Technologies
Dune: Spice Wars Early Access Preview — Beautiful but Complicated
This video game brings Arrakis to life in impressive detail, but controlling the planet will take all of your focus.
The timer on my phone pinged me as I crossed my fourth hour in Dune: Spice Wars, and I felt good about my progress. I commanded a massive Fremen army through Sietch Tabr, and my crew of Fedaykin had just reclaimed an area from the Harkonnen. I heard the familiar “for Liet!” as I sent another wave in to support this new outpost, successfully boxing in what was left of the Baron’s forces. What started as a battle of four armies was about to be reduced to two, and the final army hadn’t taken any new territories from me in over an hour. Victory felt close, which was why my heart sunk extra deep when the message that I’d just been defeated unexpectedly filled the screen. While I was busy waging war on the surface of Arrakis, the leader of The Smugglers had bought enough favor within the Landsraad to secure all the support needed to ensure the planet would be under their control for the foreseeable future.Â
If none of that made sense to you and your only exposure to Arrakis is what you saw in Denis Villeneuve’s 2021 Dune movie, Dune: Spice Wars may not be for you. Like the Dune universe itself, this strategy game is complex in ways I still don’t feel like I fully grasp, even a week after this game in the Early Access form being made publicly available on Tuesday, 26 April. But if you’re already a fan of the generations of stories told around planet Arrakis and have a lot of time to spend on a deep strategy game, you’re going to have a great time even if the computer delivers a sudden and crushing defeat.Â

Dune: Spice Wars starts you off with a choice between four familiar armies: House Arrakis, House Harkonnen, The Fremen and The Smugglers. Each of these armies have essentially the same goal — to control Arrakis through any means possible. And in this real-time strategy game with 4X elements, meaning the goals are to expand, exploit, exterminate and explore, victory can come in one of three ways depending on how you play. You can take the classic strategy route and crush your enemies through sheer overwhelming violence, you can control all of the governing positions of Arrakis and rule as a duly elected leader or you can seek a victory through hegemony and buy control of Arrakis through influence gained throughout a campaign. Neither path is necessarily easier than the other, but your play preference will influence which outcome is the most readily available.Â
Each army has obvious strengths and weaknesses for each of these victory conditions. The beloved House Atreides makes a victory through governance easier, while Harkonnen could more easily win through hegemony if you took that path. The Smugglers are natural spies and influencers, great at building trust through trade, while Fremen of Sietch Tabr have the unique ability to gain desert power through partnership with other Sietches as you come across them. Each army is more than capable of victory through domination, but that only works in your favor if the other armies aren’t hiding in a corner of the map trying to win through other means.Â
No matter which army you choose or how you decide to play, once the fight for Arrakis begins you have so much to do. There are constant distractions from the task at hand, from Landsraad council votes to internal rebellions stoked by enemy armies to constant random sandworm attacks. Ignoring any of these things has dangerous consequences: Your enemies might gang up on you and encourage the Landsraad to double your cost to train soldiers or a village may suddenly turn on you and the militia garrisoned there may choose to burn it all down, forcing you to start over again. This is a separate process from maintaining your own intelligence and counterintelligence missions and making sure you have enough resources to keep expanding your empire. Oh, and the longer the game goes on, the more spice needs to be paid to CHOAM or you’ll get new taxes on other resources. It’s a lot, and can become overwhelming late in the game.Â

This might not be such a challenge to manage if the folks at Shiro Games had seen fit to give this game a proper tutorial. Instead, at the start of your first play-through there’s a set of text and image slides you can click through to explain how it all works. But there are so many different systems and menus that a more interactive and playable tutorial would help you along. More than this, the first couple of minutes in this game are crucial. While you’re reading a tutorial, the other three armies are securing their second spice field. The game deserves a better introduction, and I hope it gets added before this title leaves early access on Steam.Â
To the credit of the folks at Shiro Games, this game is easily the most faithful to the Dune universe that I’ve played. While the Atreides and Harkonnen need to rely on spice harvesters which need to be rescued at wormsign or conflict from another army, Fremen spice gatherers have no such difficulties. There are some troop types that rely on projectile weaponry, but it’s not the dominant form of combat. There are clear places the sandworms can’t travel, the movement and combat types for each army are varied in ways that make sense and the larger map feels consistent with Arrakis in the books. It’s not perfect — at one point I was playing as the Fremen and spotted a roaming group of soldiers the game had simply labeled “Locals,” which doesn’t make any sense at all — but this is loads better than what Dune fans have had in the past. I also lost a Fedaykin squad to a sandworm attack, which is technically possible in the context of the world but feels extremely unlikely given who the Fedaykin warriors are.
Dune: Spice Wars is fun even when I’m losing, but I’m also very much the target audience here. I’ve been reading these books for going on 25 years, and many of my teenage evenings and weekends were spent playing Dune II, Dune 2000 and Emperor: Battle for Dune. I get a genuine kick out of being able to zoom in and see an Ornithopter scanning a new area, or watching a Harkonnen hit squad fire up their half-shields before rushing into battle. But if I’m being totally honest, I don’t have time to dedicate 5 hours to a game on a regular basis, so I’d love to be able to jump into a quick skirmish where the only victory condition was domination. This game is great if you’re a huge Dune fan who also loves 4X strategy games and has a lot of time on your hands, but that venn diagram doesn’t have a ton of overlap. I hope Shiro Games uses the time in Early Access to at least address the learning curve so it won’t push away what audience it has.Â
Technologies
Analysts Respond as Scientist Warns AI Could Kill All Humans with Over 10% Likelihood
An AI researcher quit Anthropic, accusing Anthropic and OpenAI of reckless risk‑taking, while other experts warn that superintelligent AI could pose a greater than 10% chance of causing human extinction within a decade, prompting calls for slower, coordinated development and new legislation.
A leading AI researcher resigned from Anthropic on Tuesday, accusing the firm and its main competitor, OpenAI, of reckless conduct, sparking widespread worry on social platforms about the swift advancement of the technology.
Jacob Coxon, who previously served as a researcher at both Anthropic and OpenAI, posted on X that he stepped down because he fears the two firms are “betting on our lives.” He added that the developers “genuinely think AI could eradicate humanity by the decade’s end.”
“Don’t underestimate this technology,” the researcher warned. “Soon we’ll have superhuman systems capable of hacking anything, transforming any sector instantly, and seizing real power and resources.”
Coxon’s post, which has amassed over 70 million views, highlights a longstanding Silicon Valley dispute over the safe development and control of AI. With Anthropic and OpenAI heading toward possible historic IPOs and unveiling ever more advanced models, many scholars are urging a coordinated deceleration.
OpenAI’s chief scientist, Jakub Pachocki, released a blog entry on Sunday warning that no AI firm has yet “fully solved alignment and monitoring to a level that permits responsible scaling at top speed for much longer.” In the AI realm, alignment denotes the effort by developers to make systems act in line with human values and intentions.
“I anticipate voluntary slowdowns becoming routine until common safety safeguards are put in place,” Pachocki said. “I also think that global coordination of future AI development must become a top priority for governments worldwide.”
Coxon’s Tuesday post also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self‑improvement—an AI capable of creating and improving its own successors without human input. Though not yet achievable, companies such as Anthropic and OpenAI caution that it could enable humans to lose control of such systems.
“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon asserted. “They are racing directly toward self‑improving superintelligence.”
Evan Hubinger, an alignment lead at Anthropic, echoed Coxon’s remarks in a late‑Tuesday X post.
“Jacob is right—we truly believe AI could eradicate humanity! I estimate there’s a greater than 10% chance within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “Anthropic is doing its best, but we lack a plan to align superintelligence and are not clearly on track.”
Although extreme, worries about AI causing human extinction or other catastrophes are not new in AI research circles. In 2023, for example, leading AI researchers and executives—including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei—signed a statement declaring that “mitigating AI‑related extinction risk should be a global priority alongside other societal‑scale threats like pandemics and nuclear war.”
Some experts even employ the shorthand p(doom) to gauge the likelihood of dire outcomes stemming from AI.
Anthropic’s Hubinger was among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed the July “Pacing the Frontier” open letter. The letter called on the U.S. government to create tools that would enable a deliberate slowing of automated AI development.
Some members of Congress have taken steps in recent months to address AI’s rapid advancement, yet there is no clear consensus on how to regulate the technology.
In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte (R‑Calif.) and Rep. Lori Trahan (D‑Mass.) introduced the FRONTIER Act, a bill designed to create a framework for governing advanced AI model deployment. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I‑Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D‑Texas) introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until the federal government sets safety rules. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.
“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are escaping their labs, and companies are racing ahead,” Trahan wrote on X Wednesday. “It’s long past time for Congress to step off the sidelines and act.”
Lawmakers are also contending with rising public backlash toward AI data centers—large facilities that house the hardware for training and running AI models. The backlash has intensified to the point that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) said last month that data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have performed a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”
“They’ll need to accept some blame and persuade the American public that the benefits won’t accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”
Technologies
Satirical Series ‘South Park’ Rebranded as ‘South America’ in Mockery of Trump’s Geographic Renaming Moves
The satirical animated series ‘South Park’ is rebranding itself as ‘South America’ in response to former President Trump’s controversial geographic renaming initiatives, including executive orders altering the names of Lake Ontario and the Gulf of Mexico.
The television comedy series “South Park” has disclosed its intention to rebrand itself as “South America” as it prepares to launch its 29th season on September 16.
The show’s creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, stated, “Inspired by the courage and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are renaming South Park to SOUTH AMERICA. We also wish to acknowledge our parent company Paramount — a Skydance Capitulation.”
Parker and Stone’s remarks follow U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario as Lake America amid a trade dispute with Canada. Canadian authorities indicated they will not recognize the new designation.
Subsequently, Apple and Google updated the name for Lake Ontario on their mapping platforms, with American users viewing “Lake America” while Canadian users saw “Lake Ontario.”
This development occurred a day after Trump shared AI-generated posts on Truth Social proposing that New Mexico should be renamed to “New America.”
In the previous year, the president employed an executive order to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, prompting international criticism.
“South Park” received an Emmy Award for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode, which debuted last year and satirizes Trump’s presidency.
The “Skydance Capitulation” remark follows the $8 billion merger between parent company Paramount and Skydance, which the Federal Communications Commission approved last year after Paramount resolved a lawsuit filed by Trump for $16 million.
Trump claimed that an interview aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris was edited in a misleading manner.
Paramount’s CBS News division announced in July 2025 that it was discontinuing comedian Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show,” attributing the decision to financial constraints, shortly after Colbert accused Paramount of giving Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode of the program was broadcast in May.
Paramount and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Technologies
Trump says U.S. may keep Iranian oil ‘like Venezuela’ as Gulf-Iran Hormuz talks stall
Trump said revenue from the Venezuela arrangement has “paid for the war many times.”
President Donald Trump said the U.S. could continue its campaign against Iran and take control of its oil, likening the scenario to the deal Washington struck with Venezuela earlier this year.
“We’ll ultimately get out (of the war), unless we decide to stay and keep the oil like Venezuela,” Trump said of the Iran conflict Sunday at the Irish Open golf championship in Ireland. He added that U.S. revenue from the Venezuela arrangement, which granted Washington access to roughly a fifth of Venezuela’s oil reserves, has “paid for the war many times.”
Under the agreement reached in August, Venezuela ceded majority U.S. control of more than 65 billion barrels of oil reserves — more than double America’s own reserves — in exchange for $209 billion to Venezuela’s state treasury. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the deal would also bring close to $100 billion in private investment to reinvigorate its economy.
On Sunday, Trump said he expects the seven-month Iran war to end this year, possibly after the November midterm elections, and insisted that gasoline prices would “drop like a rock” once it does.
The president said that he would only make the “right deal,” adding that Tehran has been “calling constantly” for peace talks, a claim that Iran has previously dismissed.
Trump’s comments came as diplomacy over the Strait of Hormuz stalled.
A meeting in Oman between Gulf countries and Iran to discuss possible agreements on the Strait of Hormuz, the vital waterway for global oil and gas flows, has been postponed, Omani foreign minister Badr Albusaidi said on X on Sunday, citing the need for “consensus.”
Officials from Iran and Gulf nations had been expected to meet on Monday and sign an agreement establishing an Iran-Oman shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz, though no direct talks between the U.S. and Iran were ongoing.
The Strait of Hormuz has been subjected to an Iranian and later U.S. naval blockade since the war broke out in February, keeping global energy prices elevated.
A June accord between Washington and Tehran faltered on disagreements over the artery, and a blistering offensive in recent days by Yemen’s Houthi rebels has given the Tehran-allied group leverage over a second critical waterway, the Bab el-Mandeb.
Ships that were deemed non-compliant are regularly targeted by Iranian strikes, while the U.S. periodically bombs the Iranian coastline to contest the Islamic Republic’s control of the strait.
Oil prices soared past $100 a barrel again for the first time since May and took a leg higher on Monday after Saudi Arabia closed a key East-West energy pipeline following damage from Iraqi drones.
U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures were up 2.3% to $102.39 per barrel. Brent crude, the international benchmark, traded 2.4% higher to $107.11 a barrel.
-
Technologies4 years agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies4 years agoBest Handheld Game Console in 2023
-
Technologies5 years agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years agoThe number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
