stop

Married At First Sight Australia groom Steve sparked controversy during Intimacy Week

Fans tuning into the latest episode of Married At First Sight Australia branded one groom a ‘complete clown’ after his wife departed the programme mere minutes into the instalment.

Audiences in the UK are presently enjoying the newest series of the reality dating programme from Australia, where couples encounter each other for the very first time at the altar and develop their relationship from that point onwards. The outcomes thus far are predominantly mixed to say the least.

This week has witnessed the couples participating in intimacy week. As part of this, expert Alessandra Rampolla recently encouraged all the brides to embrace their ultimate fantasy with their partner.

However, not every evening proceeded according to plan. This was particularly true for Rebecca and Steve. Rebecca was shown browsing at an adult shop and purchased some outfits she believed her husband might appreciate seeing her model, reports OK!.

Regrettably for her, he displayed considerable apathy towards the prospect of her dressing up for him. In his own words, he stated: “I didn’t say don’t do it. I just said it would make me very uncomfortable if it happens.”

He subsequently dismissed the notion that Rebecca’s sole motivation for participating in the programme was to find love. He asserted that he ‘was sure’ there must be alternative reasons and suggested people don’t disclose everything in their audition tapes.

The situation only deteriorated for him as he joked to expert Alessandra that he didn’t have an earpiece in his ear to provide him with the correct responses. Misinterpreting his comment as a jab at her, she retorted sharply: “Honestly the lack of respect you are showing me here to someone who is trying to help you is appalling. Tread lightly. I don’t take to this well.”

Other grooms even confessed to the camera that they believed he was acting selfishly, with one suggesting that a 50 year old man should know how to address a woman. Steve insisted he wasn’t referring directly to Alessandra, but she questioned who else his remark could be aimed at.

Later, during his on-camera interview with producers, he admitted that he hadn’t absorbed much from his conversation with Alessandra, largely dismissing everything that transpired. He also mentioned that he chose to withdraw and felt there was a lot of contradiction in the room.

Viewers at home were quick to react to the latest developments. One person commenting on the MAFS subreddit said: “So what are Steve’s ulterior motives for being here? if he’s so sure there has to be some.” Another viewer remarked: “Ugh.. Steve is becoming more and more awful…”

While Rebecca initially left the flat, she returned after spending a night apart, but then it was soon Steve’s turn to depart. After making no headway following his session with Rebecca, he packed up and left.

Viewers were left astonished by his decision, with one commenting: “Rebecca deserves a lot better. Cos what is this “so much for me” business. What exactly is she doing?? I’m so confused.”

Another responded: “Goodness Steve is diabolical and such a liar, he hasn’t tried.” While someone else pleaded: “Steve should just leave, he clearly doesn’t fancy or want Rebecca. Stop wasting everyone’s time.”

Meanwhile, one fan questioned on X: “Did Steve realise he was on a tv programme?! #mafsau”, another posted: “If Steve is SO conservative, why even apply for this show, knowing what it’s all about #mafsau” while a different audience member added: “Did Steve not watch #MAFSAU before he applied?”

Married at First Sight Australia continues tomorrow at 7.30pm on E4 and streaming on Channel 4.

March 25 (UPI) — Republican senators have again backed President Donald Trump‘s war against Iran, blocking a Democratic-led effort to curb his ability to wage war without congressional approval.

The Senate voted 53-47, mostly along party lines, on Tuesday evening to block Democrats’ war powers resolution, the third time Senate Republicans have blocked a resolution to require the removal of U.S. forces from hostilities against Iran unless Congress authorizes them.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the only Republican to vote in favor of the motion with his Democratic colleagues, while Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was the only Democrat to vote against it with the GOP lawmakers.

Since the war began on Feb. 28, when the United States and Israel attacked Iran, Democratic lawmakers have argued the war is unconstitutional because only Congress has the power to declare war, while Republicans contend Trump is within his authority as commander in chief to defend the country.

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut said he forced the vote Tuesday to have debate on Trump’s war in Iran.

“This is increasingly important because this war is spiraling out of control,” he said in a video posted to social media ahead of heading into the Senate.

“The cost of plastic just doubled, prices at the pump are sky high, the Strait of Hormuz is still shut down, new wars are breaking out in the region, we’ve had a dozen Americans killed, $2 billion being spent a day and for what!”

From the floor, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called on Republicans to vote in favor of the resolution, saying it was time for the war to come to an end.

“The war is expanding, and the Senate has an obligation to step in,” he said.

“I say to my Republican colleagues: if there was ever a time to stand up for the authority of the Senate, stand up for the powers given to us through the Constitution, the time is now.”

Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho, who has repeatedly argued against the war powers resolution, took to the floor again on Tuesday to say the Democrats were going to receive the same negative result as they had the two previous times.

Iran started the war, he said, pointing to the Iran hostage crisis of 1979 and stating that the Islamic regime has since killed thousands of Americans.

“The president of the United States said, ‘We have had enough.’ He had very good reasons to pull the trigger at the time that he did and… The fact of the matter is, we are in conflict,” he said, stating the Senate needs to back the Americans fighting in the war and their president.

“We all know this isn’t going to go on very long, but it needs to be done.”

The vote was held less than a week after Democrats used the war powers resolution to force a vote on Wednesday on a similar motion, which Republicans blocked in the same 53-47 outcome. Both Paul and Fetterman voted against their parties.

If you’re looking for something to watch that not only will make you laugh, but will also leave you on the edge of your seat with plot twists, TV fans recommend one particular four-series show

Television viewers have been busy debating which programme has the “biggest plot twist” and it appears there’s one show that stands out from the rest. The question was posed in Reddit’s ‘Watchever’ community after a user looked for inspiration as to what shows they should check out next.

“What TV show had the biggest plot twist you never saw coming?” they asked. “What’s a TV show that completely shocked you with a plot twist you didn’t expect at all?” The Reddit user elaborated: “The kind that makes you pause and think, ‘Wait… what just happened?’ For many people, shows like Mr. Robot or Westworld had moments like that. Which one got you the most?”

It prompted several people to point out a four-series sitcom that first aired in 2016 and is currently available to stream on Netflix.

“This is as good of a place as any for my regular reminder for people who haven’t seen The Good Place to give it a try,” one person declared.

“The concept seems a little cheesy at first, until you realise that it’s actually about way more than what it seems like in the first season. And aside from the deeper philosophical stuff, it’s really f***ing funny.”

A second agreed, joking: “The Good Place… then The Good Place… then The Good Place again.”

A third fan suggested: “You need to go on the journey the characters go on. That’s the great thing about The Good Place; the show doesn’t give the characters the answers, they figure them out.

“And as a result it isn’t preachy about the philosophical stuff, even though the show definitely has a point that they wanted to get across about mortality.”

Whilst a fourth Reddit user praised: “It’s a sitcom structured like a mystery box drama, ending each episode with a cliffhanger. It’s easy to binge because of this. And unlike dramatic mystery box shows, the ending is amazing.”

However, a fifth who was sceptical at first confessed: “I didn’t watch The Good Place until it was on Netflix and from the first episode I thought something was off and kept looking for little hints here and there but never really anything that really stuck out on the first watch.

“Now on the second watching… I have noticed a lot more.”

The comedy stars Kristen Bell as Eleanor Shellstrop, Ted Danson as Michael and William Jackson Harper as Chidi Anagonye.

Netflix’s synopsis states: “Due to an error, self-absorbed Eleanor Shellstrop arrives at the Good Place after her death. Determined to stay, she tries to become a better person.”

On IMDb, meanwhile, the show boasts a very impressive score of 8.2 out of 10 following 219,000 reviews.

Frank Lampard hopes Matt Grimes’ “very classy” decision not to celebrate his goal against Swansea City will end the boos when the midfielder faces his old club.

Grimes was given an icy reception on his first return to the Swansea.com Stadium since ending a 10-year spell as a Swan when he joined Coventry City in January 2025.

Yet when he responded by scoring Coventry’s second goal in the Championship leaders’ 3-0 win on Saturday, the 30-year-old raised his hands in apology.

“A lot of people, maybe including me, would have had a little celebration having got booed, but it’s a sign of the man he is,” said Sky Blues boss Lampard.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s David Zahniser, with an assist from Libor Jany and Howard Blume, giving you the latest on city and county government.

It was a dramatic moment for City Hall: Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, appearing at a meeting about reining in certain traffic stops by police, revealed that he had been pulled over only two days earlier.

Harris-Dawson, who is Black, told his colleagues that police have stopped him four times since he took office in 2015. During the most recent incident, he said, an officer asked him a number of questions, including, “How do you have this vehicle?”

“It was as traumatic on Wednesday as it was when I was 16,” Harris-Dawson said at the March 6 committee meeting.

It wasn’t the Los Angeles Police Department that pulled over Harris-Dawson’s car, a Tesla Model Y with a government license plate. Instead, it was an officer from the L.A. Unified School District police, who began trailing him while he was heading to work on the freeway, Harris-Dawson said recently.

The district has provided minimal details, and its police union has not commented. But the union that represents nearly 8,700 LAPD officers, known for its bare knuckle politics, is now deeply involved.

Ricky Mendoza, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, urged Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman on Thursday to investigate whether Harris-Dawson attempted to resist, delay or obstruct the officer who carried out the traffic stop, in violation of state law.

Mendoza pointed to a California Post story that accused Harris-Dawson of contacting an unnamed school board member during the incident “in an apparent effort to get out of the citation.”

Tom Saggau, a police union spokesperson, said Harris-Dawson was caught driving “recklessly” in a school zone — and should have disclosed it during his remarks about the incident.

“Mr. Harris-Dawson’s testimony implied LAPD pulled him over because of his race, not his driving behavior,” Saggau said in an email. “That implication painted our minority-majority membership as racist, and we will always stand up for our membership and correct falsehoods and other tall tales.”

Harris-Dawson, for his part, told The Times he received the citation for attempting to enter a left turn lane too early — before it was actually marked as a turn lane. That maneuver did not pose a threat to anyone, he said.

Harris-Dawson said he did contact other people during the traffic stop, to ensure he had real-time witnesses. He would not provide their names.

“I called several people during that encounter so that there was a record of it besides myself,” he said.

The Times reached out to the school board about the police union’s claims. Four of the seven, either in person or through a representative, said they did not talk to Harris-Dawson about the stop.

The dispute comes as the council is weighing new limits on “pretextual stops,” where officers use a minor violation as justification to pull someone over and then investigate whether a more serious crime has occurred. The stops have disproportionately affected Black and Latino drivers, and the LAPD has scaled back their use over the past decade.

At the meeting where Harris-Dawson revealed he had been pulled over, two council committees were discussing next steps on the issue.

On Thursday, a Harris-Dawson aide hit back at the union, accusing the group of trying to divert the public’s attention away from that work.

“Just like pretextual traffic stops, the call for these pointless investigations violates the public trust, is wholly ineffective, and wastes precious resources that could be used to keep us safe,” said Harris-Dawson spokesperson Cerrina Tayag-Rivera in a statement this week.

Asked about his recent experience with the school police, Harris-Dawson said: “It’s not up to the driver to determine if a stop is pretextual, but it felt pretextual.”

School district officials have offered only minimal information about the incident.

“During our morning school drop-off, a Los Angeles School Police Department officer conducted a traffic stop based on an observed moving traffic violation in the vicinity of one of our high schools and issued the driver a citation,” the statement said.

Harris-Dawson told The Times that the encounter began the morning of March 4, during his drive from his South L.A. home to City Hall, when he noticed a white, unmarked car following him on the northbound 110 Freeway.

He took the Adams Boulevard offramp, turned right on Adams and headed toward Main Street, with the unmarked car following him through multiple intersections. When he turned left on Main, the officer turned on his lights and pulled him over, he said.

The officer walked up to the car with his hand on his gun and told him to roll down the windows, Harris-Dawson said.

“Because it was an unmarked car … I thought I was dealing with Immigration and Customs Enforcement,” he said.

Harris-Dawson said the officer told him that he had illegally crossed the double-yellow line in the center of the street, preparing to turn left before his car was actually in the marked left-turn lane.

The intersection is four blocks from Santee High School.

Harris-Dawson said the officer asked him how he came to possess the car. He informed the officer that it was a city vehicle and that he sits on the council. He handed the officer his driver’s license and, at a certain point, demanded it back.

The officer refused twice, Harris-Dawson said.

“He said, ‘Are you accusing me of taking your property?’” Harris-Dawson said. “I said, ‘That’s absolutely what I’m accusing you of.’”

Harris-Dawson said he was cited for violating the state vehicle code that prohibits motorists from driving the double-yellow lines.

“That stop was not about traffic safety,” he said, adding: “It was an investigative stop where the officer decided to give a citation, frankly, because I failed the attitude test.”

Harris-Dawson said through his spokesperson that he has paid the $238 citation. Asked if he is considering any legal action, he responded: “I’m weighing all my options.”

Meanwhile, Mendoza said he wants not just the D.A. but also City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto to investigate Harris-Dawson’s behavior during the stop, determining who he called, what he said, and whether the officer was contacted by a school board member.

The police union president said it’s “unethical and potentially illegal for a city leader to use their position of power to attempt to avoid accountability for their reckless driving in a school zone.”

The Police Protective League is well known for its heavy involvement in city politics, especially during election season. On the Westside, the union has already put nearly $500,000 into efforts to reelect Councilmember Traci Park.

The union has endorsed Mayor Karen Bass, a close ally of Harris-Dawson, but hasn’t been spending on her behalf.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, who sits on the council’s public safety committee, said he believes the union is trying to “bully” Harris-Dawson, to ensure that others remain silent about pretextual stops.

“I think the council president is very courageously bringing up a reform on one of the most racist practices” in the LAPD, he said.

State of play

— DROPPING CHAVEZ: The bombshell New York Times report that found that labor organizer Cesar Chavez sexually abused minors left the state’s elected officials scrambling to rename streets, buildings and of course, the holiday itself. In L.A., Bass and several council members said they would rename the March 31 holiday “Farm Workers Day,” a move also backed at the county level by Supervisor Janice Hahn. Meanwhile, Raul Claros, running for an Eastside council seat, said Cesar Chavez Avenue should be renamed Dolores Huerta Avenue.

— DEMS WEIGH IN: The L.A. County Democratic Party threw its endorsement behind Bass and Councilmembers Eunisses Hernandez, Katy Yaroslavsky, Monica Rodriguez, Hugo Soto-Martínez and Tim McOsker. The group also backed several newcomers: Marissa Roy for city attorney, Zach Sokoloff for city controller and council candidates Barri Worth Girvan and Jose Ugarte.

— PLUS THE COUNTY: The Dems also threw their support behind four countywide candidates: Sheriff Robert Luna, Assessor Jeffrey Prang, Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and State Sen. Maria Elena Durazo, who is running to replace termed-out Supervisor Hilda Solis.

— SPEAKING OF WHICH: It’s been pretty clear from the past year that Horvath is not a fan of Bass, offering bracing critiques of the city’s approach to homelessness and other issues. But her four colleagues — Hahn, Solis, Kathryn Barger and Holly Mitchell — have all lined up behind the mayor’s reelection, according to a campaign announcement issued Friday.

— POLICE PAYOUT: A jury awarded $5.9 million to a former LAPD commander who claimed she was wrongfully fired over an alcohol-fueled incident in 2018. The commander, Nicole Mehringer, said she was held to a different standard than her male colleagues, losing her job after being arrested on a charge of public intoxication.

— MINDING MEASURE ULA: Councilmember Ysabel Jurado was named the chair of a new three-member ad hoc committee formed to take a fresh look at the impacts of Measure ULA, the 2022 tax on high-end property sales. She will be joined by Councilmembers John Lee and Imelda Padilla in examining the measure, which has been criticized by real estate leaders.

— HOLLYWOOD’S HOMELESS: Bass and Soto-Martínez celebrated the opening of a new homeless services hub on Hollywood Boulevard to help unhoused residents shower, find new clothes, obtain meals and receive help finding an apartment or a bed in an interim housing facility.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to address homelessness went to South Los Angeles, focusing on the area around Broadway and 23rd Street, according to the mayor’s team.
• On the docket next week: The council meets Tuesday to discuss its strategy for complying with Senate Bill 79, which seeks to add taller, denser apartments within a half mile of rail and dedicated bus stops.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

BBC Radio 1 presenter Greg James completed his epic 1,000km tandem bike challenge for Comic Relief.

Following eight days of gruelling effort, BBC presenter Greg James completed his enormous cycling challenge for Comic Relief on Friday afternoon, having covered 1,000km on a tandem bicycle.

Setting off from Weymouth on Friday 13th, the 40-year-old journeyed across England, Wales and Scotland, concluding his expedition in Edinburgh.

Whilst celebrity companions including Jamie Laing and Prince William joined him en route, he tackled the final leg of his ride solo.

During Friday night’s live Comic Relief broadcast (March 20th), Greg appeared alongside Davina McCall on stage to discover his fundraising total. Davina announced he’d amassed an incredible £4,225,939 as the audience broke into thunderous applause.

He responded: “Wow! Thank you to everyone who donated, wow.” Standing momentarily lost for words, spectators began chanting his name in solidarity, reports Wales Online.

Though the BBC broadcaster protested: “I’m uncomfortable with this, please stop. I’m uncomfortable with this. I said, when I finished today, I said please I’ve had too much praise for this now.

“It was a daft idea to raise money and awareness of this amazing charity that Comic Relief supports.

“Can I say one thing? Treat people like you’re treating a minor celebrity that’s riding a tandem past you. There’s too much coming my way, put it somewhere else!”

Discussing his progress thus far, Greg revealed he’d begun cycling in the early hours of this morning. He said: “I’m overjoyed with how much money we’ve raised with this thing and how joyful we’ve managed to make the tandem adventure!”

Meanwhile during the BBC programme, Davina was reduced to tears upon hearing the devastating account of one mother who lost her infant to malaria.

Having chosen to work on the frontline and gain medical knowledge to assist women in the community, preventing the same anguish she’d experienced, Davina became visibly emotional.

As the pre-recorded clip concluded, she said: “Mothers, helping mothers. I love that.

“Community health workers are needed now more than ever. Comic Relief, with your donations, is supporting projects like LWALA and people like Susan, who are helping to save lives.

“She went through something so terrible, and she decided to help others save the lives of their children.

“All of us watching tonight, we’ve all got something in common. We all made it past our fifth birthday, but isn’t that something that every child deserves? Please pick up your phones right now.”

Comic Relief: Funny For Money is available to watch on BBC iPlayer.

March 16 (UPI) — Kenya and Russia announced on Monday that Kenyans will no longer be recruited by the Russian military and sent to fight in Ukraine.

The move follows a Kenyan intelligence report indicating that more than 1,000 people from Kenya and other African nations in recent months have been recruited into deployment on the front lines of the war between Russia and Ukraine by “rogue” agencies participating in human trafficking.

The report, released in February, alleged that of Kenyans recruited for the war, 10 died, 28 were missing, 39 were hospitalized and others were fighting for Russia in Ukraine, The Kenyan Daily Post reported.

“We have agreed that Kenyans will no longer be enlisted for special operations through the defense ministry,” Kenyan Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi said during a news conference. “They will no longer be eligible to be enlisted.”

The nations also were expected to sign a labor agreement aimed at protecting Kenyans working in Russia — specifically in drone manufacturing — which will cover people working specifically for the military or for other related industries, he said.

Mudavadi told The BBC that Kenya has shut down more than 600 agencies that were lying to Kenyans about a range of possible jobs in Russia and other countries, with many ending up in Ukraine.

Russia has not given answers to relatives at its embassy in Kenya, nor has it commented on reports that human traffickers were fooling people into being enlisted in the war with lies about well-paid jobs.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Lavrov said during the news conference that all foreign fighters, including those from Kenya, had not been coerced or lied to and their voluntary service complied with Russian law.

“Once a contract is terminated, the individual is no longer bound and is free to make their own decisions,” Lavov said, although Kenyans who have volunteered to join the war have to find and pay for their own travel home.

Ukraine’s foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha, alleged in November that at least 1,400 people from Africa from 36 countries have been sent to Ukraine by Russia, many of whom have been captured as prisoners of war.

Oscar winner Pavel Talankin called for ‘an end to all wars’ as he received the best documentary award for “Mr Nobody Against Putin”.

Passport holders have been urged to avoid wearing a common item of clothing when flying. When travelling on planes, there are certain items you should never wear

Every day, thousands of individuals globe-trot, but passport holders are now being advised to steer clear of a certain popular garment. When jetting off to sunnier climes, it’s only natural to adjust your wardrobe accordingly and prepare for the balmy weather; however, there’s a particular item you should avoid donning when boarding a plane.

You might be surprised to learn that your choice of attire can significantly influence both your travel experience and your safety. That’s why travellers are being urged to refrain from wearing this specific item when embarking on a flight in future, and it’s advice everyone would do well to heed.

The issue was recently spotlighted by Polly Ann, who goes by the handle Travel with Polly Ann on Instagram, and regularly imparts valuable travel tips to her multitude of followers. Unbeknownst to many, certain items of clothing are best stowed away in your suitcase when flying.

Polly Ann enumerates several garments she personally avoids, but one stands out as crucial from a travel safety perspective. It could have serious implications in the event of an emergency.

She divulged what people need to know in a frank post. It’s advice worth heeding, as it could greatly affect your travel experience.

Imparting wisdom to passport holders, she stated: “Things never to wear on a plane. Open-toed shoes.

“Sandals and open-toed footwear are discouraged because aircraft floors and bathrooms aren’t very clean and they don’t protect your feet in case of an emergency.

“Offensive clothing. Anything with profanity, lewd graphics or offensive messaging could lead to being asked to change or even denied boarding under some airline dress codes.”

She proceeds to mention several other items she’d steer clear of but, regarding safety, footwear is particularly crucial. Whilst they’re not typically prohibited on aircraft, travellers are actually discouraged from wearing sandals.

There are several reasons why it’s advisable to avoid them when flying. You might never have considered they can actually present hazards.

Why should they be avoided?

Experts generally recommend passengers avoid wearing sandals or open-toed footwear on flights due to safety risks during an emergency evacuation, the possibility of foot injuries from falling objects and hygiene issues.

If you do choose to wear them, it’s recommended you also wear socks. There are multiple reasons behind this guidance.

During an emergency, such as an evacuation, sandals can slip off, making it challenging to run or walk across harsh surfaces like tarmac, broken glass or wreckage. Additionally, aircraft floors are frequently dirty and chilly, meaning wearing sandals leaves your feet vulnerable to bacteria.

Aeroplanes are typically cold, and feet have a tendency to swell during lengthy flights, rendering the footwear increasingly uncomfortable. You may also be required to remove sandals at security checkpoints, which could extend your time getting through the airport.

Hence, it’s simpler all around if you refrain from wearing them. There are a few reasons why they could land you in a bit of trouble.

Inside the Washington bubble, we look inside the chaos shaping the US-Israeli war on Iran, from celebrations at DC power dinners and the Secretary of State admitting US defense of Israel to the Epstein files fading from public view. With low popular support for the war, can American voters do anything to stop it?

In this episode: 

• Patty Culhane (@PattyCulhane), Al Jazeera English Correspondent

Episode credits:

This episode was produced by Marcos Bartolomé, Sari el-Khalili, and Catherine Nouhan, with Spencer Cline, Tuleen Barakat, Maya Hamadeh, and our host, Malika Bilal. It was edited by Alexandra Locke. Special thanks to James Hamilton.

Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad al-Melhem. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer.

Connect with us:

@AJEPodcasts on X, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube

President Trump on Friday directed federal agencies to stop using technology from San Francisco artificial intelligence company Anthropic, escalating a high-profile clash between the AI startup and the Pentagon over safety.

In a Friday post on the social media site Truth Social, Trump described the company as “radical left” and “woke.”

“We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump said.

The president’s harsh words mark a major escalation in the ongoing battle between some in the Trump administration and several technology companies over the use of artificial intelligence in defense tech.

Anthropic has been sparring with the Pentagon, which had threatened to end its $200-million contract with the company on Friday if it didn’t loosen restrictions on its AI model so it could be used for more military purposes. Anthropic had been asking for more guarantees that its tech wouldn’t be used for surveillance of Americans or autonomous weapons.

The tussle could hobble Anthropic’s business with the government. The Trump administration said the company was added to a sweeping national security blacklist, ordering federal agencies to immediately discontinue use of its products and barring any government contractors from maintaining ties with it.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who met with Anthropic’s Chief Executive Dario Amodei this week, criticized the tech company after Trump’s Truth Social post.

“Anthropic delivered a master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon,” he wrote Friday on social media site X.

Anthropic didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Anthropic announced a two-year agreement with the Department of Defense in July to “prototype frontier AI capabilities that advance U.S. national security.”

The company has an AI chatbot called Claude, but it also built a custom AI system for U.S. national security customers.

On Thursday, Amodei signaled the company wouldn’t cave to the Department of Defense’s demands to loosen safety restrictions on its AI models.

The government has emphasized in negotiations that it wants to use Anthropic’s technology only for legal purposes, and the safeguards Anthropic wants are already covered by the law.

Still, Amodei was worried about Washington’s commitment.

“We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner,” he said in a blog post. “However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values.”

Tech workers have backed Anthropic’s stance.

Unions and worker groups representing 700,000 employees at Amazon, Google and Microsoft said this week in a joint statement that they’re urging their employers to reject these demands as well if they have additional contracts with the Pentagon.

“Our employers are already complicit in providing their technologies to power mass atrocities and war crimes; capitulating to the Pentagon’s intimidation will only further implicate our labor in violence and repression,” the statement said.

Anthropic’s standoff with the U.S. government could benefit its competitors, such as Elon Musk’s xAI or OpenAI.

Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and one of Anthropic’s biggest competitors, told CNBC in an interview that he trusts Anthropic.

“I think they really do care about safety, and I’ve been happy that they’ve been supporting our war fighters,” he said. “I’m not sure where this is going to go.”

Anthropic has distinguished itself from its rivals by touting its concern about AI safety.

The company, valued at roughly $380 billion, is legally required to balance making money with advancing the company’s public benefit of “responsible development and maintenance of advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity.”

Developers, businesses, government agencies and other organizations use Anthropic’s tools. Its chatbot can generate code, write text and perform other tasks. Anthropic also offers an AI assistant for consumers and makes money from paid subscriptions as well as contracts. Unlike OpenAI, which is testing ads in ChatGPT, Anthropic has pledged not to show ads in its chatbot Claude.

The company has roughly 2,000 employees and has revenue equivalent to about $14 billion a year.

Airbnb has gained popularity over the years for its cozy and unique places to stay across the world, but one user of the app is ‘begging’ hosts to stop using 1 thing

An Airbnb user is “begging” hosts to stop using 1 thing in their rooms, calling it “weird” and “uncomfortable”.

When visiting new towns, cities or countries, people have different ideas of where they would like to stay.Some people prefer the convenience of a well-placed hotel where you know you’re going to get a comfy and clean room with a number of amenities, such as a hairdryer and even a kettle for hot drinks.

Others, however, prefer to stay in an Airbnb, which are homely and often have even more perks, such as an entire kitchen, a hot tub or even a balcony, depending on where you stay.

There is no right or wrong way to travel, but one Airbnb user is asking hosts of properties and rooms to stop using one thing in their bedrooms that they find ‘weird’.

The user took to Reddit to write the post titled “Hosts: please, for the love of five stars and good repeat guests….”

The post read: ” Don’t use microfiber bedsheets. They don’t stay put. Unless you get into bed and immediately become corpse-like, the whole thing gets wrinkled and baggy almost immediately.

“They don’t breathe. No matter how nice and cool the ambient temperature is, inside the sheets is uncomfortable.

“It’s weirdly warm on the skin in the same way sleeping in a thin plastic bag is. Actually, that’s exactly what sleeping in microfiber sheets feels like, minus the crinkly sounds.

“They feel cheap. Yes they don’t wrinkle, yes they’re smooth to the touch, but so is a painter’s tarp. Basic cotton sheets—they don’t even have to be of a high thread count—will fix this! That is all.”

Dozens of people agreed with the poster after noticing a number of hotels also moving away from cotton sheets.

One person said: “Plastic sheets are the worst! Cotton sheets. Hell, most hotels only have 350 threadcount cotton sheets. All you “need” per say.

“I’m with you though. I cannot stand microfiber, anything with polyester or rayon or any of that plastic rooted fibers.”

A second added: “I am a host and sometimes a guest and fully agree, nothing worse than microfiber or polyester sheets, I only use linen or cotton.“And for pillows and duvet cover just feather and down. They can actually be washed and drycleaned and are so much more comfortable.”A third said: “I totally agree. I recently stayed at a VERY expensive AirBnB in Sonoma, CA and they had microfiber sheets! I hate them. Automatic deduction of a star in the review.”