Microsoft has quietly extended free Windows 10 security updates for consumers by another year, pushing the Extended Security Updates (ESU) program's end date from October 12, 2026, to October 12, 2027. "The ESU support page was updated with that date, and Microsoft's blog post on the program has a new editor's note confirming the change," reports Ars Technica. From the report: The prevalence of Windows across so many devices and form factors has given Microsoft a massive customer base for decades, but it has also stymied the company's efforts to roll out new operating systems. Microsoft famously extended the support window for Windows XP numerous times throughout the 2010s as it became apparent that millions of PCs would never be updated. Windows 10 isn't quite as entrenched as XP was, but it has still been a slog getting people to upgrade to Windows 11 even nearly five years after release.

Unlike many past Windows updates, Windows 11 required some users to buy new PCs with specific CPU technologies and a Trusted Platform Module (TPM). Microsoft was widely criticized for excluding perfectly serviceable PCs, and that's turning into a problem in 2026. The AI-driven shortage of storage and memory has made system upgrades vastly more expensive, potentially slowing upgrades. Some have also avoided Windows 11 due to Microsoft's intense focus on AI features.

The result is that Windows 10 remains stubbornly popular. According to StatCounter data, Windows 10 is still running on about 26 percent of PCs, while Windows 11 sits at 72 percent. That means there are still hundreds of millions of active Windows 10 installs, but those machines will be up to date for at least an additional year.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The drivers and teams report back on Friday practice from the Red Bull Ring ahead of the Austrian Grand Prix.

Charles Leclerc believes that Ferrari could be in for a tricky weekend at the Austrian Grand Prix following some struggles on Friday.

The silver cars of Mercedes looked mighty fine as they navigated the beautiful Red Bull Ring nestled in the Styrian Hills during Friday practice for the Austrian Grand Prix. But are they the one to beat in Spielberg – or can Red Bull, Ferrari and McLaren, who all brought upgrades of varying degrees, get in on the action?

McLaren enjoyed a strong performance in Friday’s running at the Austrian Grand Prix, with Oscar Piastri finishing the day in P2.

Formula 1's 'silly season' has flicked up a gear at the Red Bull Ring, with Max Verstappen, McLaren, Racing Bulls and Esteban Ocon all in the thick of it – but what is really going down?

After Red Bull arrived into their home event with a range of upgrades, Isack Hadjar has given his take on how the car felt out on track during Friday's practice sessions in Austria.

Cadillac have revealed that an electrical problem impacted Sergio Perez's running on Friday ahead of the Austrian Grand Prix, as Valtteri Bottas also suffered issues later in the day.

Team Principal James Vowles has detailed when Williams will be introducing upgrades this season as the team continues to struggle to reach the top of the midfield fight.

Noel Leon took his maiden Formula 2 pole position in Spielberg, beating Alexander Dunne and his Campos Racing team mate Nikola Tsolov to top spot on Friday.

F3 driver Hiyu Yamakoshi claimed a surprise pole position at the Red Bull Ring.

Mercedes are braced for McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari to all potentially pose a threat as the Austrian Grand Prix weekend develops, despite their pace-setting start to the event with Kimi Antonelli on Friday.

David Sylvian

Why Brussels needs to pick up the pace.

Vandaag zingen we het Wilhelmus net ietsje harder (doen we elke ochtend voor het schijten) want onze favoriete Prinses der Nederlanden alsook van Oranje Nassau, Hare Koninklijke Hoogheid ALEXIA is 21 jaar geworden. Betekent dus dat Alexia vanaf nu mag zuipen in Amerika, recht heeft 100 procent wettelijk minimumloon, mag gokken en zelfstandig een uitkering mag aanvragen. Dat laatste zal niet hoeven want een uitkering hebben papa Willie en zus Amaal al en bij acute geldnood kan ze desnoods Antoon ff aanschieten. Er zijn best wel wat dingetjes aan het Koningshuis waar we af en toe chagrijnig over zijn, maar op een of andere manier worden we nooit van Alexia. Al krijgt ze een toelage van 10 miljoen, al rolt ze in ieder kudtdorp waar ze handjes moet schudden de hele dag met haar ogen, al vlucht ze naar Canada Griekenland als heel Nederland op de IC ligt, al duikt ze bij elke irritante zanger in de auto, wij klagen niet. Uiteraard bedoelen we daarmee niet te zeggen dat Alexia 'de lekkerste' prinses is. Nee, dat bedoelde Sander Schimmelpenninck. Toen ze 15 was. #NeverForget.

SocialSocial

Ook gefeliciteerd namens Dennis & Ron!

Social

Thomas Hawk posted a photo:

Thomas Hawk posted a photo:

For more than three years now, we've been hearing from AI execs who insist that the government regulate their industries … until there's a chance such oversight could hurt business. OpenAI and Anthropic have led the way with the latter's CEO, Dario Amodei, calling for "binding regulations" in June 2026, only to push back when his latest models were suspended. Now Google, which has also called for AI regulation, would like to clarify its request for government intervention and ask for a "middle way" that's largely favorable to its interests. "The debate over AI governance is stuck in a false choice between over-regulation and no regulation," said Google president Kent Walker in a blog post. "There is a middle way: A pragmatic, evidence-based approach that recognizes the unique challenges and opportunities of both frontier AI and widely-deployed AI applications." Walker does not explicitly define "over-regulation," but presumably we're talking about the recent ban on Anthropic's Fable 5 and Mythos 5. In Google's 21-page policy paper "A Pragmatic Approach to AI Governance in America" [PDF], the company argues, "There is a middle path that would balance market-driven innovation and independent oversight: a federally overseen frontier AI regulatory organization (FARO)." The FARO would be modeled after other notionally independent, industry-funded organizations like the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and the American Medical Association, each of which is overseen by some government commission or agency. The conceit of a middle path is difficult to reconcile with the past decade of dire warnings about AI from technology leaders. If AI is indeed an existential threat with the capability to do harm, one might expect it to be regulated like lead or asbestos. Yet here's Google arguing, "AI platforms should be required to take reasonable measures to feature persistent disclaimers, filter out sexually explicit or romantic content, avoid claims the model is a person (and regularly point out that it’s not), and not promote emotional dependency." We've seen how well this has worked out on the internet, where Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has immunized platforms that take performative safety measures: we wanted some measure of free speech, but we also got no-fault misinformation and social media incitement as part of the package. The middle road for AI governance is already here: some acceptable level of chatbot suicide promotion, non-consensual nudification images, copyright surrender, model bias, indemnified errors, and guidance toward harms. Hey, we tried. It's not communities banning datacenters, but communities negotiating terms. "The question is not datacenters or no datacenters, but how to build datacenters the right way, responsibly and in partnership with communities," Google's paper states. But already for many communities, it's not a question but an imperative. If there's one thing that unites the political spectrum at the moment, it's opposition to datacenters. And this middle of the road approach looks more like "just let us have our way" with regard to copyright. "Using publicly available web data for training models is a transformative, non-expressive use – like an art student taking inspiration from walking through a gallery – that should remain protected under fair use in the U.S. and text-and-data-mining exceptions abroad," Google's paper muses. The courts are still considering claims about AI copyright abuse. But as analogies go, AI for Google is more like an art student who controls the tourist referral market capturing the entirety of the Louvre's imagery and then selling access to those images – fair, profitable use! – and laundered variations in a way that discourages tourists from visiting the actual Louvre. And then, noting all the creative types who no longer get hired because AI sells their talent on tap, the art student throws in with a non-profit offering incentives to companies for job retraining programs. Google is asking for a middle path, but one need only look at the growth in AI lobbying over the past few years – up 340 percent since 2023 – to understand that the AI industry is paying to pave this middle path in a favorable direction. ®

​Veel mensen kunnen maar niet wennen aan het warme weer. De 29-jarige Berend uit Cuijk wel: hij kan tijdens deze hittegolf ‘echt niet meer nadenken’, dus voor hem verandert er eigenlijk vrij weinig.

“Ik ga hier eigenlijk wel lekker op: een beetje voor me uit staren, terwijl er nauwelijks noemenswaardige gedachten aan me voorbijtrekken. Of nou ja, gedachten wil ik het eigenlijk niet eens noemen. Woorden. Flarden. Nee, zelfs flarden is nog te veel gezegd.”

Berend vindt het niet erg dat hij bij deze temperatuur al kortsluiting in zijn hersenen krijgt bij de vraag wat hij vanavond gaat eten. “Ik ben niet anders gewend.”

​

&