falsehood is obvious.
I spoke about my daughter not too long ago, and this past week she finally had her first cleft lip repair surgery. She was born with a mid-line cleft lip that extended into her nose and with the first surgery, the most visual defect has been corrected. She still has more surgeries in the future, but we’re taking it one step at a time. This “before” image represents what she looked like prior to surgery, and she is working her way to the “after” photo as she gets older.
The biggest change from our perspective so far is her smile. Her top lip is much narrower leading to a thinner smile, but it’s beautiful in a different way.
Speaking of other unexpected face changes, we saw multiple nurses throughout the week she spent in the hospital, and a lot of them wore face masks. Your brain subconsciously tries to complete the face of the masked person that you’re seeing day in and day out, but then you get surprised when the mask comes off and the face is not what you expected. There were no defects in their faces, but your subjective brain’s reality distortion field was expecting a certain look based on their other facial features and speech.
It’s like those AI experiments people do where they cover half their face with a hand, and ask AI to remove the hand and generate the rest of the face. It’s close, but you can tell there’s something off. My brain’s result was similar to Google’s Magic Eraser and not Apple’s Clean Up, which I consider a huge win for the human mind.
From a digital authenticity and reality point of view, Apple’s Clean Up is better because it is so bad you know the edited photo is not real and the line between reality and falsehood is obvious.
I saw a Series 3 Apple Watch in the wild before I saw an iPhone Air in the wild.
An older nurse was wearing it while we were in the hospital, and I’m assuming it was a Series 3. It could have been a Series 2 or older, but either way it’s pretty cool to see an almost 10 year old Apple Watch being used in 2026.
It was the 38mm variant and of course she had the best Apple Watch face…📓
An older nurse was wearing it while we were in the hospital, and I’m assuming it was a Series 3. It could have been a Series 2 or older, but either way it’s pretty cool to see an almost 10 year old Apple Watch being used in 2026.
It was the 38mm variant and of course she had the best Apple Watch face - Utility.
The straight-line text on her complications was a dead giveaway that it was the first-generation body. The straight-text complications look great on the more squared off body, but it was a necessity since the screen was much smaller than what the dimensions of the watch would assume.
Series 3 42mm versus Series 10 42mm.
42mm was the large size when the Series 3 was released, and now 42mm is the smaller Apple watch size.
The screen to body ratio has changed dramatically from the 1st generation design to the 4th generation design.
John Ternus will replace Tim Cook as Apple’s CEO, which is great news for Apple fans.
Apple announced that Tim Cook will become executive chairman of Apple’s board of directors and John Ternus, senior vice president of Hardware Engineering, will become Apple’s next chief executive officer effective on September 1, 2026. The transition, which was approved unanimously by the Board of Directors, follows a thoughtful, long-term succession planning process.
Cook will continue in his role as CEO through the summer as he works closely with Ternus on a smooth transition. As executive chairman, Cook will assist with certain aspects of the company, including engaging with policymakers around the world.
Congrats to John for the new role. Having hardware engineers at the helm is a good sign since the passion for great products stays alive, and might even grow stronger.
Look at Toyota’s former CEO, Akio Toyoda as an example. He had true passion for cars and racing, and vowed that Toyota would no longer make boring cars, leading to the revival of the Toyota Supra, a new turbocharged 3-cylinder GR Yaris and GR Corolla, and of course, the production of the Lexus LFA supercar.
Tim Cook will continue to handle the politics as Executive Chairman of Apple’s board of directors, allowing John to focus on what Apple does best - delivering great experiences with hardware and software.
Apple announced that Tim Cook will become executive chairman of Apple’s board of directors and John Ternus, senior vice president of Hardware Engineering, will become Apple’s next chief executive officer effective on September 1, 2026. The transition, which was approved unanimously by the Board of Directors, follows a thoughtful, long-term succession planning process.
Cook will continue in his role as CEO through the summer as he works closely with Ternus on a smooth transition. As executive chairman, Cook will assist with certain aspects of the company, including engaging with policymakers around the world.
Congrats to John for the new role. Having hardware engineers at the helm is a good sign since the passion for great products stays alive, and might even grow stronger.
Look at Toyota’s former CEO, Akio Toyoda as an example. He had true passion for cars and racing, and vowed that Toyota would no longer make boring cars, leading to the revival of the Toyota Supra, a new turbocharged 3-cylinder GR Yaris and GR Corolla, and of course, the production of the Lexus LFA supercar.
Tim Cook will continue to handle the politics as Executive Chairman of Apple’s board of directors, allowing John to focus on what Apple does best - delivering great experiences with hardware and software.
Buying a Milanese Loop for your aluminum Apple Watch? Think twice.
Milanese Loops are great, until they aren’t.
If you own an aluminum Apple Watch, the Milanese Loop can work with it, sometimes really well like in this Space Gray example, but you have to know its limitations.
The Milanese Loop is made out of stainless steel or Titanium, and both materials scratch glass. Technically the Titanium Milanese Loop shouldn’t scratch glass since it has a lower hardness than glass, but it could scratch the glass indirectly if there’s grit stuck in between the crevices and the silica rubs against the glass. I had a horrible experience in the past where my stainless steel Milanese Loop created scratches in a hashtag-like pattern on my aluminum Apple Watch display back in 2015.
I put my watch in my pocket when using an airplane bathroom and didn’t want to wash my hands while wearing the watch. This was when Apple Watches were not officially water resistant, so I didn’t want to take any chances. Funny thing is I would have been better off wearing the watch while washing my hands to avoid what was to come…
I came out of the bathroom and held my daughter on my lap, and she was naturally bouncing around on my lap like any 3-year old would. The watch was still in my pocket (I forgot all about it), directly underneath her bottom, and it was getting pummeled unbeknownst to me as she was squirming around. In the end the Milanese Loop left the hashtag pattern of scratches on the display which is why I avoid aluminum Apple Watches altogether. I made an exception for Jet Black last year, but I knew not to wear a Milanese Loop with it, nor put it in my pocket.
If you do choose to get a Milanese Loop for an aluminum Apple Watch, be extra careful and don’t allow the band to sit on the glass. This is not a problem if you get a Stainless Steel or Titanium Apple Watch since the display is made of sapphire.
Milanese Loops are great, until they aren’t.
If you own an aluminum Apple Watch, the Milanese Loop can work with it, sometimes really well like in this Space Gray example, but you have to know its limitations.
The Milanese Loop is made out of stainless steel or Titanium, and both materials scratch glass. Technically the Titanium Milanese Loop shouldn’t scratch glass since it has a lower hardness than glass, but it could scratch the glass indirectly if there’s grit stuck in between the crevices and the silica rubs against the glass. I had a horrible experience in the past where my stainless steel Milanese Loop created scratches in a hashtag-like pattern on my aluminum Apple Watch display back in 2015.
I put my watch in my pocket when using an airplane bathroom and didn’t want to wash my hands while wearing the watch. This was when Apple Watches were not officially water resistant, so I didn’t want to take any chances. Funny thing is I would have been better off wearing the watch while washing my hands to avoid what was to come…
I came out of the bathroom and held my daughter on my lap, and she was naturally bouncing around on my lap like any 3-year old would. The watch was still in my pocket (I forgot all about it), directly underneath her bottom, and it was getting pummeled unbeknownst to me as she was squirming around. In the end the Milanese Loop left the hashtag pattern of scratches on the display which is why I avoid aluminum Apple Watches altogether. I made an exception for Jet Black last year, but I knew not to wear a Milanese Loop with it, nor put it in my pocket.
If you do choose to get a Milanese Loop for an aluminum Apple Watch, be extra careful and don’t allow the band to sit on the glass. This is not a problem if you get a Stainless Steel or Titanium Apple Watch since the display is made of sapphire.
How to share your Apple Watch face with others.
After yesterday’s advice, it only seems right to explain how to share your watch face with others:
Go to the Watch app.
Select the watch face you want to share.
After yesterday’s advice, it only seems right to explain how to share your watch face with others:
- Go to the Watch app.
- Select the watch face you want to share.
- Click on the Share icon.
Maybe there is a way you can save your favorite Apple Watch face from being eliminated?
With watchOS 11, Apple discontinued several watch faces, the most notable one being the Explorer watch face. The cancelling continued with watchOS 26, with more (admittedly worth cancelling) watch faces that got burned and bit the dust. I’m not sure how Apple decides what faces to discontinue, but it has to be based on user preference. Apple has a ton of data on what Apple Watches are active, and they must know what watch faces are actively being used. There is probably a different metric for a watch face being active on your display, vs a watch face that is in your carousel of watch faces but isn’t actively being used. You made the watch face, but it rarely becomes your active watch face.
My guess is if you really want a particular Apple Watch face to live another year, make sure you’re actively using that watch face. If you want to go beyond the call of duty, you can share and promote that watch face to your friends, family, and even foes. The more people using it, the less likely it will be discontinued (at least that’s my theory).
In that regard, I’m evangelizing the Motion Watch face with the beautiful Jellyfish.
With watchOS 11, Apple discontinued several watch faces, the most notable one being the Explorer watch face. The cancelling continued with watchOS 26, with more (admittedly worth cancelling) watch faces that got burned and bit the dust. I’m not sure how Apple decides what faces to discontinue, but it has to be based on user preference. Apple has a ton of data on what Apple Watches are active, and they must know what watch faces are actively being used. There is probably a different metric for a watch face being active on your display, vs a watch face that is in your carousel of watch faces but isn’t actively being used. You made the watch face, but it rarely becomes your active watch face.
My guess is if you really want a particular Apple Watch face to live another year, make sure you’re actively using that watch face. If you want to go beyond the call of duty, you can share and promote that watch face to your friends, family, and even foes. The more people using it, the less likely it will be discontinued (at least that’s my theory).
In that regard, I’m evangelizing the Motion Watch face with the beautiful Jellyfish.
iPhone Air is $150 off for a brand new unlocked device at Best Buy.
The latest iPhone model being discounted by $150 for an unlocked device is something you will rarely find in the United States, and this is the first time I’m ever seeing it from a well known retailer.
Best Buy really must have a lot of stock they want to move out of storage. The 1 TB Cloud White model is sold out, but you can still snag all other variants.
(originally reported by 9to5Toys)
The latest iPhone model being discounted by $150 for an unlocked device is something you will rarely find in the United States, and this is the first time I’m ever seeing it from a well known retailer.
Best Buy really must have a lot of stock they want to move out of storage. The 1 TB Cloud White model is sold out, but you can still snag all other variants.
(originally reported by 9to5Toys)
iPhone Ultra could be the beginning of MagSafe Ultra?
The iPhone Ultra (or whatever Apple calls it), is going to be a device like no other. It will break many molds of what a traditional iPhone should be, and most important of all, it will break the MagSafe mold that has been a staple for iPhones since 2020.
A phone with the name “Ultra” in it should have Qi2 or MagSafe wireless charging built-in, and an iPhone with the name “Ultra,” accompanied with a hefty price tag, should definitely have MagSafe built-in. When I look at the dummy models for the iPhone Ultra, it definitely begs the question:
Does this device support MagSafe???
Photos released by Sonny Dickson on X show the 18 Pro and Pro Max with MagSafe circles, but the circle is missing on the Ultra. It would be an absolute deal breaker for many (including myself) if Apple skips MagSafe, but I’m hoping with iPhone Ultra, Apple is getting ready for the next generation of MagSafe on iPhone:
MagSafe Ultra.
Maybe we will get the following (all speculation of course):
Instead of a single line of vertical stabilizer magnets currently in iPhones (pg 194), we get corner magnets to make MagSafe even more stable - I’m talking rock solid stable since iPhone Ultra, in its fully open position, will start swiveling on a circular charger due to weight asymmetry. Think of a square shaped mount with rounded corners that matches the iPhone Ultra’s back with 4 corner magnets, and the circular MagSafe ring in the middle. That’s the only way to keep the phone from rotating when fully opened. In the closed position, iPhone Ultra will be backwards compatible with standard circular MagSafe chargers, and this new square with rounded corners should still work with older iPhones.
For accessories, expect most older rectangular accessories to work, but they will jut out and look out of place on iPhone Ultra. I’m talking wallets, battery banks, and weird stands.
Since Apple is going all out in trying new things, how about we get custom MagSafe Ultra Battery Packs that fit flush with iPhone Ultra? If they could make a one-off battery for iPhone Air, surely the Ultra also deserves one?
The iPhone Ultra (or whatever Apple calls it), is going to be a device like no other. It will break many molds of what a traditional iPhone should be, and most important of all, it will break the MagSafe mold that has been a staple for iPhones since 2020.
A phone with the name “Ultra” in it should have Qi2 or MagSafe wireless charging built-in, and an iPhone with the name “Ultra,” accompanied with a hefty price tag, should definitely have MagSafe built-in. When I look at the dummy models for the iPhone Ultra, it definitely begs the question:
Does this device support MagSafe???
Photos released by Sonny Dickson on X show the 18 Pro and Pro Max with MagSafe circles, but the circle is missing on the Ultra. It would be an absolute deal breaker for many (including myself) if Apple skips MagSafe, but I’m hoping with iPhone Ultra, Apple is getting ready for the next generation of MagSafe on iPhone:
MagSafe Ultra.
Maybe we will get the following (all speculation of course):
Instead of a single line of vertical stabilizer magnets currently in iPhones (pg 194), we get corner magnets to make MagSafe even more stable - I’m talking rock solid stable since iPhone Ultra, in its fully open position, will start swiveling on a circular charger due to weight asymmetry. Think of a square shaped mount with rounded corners that matches the iPhone Ultra’s back with 4 corner magnets, and the circular MagSafe ring in the middle. That’s the only way to keep the phone from rotating when fully opened. In the closed position, iPhone Ultra will be backwards compatible with standard circular MagSafe chargers, and this new square with rounded corners should still work with older iPhones.
For accessories, expect most older rectangular accessories to work, but they will jut out and look out of place on iPhone Ultra. I’m talking wallets, battery banks, and weird stands.
Since Apple is going all out in trying new things, how about we get custom MagSafe Ultra Battery Packs that fit flush with iPhone Ultra? If they could make a one-off battery for iPhone Air, surely the Ultra also deserves one?
iPhone Air bumper cases are $17 on Amazon.
You can get the Light Blue or Black for the discounted price (affiliate links provided). These do fit well on iPhone Air and for $17, it’s a fair price compared to $39.
You can get the Light Blue or Black for the discounted price (affiliate links provided). These do fit well on iPhone Air and for $17, it’s a fair price compared to $39.
watchOS 27 feature request: more triple, bite-sized widgets in Smart Stack please.
Smart Stack is great, but it becomes a drag to scroll through all your widgets when you just need a lot of different info as quick as possible. I love the default triple widget, but can we get more than one as an option? I know it will eat into my total widget count, but I’m OK with 6 of my 10 widgets being tied up into 2 blocks.
There are other triple widgets such as alarms, messages, and even the weather widget, but I want the truly independent triple widget that is not a subset of a particular app. Ideally I would like 2 triple widgets that have the following:
Messages
Digital seconds
Prayer timings
Activity Rings
Alarms
Start a Workout
Smart Stack is great, but it becomes a drag to scroll through all your widgets when you just need a lot of different, small bits of information as quick as possible. I love the default triple widget, but can we get more than one as an option? I know it will eat into my total widget count, but I’m OK with 6 of my 10 widgets being tied up into 2 blocks.
There are other triple widgets such as alarms, messages, and even the weather widget, but I want the truly independent triple widget that is not a subset of a particular app. My 2 triple widget setup would look like this:
Messages
Digital seconds
Weather temperature
Activity Rings
Prayer timings
Start a Workout
The heart is more than just a muscle.
The heart has always been at the center of emotion, purity, love, and passion, even though the brain is the organ with an unfathomably huge neural network. For comparison’s sake, the brain has about 86 billion neurons while the heart has about 40 thousand neurons.
86,000,000,000 vs 40,000 seems like a huge advantage, but the heart does have a memory, a memory that can be carried on between people who receive a heart transplant.
The heart has always been at the center of emotion, purity, love, and passion, even though the brain is the organ with an unfathomably huge neural network. For comparison’s sake, the brain has about 86 billion neurons while the heart has about 40 thousand neurons.
86,000,000,000 vs 40,000 seems like a huge advantage, but the heart does have a memory, a memory that can be carried on between people who receive a heart transplant.
The MacBook Neo shortage is the complete opposite of the iPhone Air surplus.
Great piece from Tim Culpan on his Culpium substack talking about the MacBook Neo “problem” with a summarized version on MacRumors.
All I can say is it’s the exact opposite of the iPhone Air dilemma, also brought to you by Tim Culpan.
Great piece from Tim Culpan on his Culpium substack talking about the MacBook Neo “problem” with a summarized version on MacRumors.
All I can say is it’s the exact opposite of the iPhone Air dilemma, also brought to you by Tim Culpan.
Prominent Islamic scholar talks about his conversion.
Funny story that you have to read till the end to get the humor.
Funny story that you have to read till the end to get the humor.
The original iPhone’s epic plastic screen story is nonchalantly repeating itself with Ceramic Shield 2.
Everyone knows the famous story of the original iPhone, where Steve Jobs was not happy when the plastic screen got gouged by his keys in his pocket. The iPhone was already announced to the public, and they only had 5 months to fix this issue before the iPhone ships. It was an impossible timeline, but the inevitable had to happen:
The iPhone had to ship with a glass screen.
An excerpt from Apple in China by Patrick McGee (affiliate link) describing the ordeal:
Two weeks after unveiling “the one device,” Steve Jobs walked into a routine divisional meeting. He was in a bad mood and didn’t look good. Then he pulled out his prototype iPhone, which looked worse. The keys in his pocket had cut a huge gouge across its plastic screen. He threw the unit onto the boardroom table toward Steve Zadesky and demanded: “Make it glass.” It wasn’t the first time the idea had come up. In September 2006, just four months earlier, Jobs had grown angry about smaller scratch marks and complained to a mid-level executive: “Look at this, look at this—what’s with the screen?” The executive responded, “Well, Steve, we have a glass prototype, but it fails the one-meter drop test one hundred times out of one hundred times.” Jobs cut the executive off. “I just want to know if you’re going to make the f**king thing work.” Now, in January, Jobs wasn’t taking excuses. Apple had just announced the phone would be available in June; the date couldn’t be pushed back. Six months would’ve been a rush job; but they had even less time than that. The display is a module that had to be ready months ahead of the assembly.
What followed is perhaps the best-known anecdote on the manufacturing of the original iPhone. Jobs reached out to Wendell Weeks, CEO of Corning, a glassmaker in upstate New York, saying he needed the hardest glass they could make. Weeks told Jobs about Gorilla Glass, something Corning had developed for fighter-jet cockpits back in the 1960s. They’d never found a market for it and abandoned the project. Jobs convinced him to begin production immediately.
The decision risked throwing Zadesky, who managed all the mechanical parts for the iPhone project, into a tailspin. He and Tang Tan, another iPod veteran, had to quickly put together a touchscreen supply chain, as glass and plastic function in totally different ways. Fadell likens this “crazy” phase to landing “a fleet of 200 jets on an aircraft carrier, all within minutes of each other. And all the jets were running out of fuel.” Apple needed to find manufacturers that were highly competent, but with enough capacity to free up their top talent.
Every iPhone screen has always been glass, but glass still scratches no matter how OCD you are about it. More specifically, most screens on phones scratch at a level 6 with deeper grooves at a level 7 on Mohs scale of hardness. It’s a common phrase you hear as a tech nerd courtesy of Zack, but that stopped in 2025 with the release of Ceramic Shield 2.
Apple introduced Ceramic Shield 2 for iPhone 17, 17 Pro, and iPhone Air, which provides 3x better scratch resistance than previous iPhones. It seemed like a standard upgrade with the same fluffy marketing, but it really does make a real world difference. I never use a screen protector on my screens and upgrade iPhones every year, and my iPhone Air’s front glass is completely scratch free 6 months later.
This has never happened to me before.
Not a single scratch.
And that’s while using it caseless!
There probably isn’t an epic story behind the birth of Ceramic Shield 2 - just years of iterating and perfecting the glass chemistry to make it more durable - but the effect it has had on iPhone displays is seriously underrated.
Everyone knows the famous story of the original iPhone, where Steve Jobs was not happy when the plastic screen got gouged by his keys in his pocket. The iPhone was already announced to the public, and they only had 5 months to fix this issue before the iPhone ships. It was an impossible timeline, but the inevitable had to happen:
The iPhone had to ship with a glass screen.
An excerpt from Apple in China by Patrick McGee (affiliate link) describing the ordeal:
Two weeks after unveiling “the one device,” Steve Jobs walked into a routine divisional meeting. He was in a bad mood and didn’t look good. Then he pulled out his prototype iPhone, which looked worse. The keys in his pocket had cut a huge gouge across its plastic screen. He threw the unit onto the boardroom table toward Steve Zadesky and demanded: “Make it glass.” It wasn’t the first time the idea had come up. In September 2006, just four months earlier, Jobs had grown angry about smaller scratch marks and complained to a mid-level executive: “Look at this, look at this—what’s with the screen?” The executive responded, “Well, Steve, we have a glass prototype, but it fails the one-meter drop test one hundred times out of one hundred times.” Jobs cut the executive off. “I just want to know if you’re going to make the f**king thing work.” Now, in January, Jobs wasn’t taking excuses. Apple had just announced the phone would be available in June; the date couldn’t be pushed back. Six months would’ve been a rush job; but they had even less time than that. The display is a module that had to be ready months ahead of the assembly.
What followed is perhaps the best-known anecdote on the manufacturing of the original iPhone. Jobs reached out to Wendell Weeks, CEO of Corning, a glassmaker in upstate New York, saying he needed the hardest glass they could make. Weeks told Jobs about Gorilla Glass, something Corning had developed for fighter-jet cockpits back in the 1960s. They’d never found a market for it and abandoned the project. Jobs convinced him to begin production immediately.
The decision risked throwing Zadesky, who managed all the mechanical parts for the iPhone project, into a tailspin. He and Tang Tan, another iPod veteran, had to quickly put together a touchscreen supply chain, as glass and plastic function in totally different ways. Fadell likens this “crazy” phase to landing “a fleet of 200 jets on an aircraft carrier, all within minutes of each other. And all the jets were running out of fuel.” Apple needed to find manufacturers that were highly competent, but with enough capacity to free up their top talent.
Every iPhone screen has always been glass, but glass still scratches no matter how OCD you are about it. More specifically, most screens on phones scratch at a level 6 with deeper grooves at a level 7 on Mohs scale of hardness. It’s a common phrase you hear as a tech nerd courtesy of Zack, but that stopped in 2025 with the release of Ceramic Shield 2.
Apple introduced Ceramic Shield 2 for iPhone 17, 17 Pro, and iPhone Air, which provides 3x better scratch resistance than previous iPhones. It seemed like a standard upgrade with the same fluffy marketing, but it really does make a real world difference. I never use a screen protector on my screens and upgrade iPhones every year, and my iPhone Air’s front glass is completely scratch free 6 months later.
This has never happened to me before.
Not a single scratch.
And that’s while using it caseless!
There probably isn’t an epic story behind the birth of Ceramic Shield 2 - just years of iterating and perfecting the glass chemistry to make it more durable - but the effect it has had on iPhone displays is seriously underrated.
Supporting my website.
I have been writing about Apple for over 3 years now, and although it’s a lot of fun (and stress!), I’ve decided to monetize to help support my website through an Amazon Affiliate Account. Every affiliate product that I will recommend will be a product that I bought myself or one that I know is a reliable product.
For example, an affiliate link to a MacBook Pro 16-inch is not something I use, but it is obviously a reputable product. An off-brand MagSafe mount on the other hand? I will test it myself and use it for 30 days before throwing affiliate links out there to make sure it’s worth your money.
I don’t have a dedicated affiliate links landing page, but in the meantime you will see links in my articles with relevant content.
I have been writing about Apple for over 3 years now, and although it’s a lot of fun (and stress!), I’ve decided to monetize to help support my website through an Amazon Affiliate Account. Every affiliate product that I will recommend will be a product that I bought myself or one that I know is a reliable product.
For example, an affiliate link to a MacBook Pro 16-inch is not something I use, but it is obviously a reputable product. An off-brand MagSafe mount on the other hand? I will test it myself and use it for 30 days before throwing affiliate links out there to make sure it’s worth your money.
I don’t have a dedicated affiliate links landing page, but in the meantime you will see links in my articles with relevant content.
Apple shows off rare prototypes to the Wall Street Journal.
Nice little video with Tim Cook and Ben Cohen from the Wall Street Journal talking about key moments in Apple’s history, showing some rare prototypes, and, “one more thing” from the Wall Street Journal for Tim Cook. Worth a watch.
Nice little video with Tim Cook and Ben Cohen from the Wall Street Journal talking about key moments in Apple’s history, showing some rare prototypes, and, “one more thing” from the Wall Street Journal for Tim Cook. Worth a watch.