Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes and former CEO Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani were on Tuesday ordered to pay $452 million to victims of the blood-testing startup’s fraud, and an appeals court also denied Holmes’ request to remain out of prison while challenging her conviction.

Holmes, who rose to fame after claiming Theranos’ small machines could run an array of diagnostic tests with just a few drops of blood, was convicted last year of misrepresenting the startup’s technology and finances. She was sentenced to 11 years and three months in prison.

Under the restitution order made by Judge Edward Davila in San Jose, California, who also oversaw Holmes’ trial and sentencing, both Holmes and Balwani are equally responsible for the full amount.

Davila rejected their argument that intervening events contributed to Theranos investors’ losses.

“The victims’ losses occurred at the moment they exchanged their money for Theranos shares,” the judge said.

Holmes had asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to pause her sentence on April 25, two days before she was to report to prison.

The court rejected her argument that the appeal is likely to result in a new trial, the threshold for her to remain free on bail. The denial of bail on Tuesday means Davila will now set a new date for her to go to prison.

During the trial, Holmes testified in her own defense, saying she believed her statements were accurate at the time. On appeal, Holmes is challenging several of the judge’s rulings, including his allowance of evidence about Theranos’ test accuracy that postdated her statements to investors.

Balwani was convicted of defrauding Theranos investors and patients at a separate trial and sentenced to 12 years and 11 months in prison. He began serving the sentence on April 20, after Davila and the 9th Circuit rejected his requests to remain free on bail during his appeal.

Forbes dubbed Holmes the world’s youngest female self-made billionaire in 2014, when she was 30 and her stake in Theranos was worth $4.5 billion. Theranos, once valued at $9 billion, collapsed after a series of Wall Street Journal articles in 2015 questioned its technology.

Ukraine said on Tuesday it had shot down six Russian Kinzhal missiles in a single night, thwarting a weapon Moscow has touted as a next-generation hypersonic missile that was all but unstoppable.

When asked about the Ukrainian claim, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu dismissed it, the RIA news agency reported. His ministry said a Kinzhal had destroyed a U.S.-built Patriot surface-to-air missile defence system.

“A high-precision strike by the hypersonic Kinzhal missile hit a U.S.-made Patriot anti-aircraft missile system in the city of Kyiv,” the defence ministry said in a statement.

Two U.S. officials said a Patriot system likely suffered some damage but had not been destroyed, and one said discussions on repairing it were underway and it did not appear the system would have to be removed from Ukraine.

The commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, had said earlier that his forces had intercepted the six Kinzhals launched from aircraft, as well as nine Kalibr cruise missiles from ships in the Black Sea and three Iskanders fired from land.

Russia’s Shoigu was quoted as saying the number of claimed Ukrainian missile intercepts in general is “three times greater than the number we launch”.

“And they get the type of missiles wrong all the time. That’s why they don’t hit them,” he said, without elaborating.

It was the first time Ukraine had claimed to have struck an entire volley of multiple Kinzhal missiles, and if confirmed, would be a demonstration of the effectiveness of its newly deployed Western air defences.

The United States and the European Union have supplied Ukraine with weaponry to defend itself since Russia invaded in February 2022.

EU and NATO member Hungary has refused, however, to provide any military equipment to neighbour Ukraine, and on Tuesday, the government said it had blocked the next tranche of the EU’s off-budget military support known as the European Peace Facility.

Air raid sirens blared across nearly all of Ukraine early on Tuesday and were heard over the Ukrainian capital and the surrounding region for more than three hours.

“A year ago, we were not able to shoot down most of the terrorists’ missiles, especially ballistic ones,” President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an address to the Council of Europe rights body in Iceland by video link.

“And I am asking one thing now. If we are able to do this, is there anything we can’t do?”

The meeting of European leaders over two days was to focus on ways to hold Russia to account for its war, officials said.

Russia says its invasion was necessary to counter threats to its security posed by Ukraine’s growing ties to the West.

Ukraine and its allies call it an unprovoked war of conquest and Ukraine says it won’t stop fighting until all Russian forces leave its land.

The six Kinzhals were among 27 missiles Russia fired at Ukraine over 24 hours, Ukraine’s military said in its evening update on Tuesday, lighting up Kyiv with flashes and raining debris after they were blasted from the sky.

It was unclear which Western weapon Ukraine used to defend against the Kinzhals. The Pentagon had no immediate comment.

For its part, Russia’s defence ministry said its forces delivered a concentrated strike with long-range air- and sea-based high-precision weapons at Ukrainian forces, “as well as at places of storage of ammunition, weapons and military equipment delivered from Western countries”.

Kyiv authorities said three people were wounded by falling debris.

“It was exceptional in its density – the maximum number of attack missiles in the shortest period of time,” Serhiy Popko, head of the city military administration, said on Telegram.

Ukraine’s military said two S-300 missiles had also targeted infrastructure in Kostyantynivka, west of the embattled eastern city of Bakhmut.

This month, Ukraine said it had shot down a single Kinzhal missile over Kyiv for the first time using a newly deployed Patriot system.

The U.S. military confirmed that but did not say whether the Russian missile was flying at hypersonic speed at the time.

The U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) says the Kinzhal rapidly accelerates to Mach 4 (4,900 km/h) after launch and may reach speeds of up to Mach 10 – or 10 times the speed of sound. Hypersonic weapons travel at least five times the speed of sound.

The Kinzhal missile, the name means dagger, can carry conventional or nuclear warheads up to 2,000 km. Russia used the weapon in war for the first time in Ukraine last year and has only acknowledged firing them on a few occasions.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has frequently touted the Kinzhal as proof of world-beating Russian hardware, capable of taking on NATO.

With Ukraine set to go on the offensive against Russia’s invasion for the first time in six months, Russian forces are launching longer-range air strikes at the highest frequency of the war.

Ukraine says it is shooting down most missiles and drones.

Related Galleries:

Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

• Elon Musk told CNBC that growing US-China tensions should concern everyone.
• He said US and China are like “conjoined twins” and any fallout would impact the world economy.
• Musk also said there was “some inevitability” about China’s stance toward Taiwan.

Elon Musk is concerned about the intensifying geopolitical tensions between US and China — and he thinks everyone else should be too.

“I think that should be a concern for everyone,” Musk told CNBC’s David Faber on Tuesday in response to a question about the “growing belligerence between the US and China.”

Musk also said there was “some inevitability” about China’s move to take control of Taiwan, a self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its territory. 

“The official policy of China is that Taiwan should be integrated,” Musk said. “One does not need to read between the lines.”

Tensions between the US and China have risen in recent years due to a range of issues: from trade disputes, and China’s wide-ranging updates to its anti-espionage law, to strategic competition in technology like chips — for which Taiwan is a critical producer. 

US President Joe Biden told CBS 60 Minutes said last September that the US forces would defend Taiwan if China invaded the island.

The situation could get serious and affect the global economy.

“The Chinese economy and the rest of the global economy are like conjoined twins. It would be like trying to separate conjoined twins. That’s the severity of the situation,” Musk, the CEO of electric vehicle maker Tesla, told Faber.

“And it’s actually worse for a lot of other companies than it is for Tesla. I mean, I’m not sure where you’re going to get an iPhone, for example.”

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s largest contract chipmaker, is a key supplier to Apple.

In a move to diversify its supply chain, Apple has been shifting production previously concentrated in China to other countries including India — but the tech giant is just making just 7% of its iPhones in India now, Bloomberg reported on April 13, citing people familiar with the matter. 

Tesla and Musk did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment sent outside regular business hours.

(NewsNation) — A security guard who fatally shot a suspected shoplifter in San Francisco will not be criminally charged, the district attorney’s office announced Monday.

Brooke Jenkins’ office released surveillance video of the April shooting at a Walgreens to justify the decision, which sparked protests from some in the city.

The video showed the moments the security guard shot and killed 24-year-old Banko Brown, a Black transgender man accused of shoplifting. Brown is seen walking out the door with a bag in his hand when he is stopped by 33-year-old guard Michael Anthony, who quickly starts throwing punches.

The physical altercation lasts 54 seconds before Anthony shoots Brown right outside the store’s doors.

Jenkins released a slew of videos as part of an evidence package announcing Anthony would not be criminally charged.

“That report outlines not only the facts of the case as well as witness statements, but the law,” Jenkins said at a news conference.

In a police interview, Anthony said he told Brown to put the items back and he’d let him go, telling investigators Brown became aggressive and threatened to stab him.

“It was a life-or-death situation,” Anthony told police.

No weapon was ever found on Brown. Civilian cellphone video captured the moments following his death as shoppers passed his body on the sidewalk.

Many were critical of Jenkins’ decision, including San Francisco Supervisor Shamann Walton, who said, in part, “Where is the perceived threat? DA Jenkins decision to not charge gives every armed security guard in San Francisco a license to have an open season to shoot and kill Black and transgender people for alleged shoplifting.”

Jenkins maintains Anthony believed in that moment he was in imminent danger.

“The law doesn’t require that you wait and see, is it a gun, is it a knife, is it scissors. The law allows you to have a perception and a belief so long as it’s reasonable,” Jenkins said.

Anthony was initially arrested on suspicion of homicide, but was released from jail just days later.

Through an attorney, Brown’s family said they believe he was killed in cold blood and they plan to file a wrongful death civil lawsuit against the security guard.

Even before House Democrats introduced a resolution on Tuesday to expel him from Congress, U.S. Rep. George Santos’ political future seemed tenuous. Reporters began discovering in December that the New York Republican had lied about topics as varied as his purported Jewish identity, his work history, and his campaign finances. He quickly became the target of numerous investigations. Then, in May, he was charged by the Justice Department on several counts of wire fraud and money laundering. He was also charged on theft of public funds and making false statements to the House of Representatives. Santos has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

As his political career appears to be going up in flames, challengers are circling like moths. Already, five candidates have launched bids to replace him, whether that opportunity comes when he’s due to be on the ballot again next November, or sooner. More candidates are likely to announce for the seat as the situation unfolds.

For now, Santos is staying put. Despite even some of his fellow Republicans calling on him to resign, Santos has yet to lose the support of House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who needs every vote he can get in the closely divided House. If Santos were to leave Congress in the coming months, New York Governor Kathy Hochul could call a special election and party leaders would have the power to choose their preferred candidates. Democrats handily won the district in 2020, and they are optimistic about their odds of doing so again, pointing to Biden’s success there and the enthusiastic anti-Santos protests that have dogged the congressman during his first term.

Here’s who has jumped into the race so far.

George Santos

Despite numerous scandals and criticism even from within his own party, Santos announced in April that he is indeed running for reelection.

“I was elected to fulfill the campaign promises of securing our border, lowering the high cost of living, solving the disastrous SALT issue in our tax code, and fighting the Hochul crime crisis of policies empowering criminals to terrorize the people of New York,” Santos wrote in a statement he posted to Twitter. “I’ve been in office for 100 days, and through legislation and my votes, I’ve already made significant efforts to honor those promises.”

Efforts to reach Santos’ campaign were unsuccessful. In a statement to TIME, a spokesperson with his congressional office wrote, “Congressional offices do not comment on campaign-related matters.”

Read more: The Charges Against George Santos Were A Long Time Coming

Kellen Curry

The only other Republican officially in the race so far is Kellen Curry, an Afghanistan veteran who previously worked at J.P. Morgan. Curry tells TIME he started thinking about returning to public service during the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, but it wasn’t until he read about Santos’ lies that he decided to take the plunge.

“Somebody could not go to this extent to defraud the American people,” he recalls thinking when he first read some of the damning stories about Santos. “But, you know, it is what it is. Now, when I go around the district, a lot of people don’t even want to talk about it.”

Curry says that he is emphasizing constituent services as he campaigns, as well as youth mental health, water infrastructure, remedies for noise pollution, and federal resources for the Merchant Marine Academy. “We have the most ineffective member of Congress right now and he just can’t get any traction on some of the issues that are important to residents of this district,” Curry says.

He calls himself a “kitchen-table-issues Republican,” and says he has been a Republican for most of his adult life because he supports limited government, low taxes, strong national defense, and the free market. How does he think Santos will affect the Republican brand in the district? “I think Santos is an aberration. I think he’s one bad apple,” Curry says. “I think the national party is in a tough spot with needing as many votes as they can get in a very slim majority in the House. But I also think there is a sentiment of wanting to move beyond the distraction. … We’re going to have that opportunity here in the Third District pretty soon.”

He adds that he looks forward to a potential special election or getting the chance to defeat Santos in a GOP primary next year if it comes down to it. “I think this whole Santos reelection thing is going to go absolutely nowhere,” Curry says. “My sense is that he’s doing this to create leverage with with DOJ.”

Zak Malamed

Zak Malamed, who co-founded the group Next 50 to raise millions for battleground Democratic candidates under 50 years old, is the latest candidate to enter the race in NY-03.

“I’m Zak Malamad and everything I’m about to tell you is true,” the 29-year-old Democrat said in his announcement video published on May 15.

In an interview with TIME, Malamad describes Santos’ scandals as too big to ignore. “Santos is not just a local embarrassment, a statewide embarrassment, a national embarrassment; he’s an international embarrassment,” he says. “When I was in Israel and the UAE over the past couple of months, I had people coming up to me asking me if I knew anything about George Santos, not knowing that he was my representative in Congress.”

Malamad says his bid brings fresh energy to the race, which is needed to defeat “MAGA Republican extremists”, and stands apart from current and potential candidates, some of whom have track records of losing in the district. He also says he’ll be focused on winning by growing the district’s Democratic base, especially in the part that reaches into Queens.

Malamed says he identifies with the New Democrats, a moderate congressional caucus focused on fiscal responsibility. Asked about what issues matter most to him, Malamed talks about expanding health care access and lowering the cost of living in the district, which he says can be prohibitive for younger Americans like himself. Having lost a friend to gun violence in 2020, Malamed says he also intends to prioritize gun safety, an issue he’s been working on for more than a decade.

He says the first 24 hours of his campaign have been marked by enthusiasm from across the ideological spectrum, including a shoutout on Twitter from U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California progressive, who praised Malamed as part of “the next generation of passionate and willing public servants.”

Will Murphy

“A real person focused on other real people,” reads the tagline on Democrat Will Murphy’s campaign website. The attorney and professor, who is making his first bid for office, says he’s the only candidate in the race who represents ordinary people.

“When the Santos news broke, I looked to the people stepping up to restore an average person, an everyday person, a real person’s faith in government,” he says. “And I just saw more of the same. They might not be as bad as Santos. But they’re a bunch of self-interested career politicians.”

Murphy says his campaign is focused on restoring trust in government. He has committed to serving no more than six years in office. Other top issues include restoring the SALT deduction and implementing common sense gun safety reforms. “We have a Second Amendment for a reason,” he says. “But voting to make the AR-15 our national weapon, it doesn’t protect people, and it doesn’t protect our Second Amendment rights.”

As a father to a two-week old and a two-year old, he says he feels a personal stake in advancing gun safety in schools and working on education issues.

“Not every family involves wedding rings and babies,” he says. “But at the end of the day, family matters in this district. And I’m the only candidate that can say, ‘I’m raising my family in this district.’”

While Murphy is preparing for a crowded Democratic primary, he says he doesn’t think a special election is likely. “If Kevin McCarthy wasn’t such a spineless coward, desperately clinging to power in the House, he would do the right thing, be a real leader, expel George Santos, and there would be a special election,” he says. “But I think it’s been made pretty clear Kevin McCarthy is a spineless coward.”

Josh Lafazan

Six years ago, Josh Lafazan was elected to the Nassau County Legislature at the age of 23, its youngest member ever. Before that, he had become the state’s youngest elected official when he joined his local school board at 18. Now Lafazan has joined the race for Santos’ seat.

On his campaign website, Lafazan states that he is a professor and an adviser to healthcare provider Northwell Health, and calls “fighting the heroin and opioid epidemic his top legislative priority.” The site also emphasizes his support for veterans and people with disabilities, as well as fighting bullying in schools.

This is not Lafazan’s first run in NY-03, Last year, he was among the candidates across the country who received support from disgraced businessman Sam Bankman-Fried. He ended up placing third in the Democratic primary.

Anna Kaplan

Former Democratic State Senator Anna Kaplan, who lost her re-election bid last year, is also in the race. Her launch video features news coverage of Santos’ lies and scandals while accusing him of wanting to restrict reproductive rights and slamming him for backing a bill celebrating AR-15s.

Additionally, the video tells her story of growing up Jewish in Iran, moving to New York, and officiating some of the state’s first same-sex weddings. It also emphasizes her support for abortion rights and gun safety, and the fact that she flipped a Republican State Senate seat in 2018, delivering control of the chamber to Democrats.

She previously ran in NY-03 in 2016, losing in the Democratic primary. Earlier in her career, she was elected Councilwoman for the Town of North Hempstead.

Other Possible Candidates

Many potential candidates who could become heavy-hitters have yet to declare whether or not they will enter the race. Among them is former U.S. Rep. Tom Suozzi, a Democrat who previously represented the district and lost the gubernatorial primary to Hochul last year. Suozzi is said to be among the party’s favorites for retaking the seat.

Another Democrat who could launch a bid is Robert Zimmerman, a DNC member and businessman who was the Democratic nominee for the seat in 2022, losing to Santos by 8 points. Zimmerman has faced some criticism for not doing more to expose Santos’ falsehoods before the election. Asked by the Washington Post early this year whether he’d run again, he deflected the question.

Across the aisle, another candidate has piqued Republicans’ interest: New York State Senator Jack Martins.

“I’ve been calling on George Santos to resign since he took office and yesterday’s spectacle only highlights why he needs to step down.” Martins tweeted on May 11 after the Congressman was indicted. “We deserve better.”

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman made an appeal to members of Congress under oath: Regulate artificial intelligence.

Altman, whose company is on the extreme forefront of generative A.I. technology with its ChatGPT tool, testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time in a Tuesday hearing. And while he said he is ultimately optimistic that innovation will benefit people on a grand scale, Altman echoed his previous assertion that lawmakers should create parameters for AI creators to avoid causing “significant harm to the world.”

“We think it can be a printing press moment,” Altman said. “We have to work together to make it so.”

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Joining Altman in testifying before the committee were two other AI experts, professor of Psychology and Neural Science at New York University Gary Marcus and IBM Chief Privacy & Trust Officer Christina Montgomery. The three witnesses supported governance of AI at both federal and global levels, with slightly varied approaches.

“We have built machines that are like bulls in a china shop: Powerful, reckless, and difficult to control,” Marcus said. To address this, he suggested the model of an oversight agency like the Food and Drug Administration, so that creators would have to prove the safety of their AI and show why the benefits outweigh possible harms.

The senators leading the questioning, however, were more skeptical about the rapidly evolving AI industry, likening its potential impact not to the printing press but a few other innovations—most notably, the atomic bomb.

Read more: Pausing AI Developments Isn’t Enough. We Need to Shut it All Down

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.), chair of the group’s subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, revealed his wariness of AI when he replied: “Some of us might characterize it more like a bomb in a china shop, not a bull.”

The session lasted nearly three hours and the senator’s questions touched upon a wide range of concerns about AI, from copyright issues to military applications. Here are some key takeaways from the proceedings.

Consensus on the Dangers

This hearing was less combative than many of the other high-profile exchanges between legislators and tech executives, largely because the witnesses acknowledged the dangers of unfettered growth and usage of a tool like advanced conversational AI, such as OpenAI’s chatbot, ChatGPT. For their part, the Senators did not ask some of the thornier questions that experts have posed, including why OpenAI chose to release its AI to the public before fully assessing its safety, and about how OpenAI created its current version of GPT-4 in particular.

Early on, Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) remarked that he could not recall a time when representatives for private sector entities had ever pleaded for regulation.

Altman and the senators alike expressed their fears about how AI could “go quite wrong.”

When Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) cited research, for example, that Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT could draw from a media diet to accurately predict public opinion, he asked Altman whether bad actors could use that technology to finetune responses and manipulate people to change their opinions on a given topic. Altman said that possibility, which he called “one-on-one interactive disinformation,” was one of his greatest concerns, and that regulation on the topic would be “quite wise.”

Marcus added that the impact on job availability could be unlike disruptions from previous technological advances, and Montgomery was a proponent for regulating AI based on the highest risk uses, such as around elections.

Read more: The AI Arms Race Is On. Start Worrying

When pressed on his worst fear about AI, Altman was frank about the risks of his work.

“My worst fears are that we—the field, the technology, the industry—cause significant harm to the world. I think that can happen in a lot of different ways,” Altman said. He did not elaborate, but warnings from critics range from the spread of misinformation and bias to bringing about the complete destruction of biological life. “I think if this technology goes wrong, it can go quite wrong, and we want to be vocal about that,” Altman continued. “We want to work with the government to prevent that from happening.”

Concerns about AI prompted hundreds of the biggest names in tech, including Elon Musk, to sign an open letter in March urging AI labs to pause the training of super-powerful systems for six months due to the risks they pose to “society and humanity.” And earlier this month, Geoffry Hinton, who has been called the “godfather” of AI, quit his role at Google, saying he regrets his work and warning of the dangers of the technology.

Specific Regulation Recommendations

Altman laid out a general three-point plan for how Congress could regulate AI creators.

First, he supported the creation of a federal agency that can grant licenses to create AI models above a certain threshold of capabilities, and can also revoke those licenses if the models don’t meet safety guidelines set by the government.

The idea was not new to the lawmakers. At least four Senators, both Democrat and Republican, addressed or supported the idea of creating a new oversight agency during their questions.

Second, Altman said the government should create safety standards for high-capability AI models (such as barring a model from self-replication) and create specific functionality tests the models have to pass, such as verifying the model’s ability to produce accurate information, or ensure it doesn’t generate dangerous content.

And third, he urged legislators to require independent audits from experts unaffiliated with the creators or the government to ensure that the AI tools operated within the legislative guidelines.

Read more: Why Microsoft’s Satya Nadella Doesn’t Think Now Is the Time to Stop on AI

Marcus and Mongomery both advocated for requiring radical transparency from AI creators, so that users would always know when they were interacting with a chatbot, for example. And Marcus discussed the idea of “nutrition labels,” where creators would explain the components or data sets that went into training their models. Altman, notably, avoided including transparency considerations in his regulation recommendations.

Lawmakers in Europe are further along in regulating AI applications, and the E.U. is deciding whether to classify the general purpose AI technology (on which tools like ChatGPT is based) as “high risk.” Since that would subject the technology to the strictest level of regulation, many big tech companies like Google and Microsoft—OpenAI’s largest investor—have lobbied against such classification, arguing it would stifle innovation.

Avoiding a Similar Social Media Problem

The senators at the hearing affirmed that they intend to learn from their past mistakes with data privacy and misinformation issues on social networks like Facebook and Twitter.

“Congress failed to meet the moment on social media,” Blumenthal said. “Now we have the obligation to do it on AI before the threats and the risks become real.”

Read more: The ‘Don’t Look Up’ Thinking That Could Doom Us With AI

Faced with an unknowable future of AI technology, the nearly dozen legislators at the hearing covered a wide range of issues with their questions. Each highlighted a different area of concern about the impacts of AI.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) asked about compensation for musicians and artists whose work was used to train the models, for example, and then create similar works with their styles or voices. Sen. Alex Padilla (D., Calif.) asked about issues of language inclusivity and providing the same technology for people across cultures. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) asked about protections for local news agencies, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) asked about how AI could impact military drones and change warfare. Other topics included assessing the risks of an AI industry concentrated into very few corporate powers, and ensuring the safety of children who use the tools.

Altman, Marcus, and Montgomery all expressed readiness to continue working with the government in the future to find answers for those questions, and Blumenthal has indicated that this was just the first in a series of committee hearings.

“I sense that there is a willingness to participate here that is genuine and authentic,” he said.