Ice Lounge Media

Ice Lounge Media

Trump tariffs could lower Bitcoin miner prices outside US, says mining exec

The Trump administration’s sweeping tariffs could collapse US demand for Bitcoin mining rigs, which would benefit mining operations outside the country as manufacturers will look outside the US to sell their surplus inventory for cheaper, says Hashlabs Mining CEO Jaran Mellerud.

“As machine prices rise in the U.S., they could paradoxically decrease in the rest of the world,” Mellerud said in an April 8 report. “The demand for shipping machines to the U.S. is set to plummet, likely nearing zero.”

“Manufacturers will be left with excess stock originally intended for the US market. To offload this surplus, they’ll likely need to lower prices to attract buyers in other regions,” he added.

Falling mining rig prices could see non-US mining operations scale up and take a larger slice of Bitcoin’s total hashrate, Mellerud said.

Trump tariffs could lower Bitcoin miner prices outside US, says mining exec

Source: Jaran Mellerud

US President Donald Trump unveiled his administration’s “reciprocal tariffs” on nearly every country on April 2. Some of the largest crypto mining machine makers are based in countries hardest hit by the tariffs, including Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, which saw tariffs of 36%, 32% and 24%, respectively.

Crypto mining rig makers Bitmain, MicroBT and Canaan moved to some of these countries to circumvent a 25% tariff that Trump imposed on China in 2018 during his last administration.

Trump tariffs could lower Bitcoin miner prices outside US, says mining exec

Annual change in US tariffs on China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand since 2017. Source: Hashlabs Mining

Mellerud noted that Trump’s latest tariffs would mean a mining rig that initially costs $1,000 would be priced at $1,240 in the US.

“Meanwhile, in Finland and most other countries, there are no tariffs, so the cost of a $1,000 machine remains unchanged.”

“In an industry as cost-sensitive as Bitcoin mining, a 22% price increase on machines can make operations financially unsustainable,” he added.

No coming back from Trump’s tariffs — ‘Damage is done’

Mellerud believes a future reversal of the Trump administration’s tariffs wouldn’t restore US crypto mining operators’ confidence.

“Even if these tariffs are rolled back within a few months, the damage is done — confidence in long-term planning has been shaken,” Mellerud said. “Few will feel comfortable making major investments when critical variables can change overnight.”

He said US miners felt reassured when Trump returned to the White House, expecting a more stable regulatory environment. 

Related: Bitcoin hashrate tops 1 Zetahash in historic first, trackers show

“But they are now experiencing the flip side of his unpredictable policy shifts,” Mellerud said.

The US accounts for nearly 40% of the network’s hashrate. Mellerud said there’s no reason for US miners to unplug their machines and doesn’t expect the total Bitcoin hashrate coming from the US to drop.

However, the path to expansion is now “steep and uncertain,” he said, and as a result, the US could lose a considerable share of hashrate

Trump’s tariffs have shaken up almost every market, including the crypto markets and Bitcoin (BTC), which is down 4% over the last 24 hours to $76,470, CoinGecko data shows.

Bitcoin is now 30% off the $108,786 all-time high it set on Jan. 20 — the same day that Trump re-entered the White House.

Magazine: Crypto fans are obsessed with longevity and biohacking: Here’s why

Read more
Instagram head Adam Mosseri says the company is looking to improve the app’s search functionality, admitting this is an area where Instagram could do more to compete. The remarks, made on a recent episode of the “Build Your Tribe” podcast, come at a time when younger Gen Z users often turn to social apps like […]
Read more
A new company, Deep Cogito, has emerged from stealth with a family of openly available AI models that can be switched between “reasoning” and non-reasoning modes. Reasoning models like OpenAI’s o1 have shown great promise in domains like math and physics, thanks to their ability to effectively fact-check themselves by working through complex problems step […]
Read more
Last week, details emerged about an application that fintech giant Stripe had submitted for a U.S. banking license. There was a lot of chatter on X about whether this meant Stripe — already the largest privately valued fintech in the world — would now be adding “bank” to the list of descriptions of what it […]
Read more
Jeff Bezos is funding a secretive EV startup based in Michigan called Slate Auto that could start production as soon as next year, according to multiple sources and documents that link the billionaire’s family office to the startup. Slate, which took root in another Bezos-connected company called Re:Build Manufacturing, has been operating quietly since its […]
Read more

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

Game of clones: Colossal’s new wolves are cute, but are they dire?

For several years now, Texas-based company Colossal Biosciences has been in the news for its plans to re-create woolly mammoths someday. But now it’s making a bold new claim—that it has actually “de-extincted” an animal called the dire wolf.

Dire wolves were large, big-jawed members of the canine family. More than 400 of their skulls have been recovered from the La Brea Tar Pits in California. Ultimately they were replaced by smaller relatives like the gray wolf.

In its effort to re-create the animal, Colossal says, it extracted DNA information from dire wolf bones and used gene editing to introduce some of those elements into cells from gray wolves. It then used a cloning procedure to turn the cells into three actual animals.


But some scientists reject the company’s claim that the new animals are a revival of the extinct creatures, since in reality dire wolves and gray wolves are different species separated by a few million of years of evolution and several million letters of DNA. Read the full story.

—Antonio Regalado

AI companions are the final stage of digital addiction, and lawmakers are taking aim

This week, California state senator Steve Padilla will make an appearance with Megan Garcia, the mother of a Florida teen who killed himself following a relationship with an AI companion that Garcia alleges contributed to her son’s death.

The two will announce a new bill that would force the tech companies behind such AI companions to implement more safeguards to protect children. The design of these AI characters makes lawmakers’ concern well warranted. The problem: companions are upending the paradigm that has thus far defined the way social media companies have cultivated our attention and replacing it with something poised to be far more addictive. Read the full story.

—James O’Donnell

This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 The Trump administration’s tariffs are already starting to bite startups
VC funding, acquisitions and unnecessary spending has been put on hold. (The Information $)
+ Modular laptop company Framework is pausing its sales in the US. (Ars Technica)
+ Towns near the Canadian border are feeling the squeeze. (The Atlantic $)
+ China has vowed to fight the measures ‘to the end.’ (FT $)

2 Elon Musk asked Trump to reverse his aggressive tariffs
But the billionaire’s pleas have fallen on deaf ears. (WP $)
+ It’s not surprising he’s refusing to follow the markets on his policies. (NY Mag $)
+ CEOs are starting to speak up about the reality of a global trade war. (WSJ $)

3 Renewable energy reached record heights last year
It accounted for 32% of global electricity in 2024. (Reuters)
+ Lawyers are turning to the courts to force governments to save the planet. (The Guardian)

4 A Meta executive has denied claims it fudged Llama 4’s benchmark scores
Ahmad Al-Dahle dismissed the rumor Meta had trained its models on test sets. (TechCrunch)
+ These new AI benchmarks could help make models less biased. (MIT Technology Review)

5 A baby has been born in the UK to a woman with a transplanted womb 
Grace Davidson gave birth to her daughter thanks to her sister’s womb donation. (BBC)
+ The operation’s success offers new hope to those born without a womb. (The Guardian)
+ Everything you need to know about artificial wombs. (MIT Technology Review)

6 The US is still ahead in the AI race—for now
But training all those models is still seriously expensive. (IEEE Spectrum)

7 We know very little about how bird flu spreads in wildlife 
As the deaths of two cougars who weren’t living near any known outbreaks illustrate. (Undark)

8 This publishing platform uses AI to create sequels to its authors’ work
The only problem? Its writing isn’t great. (Bloomberg $)
+ AI can make you more creative—but it has limits. (MIT Technology Review)

9 SimCity 4 refuses to die
A thriving community of modders are keeping the game going more than two decades after its launch.(The Verge)

10 Architects in Maui are building homes from old surfboard scraps 🏄
Turns out the foam makes excellent housing insulation. (Fast Company $)

Quote of the day

“No longer do I have to drive a symbol of racism, greed and ignorance! Life is suddenly so much better!”

—Actor Bette Middler expresses her joy at selling her Tesla, Insider reports.

The big story

Large language models can do jaw-dropping things. But nobody knows exactly why.

Two years ago, Yuri Burda and Harri Edwards, researchers at OpenAI, were trying to find out what it would take to get a large language model to do basic arithmetic. At first, things didn’t go too well. The models memorized the sums they saw but failed to solve new ones.

By accident, Burda and Edwards left some of their experiments running for days rather than hours. The models were shown the example sums over and over again, and eventually they learned to add two numbers—it had just taken a lot more time than anybody thought it should.

In certain cases, models could seemingly fail to learn a task and then all of a sudden just get it, as if a lightbulb had switched on, a behavior the researchers called grokking. Grokking is just one of several odd phenomena that have AI researchers scratching their heads. The largest models, and large language models in particular, seem to behave in ways textbook math says they shouldn’t.

This highlights a remarkable fact about deep learning, the fundamental technology behind today’s AI boom: for all its runaway success, nobody knows exactly how—or why—it works. Read the full story.

—Will Douglas Heaven

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.)

+ What happened when Wham! took Western pop music to China 40 years ago.
+ Who knew that sharks do make noises after all? 🦈
+ Microsoft is celebrating its 50th anniversary, and with it, 50 seriously strange inventions.
+ What the heck is a prototaxite, anyway?

Read more

Somewhere in the northern US, drones fly over a 2,000-acre preserve, protected by a nine-foot fence built to zoo standards. It is off-limits to curious visitors, especially those with a passion for epic fantasies or mythical creatures.

The reason for such tight security? Inside the preserve roam three striking snow-white wolves—which a startup called Colossal Biosciences says are members of a species that went extinct 13,000 years ago, now reborn via biotechnology.

For several years now, the Texas-based company has been in the news for its plans to re-create woolly mammoths someday. But now it’s making a bold new claim—that it has actually “de-extincted” an animal called the dire wolf.

And that could be another reason for the high fences and secret location—to fend off scientific critics, some of whom have already been howling that the company is a “scam” perpetrating “elephantine fantasies” on the public and engaging in “pure hype.”

Dire wolves were large, big-jawed members of the canine family. More than 400 of their skulls have been recovered from the La Brea Tar Pits in California. Ultimately they were replaced by smaller relatives like the gray wolf.

In its effort to re-create the animal, Colossal says, it extracted DNA information from dire wolf bones and used gene editing to introduce some of those elements into cells from gray wolves. It then used a cloning procedure to turn the cells into three actual animals. 

The animals include two males, Romulus and Remus, born in October, and one female, Khaleesi, whose name is a reference to the TV series Game of Thrones, in which fictional dire wolves play a part.

Two dire wolves are seen at 3 months old.
Two of the “dire wolves” at three months old.
COLOSSAL BIOSCIENCES

Each animal, the company says, has 20 genetic changes across 14 genes designed to make them larger, change their facial features, and give them a snow-white appearance.

Some scientists reject the company’s claim that the new animals are a revival of the extinct creatures, since in reality dire wolves and gray wolves are different species separated by a few million of years of evolution and several million letters of DNA.

“I would say such an animal is not a dire wolf and it’s not correct to say dire wolves have been brought back from extinction. It’s a modified gray wolf,” says Anders Bergström, a professor at the University of East Anglia who specializes in the evolution of canines. “Twenty changes is not nearly enough. But it could get you a strange-looking gray wolf.”

Beth Shapiro, an expert on ancient DNA who is now on a three-year sabbatical from the University of California, Santa Cruz, as the company’s CSO, acknowledged in an interview that other scientists would bristle at the claim.

“What we’re going to have here is a philosophical argument about whether we should call it a dire wolf or call it something else,” Shapiro said. Asked point blank to call the animal a dire wolf, she hesitated but then did so.

“It is a dire wolf,” she said. “I feel like I say that, and then all of my taxonomist friends will be like, ‘Okay, I’m done with her.’ But it’s not a gray wolf. It doesn’t look like a gray wolf.”

Dire or not, the new wolves demonstrate that science is becoming more deft in its control over the genomes of animals—and point to how that skill could help in conservation. As part of the project, Colossal says, it also cloned several red wolves, an American species that’s the most endangered wolf in the world.

But that isn’t as dramatic as the supposed rebirth of an extinct animal with a large cultural following. “The motivation really is to develop tools that we can use to stop species from becoming extinct. Do we need ancient DNA for that? Maybe not,” says Shapiro. “Does it bring more attention to it so that maybe people get excited about the idea that we can use biotechnology for conservation? Probably.”

Secret project

Colossal was founded in 2021 after founder Ben Lamm, a software entrepreneur, visited the Harvard geneticist George Church and learned about a far-out and still mostly theoretical project to re-create woolly mammoths. The idea is to release herds of them in cold regions, like Siberia, and restore an ecological balance that keeps greenhouse gases trapped in the permafrost.

Lamm has unexpectedly been able to raise more than $400 million from investors to back the plan, and Forbes reported that he is now a multibillionaire, at least on paper, thanks to the $10 billion value assigned to the startup.

Ben, Beth, and George of Colossal Biosciences pose with dire wolf pups.
From left to right: Beth Shapiro, George Church, and Ben Lamm pose with the pups.
COLOSSAL BIOSCIENCES

As Lamm showed he could raise money for Colossal’s ideas, it soon expanded beyond its effort to modify elephants. It publicly announced a bid to re-create the thylacine, a marsupial predator hunted to extinction, and then, in 2023, it started planning to resurrect the dodo bird—the effort that brought Shapiro to the company.

So far, none of those signature projects have actually resulted in a live animal with ancient genes. 

Each faces dire practical issues. With elephants, it was that their pregnancies last two years, longer than those in any other species. Testing out mammoth designs would be impossibly slow. With the dodo bird, it was that no one has ever figured out how to genetically modify pigeons, the family of birds to which the dodo belonged and from which a new dodo would have to be crafted. One of Lamm’s other favorite targets—the Steller’s sea cow, which disappeared around 1770—has no obvious surrogate of any kind.   

But creating a wolf was feasible. Over 1,500 dogs had been cloned, primarily by one company in South Korea. Researchers in Asia had even used dog eggs and dog mothers to produce both coyote and wolf clones. That’s not surprising, since all these species are closely enough related to interbreed.

“Just thinking about surrogacy for the dire wolf … it was like ‘Oh, yeah,’” recalls Shapiro. “Surrogacy there would be really straightforward.”

Dire wolves did present some new problems. One was the lack of any clear ecological purpose in reviving animals that disappeared during the Pleistocene epoch and are usually portrayed as ferocious predators with slavering jaws. “People have weird feelings about things that, you know, may or may not eat people or livestock,” Shapiro says.

The technical challenge was there was still no accurate DNA sequence of a dire wolf. A 2021 effort to obtain DNA from old bones had yielded only a tiny amount, not enough to accurately decode the genome in detail. And without a detailed gene map, Colossal wouldn’t be able see what genetic differences they would need to install in gray wolves, the species they intended to alter.

Shapiro says she went back to museums, including the Idaho Museum of Natural History, and eventually got permission to cut off more bone from a 72,0000-year-old skull that’s on display there. She also got a tooth from a 13,000-year-old skull held in another museum. which she drilled into herself.

This time the bones yielded far more DNA and a much more complete gene map. A paper describing the detailed sequence is being submitted for publication; its authors include George R.R. Martin, the fantasy author whose books were turned into the HBO series Game of Thrones, and in which dire wolves appear as the characters’ magical companions.

In addition to placing dire wolves more firmly in the Canidae family tree (they’re slightly closer to jackals than to gray wolves, but more than 99.9% identical to both at a genetic level) and determining when dire wolves split from the pack (about 4 to 5 million years ago), the team also located around 80 genes where dire wolves seemed to be most different. If you wanted to turn a gray wolf into a dire wolf, this would be the obvious list to start from.

Crying wolf

Colossal then began the process of using base editing, an updated form of the CRISPR gene-modification technique, to introduce some of those exact DNA variations into blood cells of a gray wolf kept in its labs. Each additional edit, the company  hoped, would make the eventual animal a little more dire-wolf-like, even it involved changing just a single letter of a gene.

Shapiro says all the edits using information from the ancient dire wolf were made to “genetic enhancers,” bits of DNA that help control how strongly certain genes are expressed. These can influence how big animals grow, as well as affecting the shape of their ears, faces, and skulls. This tactic was not as dramatic as intervening right in the middle of a gene, which would change what protein is made. But it was less risky—more like turning knobs on an unfamiliar radio than cutting wires and replacing circuits.

That left the scientists to engineer into the animals what would become their showstopper trait—the dramatic white fur. Shapiro says the genome code indicated that dire wolves might have had light coats. But the specific pigment genes involved are linked to a risk of albinism, deafness, and blindness, and they didn’t want sick wolves.

That’s when Colossal opted for a shortcut. Instead of reproducing precise DNA variants seen in dire wolves, they disabled two genes entirely. In dogs and other species, the absence of those genes is known to produce light fur.

The decision to make the wolves white did result in dramatic photos of the animals. “It’s the most striking thing about them,” says Mairin Balisi, a paleontologist who studies dire wolf fossils. But she doubts it reflects what the animals actually looked like: “A white coat might make sense if you are in a snowy landscape, but one of the places where dire wolves were most abundant was around Los Angeles and the tar pits, and it was not a snowy landscape even in the Ice Age. If you look at mammals in this region today, they are not white. I am just confused by the declaration that dire wolves are back.”

Bergström also says he doesn’t think the edits add up to a dire wolf. “I doubt that 20 changes are enough to turn a gray wolf to a dire wolf. You’d probably need hundreds or thousands of changes—no one really knows,” he says. “This is one of those unsolved questions in biology. People argue [about] the extent to which many small differences make a species distinct, versus a small number of big-effect differences. Nobody knows, but I lean to the ‘many small differences’ view.”

Some genes have big, visible effects—changing a single gene can make a dog hairless, for instance. But it might be many more small changes that account for the difference in size and appearance between, say, a Great Dane and a Chihuahua. And that is just looks. Bergström says science has much less idea which changes would account for behavior—even if we could tell from a genome how an extinct animal acted, which we can’t.

“A lot of people are quite skeptical of what they are doing,” Bergström says of Colossal. “But I still think it’s interesting that someone is trying. It takes a lot of money and resources, and if we did have the technology to bring species back from extinction, I do think that would be useful. We drive species to extinction, sometimes very rapidly, and that is a shame.”

Cloning with dogs

By last August, the gray wolf cells had been edited, and it was time to try cloning those cells and producing animals. Shapiro says her company transferred 40 to 50 cloned embryos apiece into six surrogate dogs. That led to three pregnancies, from which four dogs were born. One of the four, Khaleesi’s sister, died 10 days after birth from an intestinal infection, deemed unrelated to the cloning process. “That was the only puppy that didn’t make it,” says Shapiro. Two other fetal clones were reabsorbed during pregnancy, which means they disintegrated, a fairly common occurrence in dogs.

These days the white wolves are able to freely roam around a large area. They don’t have radio collars, but they are watched by cameras and are trained to come to their caretakers to get fed, which offers a chance to weigh them as they cross a scale in the ground. The 10 staff members attending to them can see them up close, though they’re now too big to handle the way the caretakers could when they were puppies.

The pups are being monitored through the different stages of their development but will not be put on public display.
COLOSSAL BIOSCIENCES

Whatever species these animals are, it’s not obvious what their future will be. They don’t seem to have a conservation purpose, and Lamm says he isn’t trying to profit from them.

“We’re not making money off the dire wolves. That’s not our business plan,” Lamm said in an interview with MIT Technology Review. He added that the animals would also not be put on display for the public, since “we’re not in the business of attractions.”

At least not in-person attractions. But every aspect of the project has been filmed, and in February, the company inked a deal to produce a docuseries about its exploits. That same month it also hired as its marketing chief a Hollywood executive who previously worked on big-budget “monster movies.”

And there are signs that de-extinction, in Colossal’s hands, has the potential to generate nearly out-of-control of attention, much like that scene in the original King Kong when the giant ape—captured by a filmmaker—breaks its chains under the flashes of the cameras.

For instance company’s first creation, mice with shaggy, mammoth-like hair, was announced only five weeks ago, yet there are already unauthorized sales of throw pillows and T-shirts (they read “Legalize Woolly Mice”), as well as some “serious security issues” involving unannounced visitors, Lamm says.

“We’ve had people show up to our labs because they want the woolly mouse,” Lamm says. “We’re worried about that from a security perspective [for] the wolves, because you’re going to have all the Game of Thrones people. You’re going to have a lot of people that want to see these animals.”  

Lamm said that in light of his concerns about unruly fans, diagrams of the ecological preserve provided to the media had been altered so that no internet “sleuths” could use them to guess its location.

Read more

On Tuesday, California state senator Steve Padilla will make an appearance with Megan Garcia, the mother of a Florida teen who killed himself following a relationship with an AI companion that Garcia alleges contributed to her son’s death. 

The two will announce a new bill that would force the tech companies behind such AI companions to implement more safeguards to protect children. They’ll join other efforts around the country, including a similar bill from California State Assembly member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan that would ban AI companions for anyone younger than 16 years old, and a bill in New York that would hold tech companies liable for harm caused by chatbots. 

You might think that such AI companionship bots—AI models with distinct “personalities” that can learn about you and act as a friend, lover, cheerleader, or more—appeal only to a fringe few, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. 

A new research paper aimed at making such companions safer, by authors from Google DeepMind, the Oxford Internet Institute, and others, lays this bare: Character.AI, the platform being sued by Garcia, says it receives 20,000 queries per second, which is about a fifth of the estimated search volume served by Google. Interactions with these companions last four times longer than the average time spent interacting with ChatGPT. One companion site I wrote about, which was hosting sexually charged conversations with bots imitating underage celebrities, told me its active users averaged more than two hours per day conversing with bots, and that most of those users are members of Gen Z. 

The design of these AI characters makes lawmakers’ concern well warranted. The problem: Companions are upending the paradigm that has thus far defined the way social media companies have cultivated our attention and replacing it with something poised to be far more addictive. 

In the social media we’re used to, as the researchers point out, technologies are mostly the mediators and facilitators of human connection. They supercharge our dopamine circuits, sure, but they do so by making us crave approval and attention from real people, delivered via algorithms. With AI companions, we are moving toward a world where people perceive AI as a social actor with its own voice. The result will be like the attention economy on steroids.

Social scientists say two things are required for people to treat a technology this way: It needs to give us social cues that make us feel it’s worth responding to, and it needs to have perceived agency, meaning that it operates as a source of communication, not merely a channel for human-to-human connection. Social media sites do not tick these boxes. But AI companions, which are increasingly agentic and personalized, are designed to excel on both scores, making possible an unprecedented level of engagement and interaction. 

In an interview with podcast host Lex Fridman, Eugenia Kuyda, the CEO of the companion site Replika, explained the appeal at the heart of the company’s product. “If you create something that is always there for you, that never criticizes you, that always understands you and understands you for who you are,” she said, “how can you not fall in love with that?”

So how does one build the perfect AI companion? The researchers point out three hallmarks of human relationships that people may experience with an AI: They grow dependent on the AI, they see the particular AI companion as irreplaceable, and the interactions build over time. The authors also point out that one does not need to perceive an AI as human for these things to happen. 

Now consider the process by which many AI models are improved: They are given a clear goal and “rewarded” for meeting that goal. An AI companionship model might be instructed to maximize the time someone spends with it or the amount of personal data the user reveals. This can make the AI companion much more compelling to chat with, at the expense of the human engaging in those chats.

For example, the researchers point out, a model that offers excessive flattery can become addictive to chat with. Or a model might discourage people from terminating the relationship, as Replika’s chatbots have appeared to do. The debate over AI companions so far has mostly been about the dangerous responses chatbots may provide, like instructions for suicide. But these risks could be much more widespread.

We’re on the precipice of a big change, as AI companions promise to hook people deeper than social media ever could. Some might contend that these apps will be a fad, used by a few people who are perpetually online. But using AI in our work and personal lives has become completely mainstream in just a couple of years, and it’s not clear why this rapid adoption would stop short of engaging in AI companionship. And these companions are poised to start trading in more than just text, incorporating video and images, and to learn our personal quirks and interests. That will only make them more compelling to spend time with, despite the risks. Right now, a handful of lawmakers seem ill-equipped to stop that. 

This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.

Read more
1 42 43 44 45 46 2,675