American arrested on charges of sex with a minor in Udon after being caught at home with 17 year old
By
webfact
in Thailand News
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Blurring Reality: Google's Veo 3 Unleashes Hyperrealistic AI-Generated Videos
Blurring Reality: Google's Veo 3 Unleashes Hyperrealistic AI-Generated Videos Google’s latest leap in artificial intelligence has sparked awe, admiration, and alarm. The tech giant’s new video generator, Veo 3, is producing clips so realistic that many viewers online cannot tell them apart from content made by actual filmmakers and human actors. The realism is so striking that it’s unsettling audiences and reigniting debates about what it means for art, authorship, and the future of film. Veo 3, revealed at the recent Google I/O event, is available to subscribers of Google AI Ultra for $249 per month in the United States. Unlike previous AI tools, such as OpenAI’s Sora, Veo 3 adds another dimension to synthetic media by integrating dialogue, soundtracks, and sound effects into its productions. It follows complex prompts with a precision that surprises even seasoned creators, generating sequences that obey real-world physics and feature accurate lip-syncing and human-like continuity. The results are impressively lifelike—down to actors having exactly five fingers per hand. Filmmaker and molecular biologist Hashem Al-Ghaili recently demonstrated Veo 3’s capabilities in a now-viral post on X. In a chilling sequence of short films, AI-generated actors deliver dramatic monologues criticizing their digital existence and the creators who brought them into being. Viewers were stunned—not just by the emotional depth of the scenes, but by the indistinguishably human expressions, tone, and presence of these entirely synthetic characters. This isn’t just a step forward in video production—it’s a seismic shift. “It feels like it’s almost building upon itself,” said filmmaker Dave Clark in a promotional video for Flow, a new platform that incorporates Veo 3. The comment reflects the growing unease among professionals who see Veo 3 not merely as a tool but as a creative entity evolving on its own. Google claims that the development of Veo 3 was deeply informed by feedback from filmmakers and content creators. While some are embracing the technology as a means to expand artistic boundaries, others remain skeptical. For many artists, the proliferation of these videos is disheartening. The authenticity of craft is being challenged by code and datasets, and the line between creative genius and algorithmic output grows thinner by the day. Critics have already started questioning the originality of Veo 3’s outputs. 404 Media reported that multiple users received the exact same unoriginal dad joke when prompting the tool to generate a stand-up comedy routine. Similarly, tech reviewer Marques Brownlee noted eerie similarities between Sora-generated videos and his own YouTube setup, suggesting these tools may be trained on specific real-world media without clear disclosure or consent. Despite the controversy, AI analyst Ethan Mollick believes Veo 3 could find practical applications in marketing and commercial media. But broader concerns linger. Who owns AI-generated art? What rights do the “faces” in the videos have, if any? How can consent be managed when the actors are not real? As tools like Veo 3 continue to evolve and democratize hyperrealistic video creation, society is only beginning to grapple with the ethical, legal, and artistic implications. The film industry faces a complex future where the boundaries between reality and simulation, creator and machine, may no longer be clear—or even relevant. Adapted by ASEAN Now from AXIOS 2025-05-24 -
0
Trump Urges Starmer to Abandon Wind Power in Favor of North Sea Oil
Trump Urges Starmer to Abandon Wind Power in Favor of North Sea Oil Donald Trump has called on UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to ditch his government’s support for wind energy and instead focus on ramping up fossil fuel extraction in the North Sea. In a typically outspoken post on his TruthSocial platform, the former U.S. president suggested that the United Kingdom should move away from what he described as “costly and unsightly windmills” and embrace offshore oil drilling to reduce its energy bills. “Our negotiated deal with the United Kingdom is working out well for all,” Trump wrote, referring to the recently finalized trade agreement between the two countries. “I strongly recommend to them, however, that in order to get their energy costs down, they stop with the costly and unsightly windmills, and incentivize modernized drilling in the North Sea, where large amounts of oil lay waiting to be taken.” Trump claimed that there is “a century of drilling left” and proposed Aberdeen as a strategic hub for this renewed fossil fuel effort. He also took aim at the UK’s existing tax system, saying it discourages drilling activity. “The old fashioned tax system disincentivizes drilling, rather than the opposite. UK’s Energy Costs would go WAY DOWN, and fast!” he added. His comments come at a time when the UK is seeing some relief in energy prices. Ofgem, the UK’s energy regulator, recently announced a 7 percent decrease in household energy bills starting in July. This means the average annual bill will drop by £129 to £1,720. Despite the decrease, energy costs remain substantially higher than in previous years. Ofgem noted that the level of bills in July will still be £152 more than during the same period last year. The regulator has also encouraged consumers to shop around, with some households potentially saving up to £200 a year by switching to cheaper tariffs. Trump’s comments are likely to stir political debate in the UK, where energy policy is a key part of the Labour government’s strategy to transition toward net-zero emissions. Starmer’s administration has supported a mix of renewable energy sources, including wind and solar, as part of its broader climate agenda. However, with energy prices remaining high and North Sea reserves still substantial, Trump’s remarks may resonate with those advocating for greater energy independence and lower costs. As the energy conversation continues, Trump’s remarks have injected a provocative new angle, challenging the UK's green ambitions with a blunt call to return to fossil fuels. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-05-24 -
0
Trump Threatens Major Tariff Surge of 50% on EU Amid Trade Frustrations
Trump Threatens Major Tariff Surge on EU Amid Trade Frustrations U.S. President Donald Trump has reignited transatlantic trade tensions by proposing a sweeping 50% tariff on goods from the European Union, warning that current negotiations have stalled and accusing the bloc of longstanding unfair trade practices. In a fiery post on Truth Social Friday morning, Trump expressed deep dissatisfaction with the trajectory of talks between Washington and Brussels. “Their powerful Trade Barriers, VAT Taxes, ridiculous Corporate Penalties, Non-Monetary Trade Barriers, Monetary Manipulations, unfair and unjustified lawsuits against American Companies, and more, have led to a Trade Deficit with the U.S. of more than $250,000,000 a year, a number which is totally unacceptable,” he wrote. He added, “Our discussions with them are going nowhere! Therefore, I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025.” The European Commission did not immediately issue a formal response. Olof Gill, a spokesperson for the Commission, said they would withhold comment until after a scheduled call between European Commissioner for Trade Maroš Šefčovič and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. The call was reported by Reuters to be set for 11 a.m. ET Friday. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office has not responded to media requests for comment. Markets reacted swiftly to the announcement. Major European indexes plunged, with Germany’s DAX falling 2.6%, France’s CAC down 2.8%, and the UK’s FTSE slipping 1.3%. U.S. stock futures also dipped sharply, with futures tied to the Dow dropping over 600 points, or 1.4%. The proposed 50% tariff would more than double the 20% levy Trump previously implemented in April before pausing the measure to allow time for negotiations. That pause, set to expire on July 9, produced only one new agreement, with the United Kingdom, leaving broader EU talks unresolved. Trump has consistently criticized what he refers to as “non-monetary trade barriers” and has shown particular disdain for policies that result in the U.S. running a trade deficit. The former president often argues that the U.S. gets the short end of trade deals, particularly when the country imports more than it exports. Commerce Department data showed a $236 billion trade deficit between the U.S. and EU in 2023—less than the $250 billion Trump claimed but still significant. His objections also target EU taxes such as value-added taxes (VATs) and digital service taxes (DSTs). VATs are indirect taxes imposed on goods and services, and though they are refunded on exports from the EU, they are applied to imports, including those from the U.S. Trump argues this creates an imbalance in trade. DSTs have been another major sticking point. These taxes apply to the gross revenue generated by digital services companies operating within a country, regardless of their profitability. This tax model disproportionately impacts American tech giants like Meta, Google, Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft. A report from the Congressional Research Service last year underscored that U.S.-based firms bear the brunt of DSTs, raising concerns about digital trade discrimination. As Trump eyes a potential return to the White House, this bold tariff threat signals a return to aggressive trade policy tactics reminiscent of his first term. Whether this move forces a breakthrough in negotiations or triggers a full-blown trade war remains to be seen. Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-05-24 -
0
UK Police Urge Vigilance Among Jewish Community Following Washington DC Attack
UK Police Urge Vigilance Among Jewish Community Following Washington DC Attack Following a deadly anti-Semitic attack in Washington DC, British authorities are urging members of the Jewish community in London to remain alert and cautious. The Metropolitan Police issued a public warning after two Israeli embassy staff were killed near the US capital’s Jewish museum by a man reportedly shouting “Free Palestine.” “We understand why the awful attack on the Jewish community in Washington DC on Wednesday evening will undoubtedly have increased concerns among Jewish Londoners,” said a Metropolitan Police spokesman. “It comes at a time when many are already increasingly worried about their safety.” Although Scotland Yard emphasized there is no intelligence indicating a direct threat to London stemming from the Washington incident, it underscored the importance of vigilance. “There is nothing to indicate that events in Washington have specifically increased the risk or threat here in London, but they are a reminder of the ever-present need to be vigilant. Our message to Jewish Londoners remains the same – please be alert, but do not be alarmed,” the spokesman continued. “If you see something that doesn’t feel right, trust your instincts and report it.” The Metropolitan Police also noted an uptick in anti-Semitic hate crimes since October 7, 2023, alongside persistent concerns over extremism and terrorism. In response, officers have increased their engagement with Jewish communities and are coordinating with organizations like the Community Security Trust (CST) to provide reassurance and a more visible security presence in areas with large Jewish populations. The CST, which supports and protects Jews in the UK from threats of terrorism and anti-Semitism, echoed the call for vigilance. “CST condemns the terrorist murder of two Israeli embassy staff outside the Jewish Museum in Washington DC. Our thoughts are with their family and colleagues at this awful time,” the organization said in a statement. “This kind of terrorism is a global threat to all Jewish communities that has risen significantly since Oct 7, and it is the reason why there is so much security across the Jewish community in the UK.” Reiterating its commitment to community safety, the CST said, “CST will continue working tirelessly with the police, government and other partners to enable a safe, proud Jewish way of life in this country.” The organization regularly advises community members to secure buildings, remain aware of suspicious behavior, avoid lingering outside communal venues, and be cautious of "tailgating," where someone follows closely behind to gain unauthorized access to buildings. Security measures across Jewish institutions in the UK have reportedly been heightened since Israel’s response to the October 7 attacks and have remained stringent. Recent incidents in the UK underscore the elevated tensions. On May 15, Rico House in Prestwich, a Jewish-owned office block, was targeted by Palestine Action. Red paint was splashed on its facade, and graffiti reading “Happy Nakba Day” was left on the building, referencing the displacement of Palestinians in 1948. In another incident, a man was arrested in April after allegedly attempting to break into the Israeli embassy in west London while armed with a knife. According to the CST, the UK saw 3,528 anti-Semitic incidents last year, marking the second-highest total ever recorded. More than half of those incidents in 2024—approximately 1,844—have featured rhetoric linked to the Middle East conflict. The phrase “Free Palestine” appeared in at least 355 cases, reportedly used in a hostile manner against Jewish people or institutions purely based on their Jewish identity. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-05-24 -
0
BBC Faces Backlash Over Alleged Bias in Coverage of White Farmer Killings in South Africa
Title: BBC Faces Backlash Over Alleged Bias in Coverage of White Farmer Killings in South Africa The BBC has come under fire from South African businessman Robert Hersov, who accused the broadcaster of downplaying violence against white farmers in South Africa and exhibiting what he called a “Leftist” bias in its reporting. Hersov, a vocal critic of the African National Congress (ANC) and the current state of affairs in his home country, condemned the BBC for what he sees as one-sided journalism lacking in nuance. “There is no nuance in their coverage – they are just Leftist,” he said, adding that the organization “should be disbanded.” Hersov's comments come in response to a BBC article about a meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. During their Oval Office meeting, Trump reportedly surprised Ramaphosa by dimming the lights and showing video clips he claimed proved the existence of a “genocide” against white farmers in South Africa. The BBC covered the incident under the headline “Ramaphosa keeps cool during Trump’s choreographed onslaught,” and dismissed the genocide claims as “discredited,” describing them as originating “among Right-wing groups” and circulated through “misleading information online.” In stark contrast, Hersov argued that Trump was “100 per cent right” in raising concerns. “What’s going on in South Africa, driven by the ANC, is evil, egregious, pernicious and a real threat not just to minorities in South Africa, but to Western civilisation,” he said. Citing crime statistics, he added, “It is three times more likely to be killed in South Africa being a farmer than being a policeman... the most dangerous job in South Africa by far is being a farmer.” He accused the ANC government of sweeping the issue under the rug by attributing it to general crime levels in the country. Trump’s claims were echoed by Elon Musk, who has also used social media to voice fears about a white genocide in South Africa. However, a South African high court ruled earlier this year that such claims are imaginary. During the White House meeting, Ramaphosa responded to Trump’s assertions by stating, “This is not government policy,” after viewing footage purportedly showing black South Africans singing “kill the Boer.” Despite Ramaphosa being flanked by Afrikaner billionaire Johann Rupert and former golfer Ernie Els, Hersov insisted that the ANC’s approach is fundamentally discriminatory. “The ANC, for 30 years, have destroyed South Africa’s economy, broken South Africa’s democracy,” he said. “Cyril Ramaphosa is 100 per cent responsible for the destruction of our economy and for the anti-white racism that is pervasive.” In a striking comparison, Hersov invoked the "10 stages of genocide" framework, suggesting that several of these stages are evident in South Africa today. “Even though there isn’t an extermination on a broader scale, like the Nazis with the Jews, a lot of what is happening has taken place not just against farmers, but against minorities. And not just against white minorities, but against whites, coloureds, Indians, Jews and Afrikaners,” he said. Trump’s administration took these concerns seriously, accepting 59 white South Africans as refugees earlier this month. Washington also expelled South Africa’s ambassador, accusing him of being a “race-baiting politician” who harbored animosity toward the U.S. and its then-president. Trump went further in his criticism, accusing the South African government of “taking people’s land” and allowing those individuals “to be executed. They’re being executed and they happen to be white, and most of them happen to be farmers, and that’s a tough situation.” While Trump’s stance was welcomed by some, experts in South Africa continue to argue that there is no specific campaign targeting white individuals. They point out that farmers of all races are frequent victims of violent crime in a country with one of the highest crime rates globally. Ramaphosa had hoped the Oval Office meeting would help repair strained U.S.–South Africa relations, which have hit a low not seen since the days of apartheid. The BBC has declined to comment on the criticism leveled against its coverage. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-05-24 -
0
Doctors to refuse carrying out mandatory chemical castration’
Medical Ethics Clash with Government Over Mandatory Chemical Castration Plans for Sex Offenders A proposed policy to enforce chemical castration on sex offenders has ignited a fierce debate among medical professionals, politicians, and advocacy groups, with many doctors warning they would refuse to comply with compulsory treatment orders. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood suggested mandatory medication to suppress sexual urges in paedophiles could have a "big and positive impact" and revealed the government is examining the legal pathways to enforce it. “We’re exploring all of the options,” said Alex Davies-Jones, the victims minister, noting one possibility includes sectioning offenders under the Mental Health Act to force hospital admission and treatment. “Another option is … that, currently, you could be sectioned for protecting the public or ensuring that there is public safety at the heart of this. There are options where this can be done and we are exploring all of those … We’re straining every sinew.” The concept of mandatory chemical castration, however, has drawn significant opposition from the medical community. Don Grubin, emeritus professor of forensic psychiatry at Newcastle University and a key figure in NHS England’s sexual arousal management programme, rejected the notion outright. “I don’t know quite how it would work and we certainly don’t support it,” Grubin told BBC Radio 4’s World at One. “We’ve always resisted suggestions for mandatory prescribing whenever they’ve been raised. We’ve always structured the programme as treating a health condition, helping patients manage sexual arousal. And that’s very much why I think it’s been effective — because the individuals who are taking the medication want to reduce the risk.” Grubin emphasized that such an approach would fundamentally alter the doctor-patient relationship. “There’d be a lot of resistance from doctors because you’d be asking them really to prescribe not to patients but to reduce risk for society. So they become, in fact, agents of social control, which is something that we’ve always resisted.” Currently, a pilot scheme in eight prisons allows 34 offenders to voluntarily take libido-reducing drugs. Mahmood announced the program will expand to two more regions, ultimately encompassing 20 prisons. Despite this controlled rollout, critics remain skeptical of enforcing treatment without consent. Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, labeled the government’s announcement a “gimmick,” accusing it of diverting attention from controversial sentencing reforms that allow early release for many serious offenders. He described the proposals as a “recipe for a crime wave” and a “‘get out of jail free’ card for dangerous criminals.” He further argued, “Starmer cannot mandate chemical castration without ripping up human rights legislation. Pigs will fly before that happens.” Families of crime victims have also voiced strong opposition. The parents of Sarah Everard joined the Justice for Victims group in condemning the sentencing policy changes, stating there “isn’t any excuse for letting the worst offenders get out of prison even earlier.” Dame Nicole Jacobs, the domestic abuse commissioner, added that the proposed changes send “a clear message to domestic abusers that they can offend with little consequence,” while the Suzy Lamplugh Trust warned of increased risks to stalking victims. Despite the storm of controversy, some authorities support expanding voluntary chemical castration. The head of the Prison Officers’ Association claimed successful outcomes and reported no issues administering the drugs. Former justice secretary David Gauke, who previously conducted a sentencing review, argued that voluntary treatment offers potential. “I had come across sex offenders who were desperate to rid themselves of sexual desires,” he said, noting that “they were very keen to be able to take chemical suppressants to try to reduce those urges.” While weight-loss medications are also being considered for their potential to curb addictive behaviors, critics like the Prison Reform Trust maintain that forced treatment raises “clear ethical considerations,” with CEO Pia Sinha warning of the “invidious” position such mandates could place doctors in. The debate over mandatory chemical castration continues to highlight the complex intersection of criminal justice, medical ethics, and public safety. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-05-24
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
-
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now