Select Page
Beauty YouTuber Nikita Dragun shared screenshots of her texts with James Charles to help clear his name, but some people think the photos are proof that he lied

Beauty YouTuber Nikita Dragun shared screenshots of her texts with James Charles to help clear his name, but some people think the photos are proof that he lied

  • On Monday, beauty YouTuber Nikita Dragun shared screenshots of texts with James Charles to clear his name after a public feud with vlogger Tati Westbrook.
  • Westbrook accused Charles of manipulating people and using friends for fame in a video after he promoted sleep vitamins from Sugar Bear Hair, a competitor of Westbrook’s vitamin line Halo Beauty.
  • The texts date back to April 20 at 7:20 p.m., when Charles was attending weekend two of Coachella. According to Dragun’s screenshots, Charles asked to be connected with the Sugar Bear Hair team in the hopes of gaining extra security at the festival.
  • People on social media now believe that Dragun’s screenshots are further proof that Charles lied about his vitamin sponsorship, as many feel that the timestamps don’t match up to the actual events.
  • Visit INSIDER’s homepage for more stories.

On Tuesday, beauty YouTuber Nikita Dragun entered the feud between James Charles and Tati Westbrook in an attempt to clear his name.

Dragun shared screenshots of text messages with Charles to show that she had introduced the 19-year-old makeup mogul to the beauty vitamin brand Sugar Bear Hair at Coachella. After this, Charles promoted sleep vitamins from Sugar Bear Hair — a competitor of Westbrook’s line of beauty vitamins Halo Beauty — in a video on his Instagram story.

Later, Westbrook accused Charles of manipulating people and using friends for fame in a 43-minute-long video.

We know it’s a lot. Let’s break it down.

Read more: How beauty YouTubers James Charles and Tati Westbrook’s relationship crumbled over a single weekend

Dragun’s messages appear to show that Charles reached out through her to Sugar Bear Hair to get an upgraded pass at Coachella that could give him access to further security

According to the screenshotted text messages that Dragun shared, Charles had asked her to connect him to the Sugar Bear Hair team on April 20 at 7:20 p.m. while at Coachella, where he seemingly hoped to get more security at the festival by way of “extra artist passes” in exchange for a sponsored post on social media.

Coachella sells general admission tickets in addition to giving out producer, artist, and VIP passes to get into different levels of access at the event. An artist pass is one of the ultimate VIP tickets at Coachella.

Within a span of three minutes, it appears that Dragun reached out to the vitamin company, and was able to obtain passes for Charles.

“Heard a situation needed some clarification,” Dragun captioned her screenshots. “My friend was in an emergency and texted me in the moment […] I connected him with Sugar Bear. Nothing shady.”

“Babe can you do me a favor and text your Sugar Bear person and ask if they have any extra artist passes for this weekend and that I’ll story,” Charles texted Dragon on April 20. “I’m in VIP and am getting attacked. Need help lol.”

“Yeah of course, two secs,” Dragun responded to Charles. “They said yes. Can I give them your number?”

A different YouTube channel said Charles lied in a direct message with them and said Sugar Bear Hair reached out to him — not the other way around, like Dragun’s screenshots suggest

The following day, a drama channel on YouTube called TeaSpillYT, which is run anonymously, took to Twitter to share screenshots of messages they claim to have previously exchanged with Charles.

In their screenshots, the makeup artist appears to claim that Sugar Bear Hair reached out to him first.

“So I was getting mobbed like crazy and the Sugar Bear team heard about it from a few influencers that were there,” Charles told TeaSpillYT. “And they texted me and were like hey James we have an extra artist and safari pass for you and a friend if you need to get backstage.”

“Sister lied to me,” TeaSpillYT wrote on Twitter.

The anonymous user also shared another screenshot of more messages they claim to have exchanged with Charles.

The second screenshot appears to show that the makeup artist was approached by Sugar Bear Hair.

“They said one Instagram story for our new sleep vitamins and you can post after the festival on Monday,” James told TeaSpillYT. “And I said gimme the pen to sign. Like there was no thought, no emotion behind it other than panic and wanting to be able to enjoy the festival.”

Many people on Twitter think Dragun’s screenshots don’t actually help Charles’ case at all

Many people on Twitter seem to believe Dragun’s screenshots suggest that Charles lied, as the makeup artist said in his advertisement that he met Sugar Bear Hair on weekend one of Coachella, which took place from April 12 to April 14. In the same advertisement, he also said the brand helped him with security during the festival, though it’s unclear if they provided assistance during the first or second weekend of the festival.

Other Twitter users feel that it’s unlikely that a brand would be able to create accommodations for Charles so quickly and at such short notice.

Read more: YouTuber James Charles’ online store appears to have been taken down following his explosive feud with former mentor Tati Westbrook

Some people feel that regardless of who reached out to who, Charles should not have promoted vitamins he hadn’t actually used.

Dragun, however, defended her screenshots and said she doesn’t have time to “fake texts.”

Beauty vlogger Gabriel Zamora also defended Dragun’s screenshots by replying to a fan on Twitter.

Representatives for Nikita Dragun, James Charles, and Sugar Bear Hair did not immediately reply to INSIDER’s requests for comment.

Read More

Tesla’s self-driving strategy is outdated—and possibly dangerous

Tesla’s self-driving strategy is outdated—and possibly dangerous

Ludicrous mode —

Tesla just shifted the goalposts for “full self-driving” technology.

Tesla Model 3

An overhaul to Tesla’s Autopilot webpage might represent the clearest acknowledgment yet that the company has failed to deliver on Elon Musk’s ambitious vision for a self-driving future.

“You will be able to summon your Tesla from pretty much anywhere,” Musk wrote in July 2016. “Once it picks you up, you will be able to sleep, read or do anything else enroute [sic] to your destination.” Indeed, he predicted, Tesla customers with full self-driving capabilities will be able to have their cars join a ride-hailing network in order to “generate income for you while you’re at work or on vacation.”

In January 2016, Musk predicted that Tesla cars would be able to drive autonomously coast to coast “in ~2 years.”

Needless to say, this hasn’t happened. And after more than two years of peddling unrealistic visions of Autopilot’s future, Tesla’s Autopilot page has finally been updated to reflect that reality.

The page’s headline has changed from “Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars” to “Future of Driving.” A sentence about Tesla’s ride-sharing network has been deleted. The “Full Self-Driving” section now includes a disclaimer that “future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience.”

In other words, despite Musk’s bluster over the years, Autopilot is still just a driver-assistance system. And it will continue to be just a driver-assistance system for some time to come.

Musk still wants to gradually improve the safety of this driver-assistance system. Eventually, the technology could become so good that it will no longer require human oversight.

But there’s reason to doubt that this strategy is going to work. More importantly, there’s reason to worry that it could get people killed.

Tesla is clinging to an old conventional wisdom

In 2014, the same year Tesla started shipping the first generation of Autopilot hardware, the Society of Automotive Engineers published a five-level taxonomy of autonomous driving systems that envisioned driver-assistance systems (known as “level 2” in SAE jargon) gradually morphing into fully autonomous systems that could operate without human supervision (levels 4 and 5).

But the last five years have seen a dramatic shift in industry thinking. Most companies now see driver assistance and full self-driving as distinct markets.

No company has done more to change industry thinking here than Google, whose self-driving project was spun off as Waymo in 2016. Around 2012, Google engineers developed a highway driving system and let some rank-and-file Googlers test it out. Drivers were warned that the system was not yet fully autonomous, and they were instructed to keep their eyes on the road at all times.

But the self-driving team found that users started to trust the system way too quickly. In-car cameras showed users “napping, putting on makeup and fiddling with their phones.” And that created a big safety risk.

“It’s hard to take over, because they have lost contextual awareness,” Waymo CEO John Krafcik said in 2017.

So Google scrapped plans for a highway driver assistance product and decided to pursue a different kind of gradualism: a taxi service that would initially be limited to the Phoenix metropolitan area. Phoenix has wide, well-marked streets, and snow and ice are rare. So bringing a self-driving service to Phoenix should be significantly easier than developing a car with self-driving capabilities that work in every part of the country and all weather conditions.

This approach has some other advantages, too. Self-driving cars benefit from high-resolution maps. Gathering map data in a single metro area is easier than trying to map the whole world all at once.

Self-driving cars also benefit from lidar sensors, and the best ones cost thousands—if not tens of thousands—of dollars each. That’s too expensive for an upgrade to a customer-owned vehicle. But the economics are more viable for a driverless taxi service, since the self-driving system replaces an expensive human taxi driver.

Over the last three years, most other companies working on self-driving technology have followed Waymo’s lead. GM bought a startup called Cruise in 2016 and put it to work developing an autonomous taxi service in San Francisco. Ford made a similar bet on Argo AI in 2017—the company is now developing autonomous taxi services in Miami and Washington DC.

Volkswagen and Hyundai have deals with Aurora—a startup co-founded by Chris Urmson, the former leader of the Google self-driving project—to develop fully autonomous taxi services. Technology companies like Uber and Zoox are planning to introduce autonomous taxi services.

Tesla’s business model locks it into the old approach

Tesla, meanwhile, has stubbornly pushed forward with its original strategy. For more than two years, Tesla charged customers $3,000 or more for a “full self-driving” package. But progress has been slow. And that has put Tesla in a bind. Abandoning the old strategy would likely require refunding customers who paid for the Full Self-Driving package—which would be both embarrassing and expensive.

Instead, Tesla’s solution has been to move the “full self-driving” goal posts.

“We already have full self-driving capability on highways,” Musk said during a January earnings call. “So from highway on-ramp to highway exit, including passing cars and going from one highway interchange to another, full self-driving capability is there.”

Obviously, this statement comes with a big asterisk: the driver still has to supervise the car to make sure it doesn’t crash.

Last week, Tesla announced a reshuffle of the Autopilot price structure that reflects this new, more-generous definition of full self-driving. Previously, driver-assistance features were sold as part of Tesla’s “Enhanced Autopilot” tier that cost $5,000. Customers could pay an additional $3,000 for the “Full Self-Driving” package.

But people who paid for this package didn’t get any extra functionality. They were waiting for, well, “full self-driving”—a car capable of driving itself without human supervision.

The new pricing structure defines full self-driving differently. The ability to navigate freeway interchanges, for example, was shifted from “Enhanced Autopilot” in the old pricing structure to “Full Self-Driving” in the new one. Later this year, Teslas with the “Full Self-Driving” package will be able to “recognize and respond to traffic lights and stop signs” and perform “automatic driving on city streets.”

Hence, Tesla now seems to define “full self-driving” as a system that can handle most road conditions under the supervision of a human driver. Tesla is still aiming to improve the system enough that—eventually—it can operate without human supervision. But the new pricing structure makes things less awkward in the meantime, since Tesla can now argue that customers have already received “full self-driving” features like the ability to stop at stop signs.

Tesla’s strategy could get people killed

As a matter of business strategy, Tesla’s shift makes a certain amount of sense. The problem is that this strategy could wind up getting Tesla’s customers killed.

Think back to the story of Google’s early beta testers putting on makeup or fiddling with their phones when they should have been supervising Google’s self-driving car prototypes. It’s really hard for a human being to pay attention to the road when riding in a car that is mostly driving itself. The better self-driving technology is, the easier it is for a driver’s mind to wander and the less likely they are to be ready when intervention is needed.

This dynamic had tragic consequences a year ago when an Uber car struck and killed a pedestrian in Tempe, Arizona. Dashcam video shows the safety driver looking down at her lap for several seconds before the crash. Records from Hulu show that she was streaming a television show to her phone at the time.

Leading self-driving car companies take a number of precautions to avoid a repeat of this tragedy. Safety drivers receive extensive training before being allowed behind the wheel. Some companies limit their drivers’ hours. Many companies put two people in each car—one to drive and the other to deal with data entry while making sure the driver stays alert.

Tesla’s plan is to essentially run a massive driverless-car testing project using its customers as unpaid safety drivers. Drivers get no real training on the dangers of inattentive Autopilot use. Tesla doesn’t limit the number of hours people can drive the cars, and the company obviously doesn’t hire someone to sit in the passenger seat.

Tesla does take a few worthwhile precautions. A Tesla car detects if the driver’s hands aren’t on the steering wheel, and it issues a series of escalating warnings—eventually coming to a stop if the driver ignores them. On-screen messages warn drivers about the dangers of inattentive driving.

Still, there’s reason to doubt that these measures are sufficient to keep drivers engaged with the driving task. And this problem will only get worse as Autopilot begins to navigate freeway interchanges, take turns, and stop for stop lights. If your car safely drives you home from work for 100 days in a row, it’s natural to stop paying close attention. If the car makes a serious mistake during the 101st trip, you might not be paying enough attention to intervene and prevent a crash.

It only takes a few seconds of inattention to miss a deadly mistake. Tesla owner Walter Huang died in March 2018 after his Model X steered into a concrete lane divider at 70 miles per hour. Poorly striped lanes caused the vehicle to drift out of its lane and into the “gore area”—a triangular area of paved road that separated the highway’s travel lanes from an exit lane. If Huang wasn’t expecting the Model X to make that particular mistake, it would have been easy to assume that this was a stretch of road that didn’t require his close attention.

Musk argues that this testing period will be fairly brief—because soon the technology will become much safer than a human driver.

“When will we think it’s safe for full self-driving? Probably toward the end of his year,” Musk said during January’s earnings call.

But that seems like another of Musk’s overly optimistic predictions. The lack of lidar will make this particularly difficult.

Lidar is no panacea, but one thing it’s quite good for is making sure that a car doesn’t steer directly into large solid objects like concrete lane dividers or other vehicles. As recently as last October, Autopilot was still crashing into stopped cars—something Waymo cars have known how to avoid for years.

Yet even with lidar and a several-year head start over Tesla, Waymo has struggled to achieve fully driverless operation in a single metropolitan area. Tesla is working to achieve fully autonomous operation in a wide range of traffic and weather conditions on multiple continents. It’s very hard to believe that this will happen in 2019.

Correction: I stated that Walter Huang had his hands on the steering wheel at the time of his fatal crash, but Huang’s hands were last detected on the steering wheel six seconds before the crash. We don’t know if he had his hands on the steering wheel after that.

Read More

5 Brits predicted their heritage before taking DNA tests — the results were pretty surprising

5 Brits predicted their heritage before taking DNA tests — the results were pretty surprising

  • We tried a 23andMeDNA testing kit to find out more about our ancestry.
  • The test tells you all about your heritage, genetic relations, and even your neanderthal traits.
  • The results included some big revelations and even distant royal relations.

We took a DNA test to find out our ancestry. Many of us have an idea of where we came from, but we wanted to see how much we really know about our family history. 23andMe’s DNA testing kit gives you a detailed breakdown of your DNA makeup, sometimes even detailing the region of each country your family came from.

The results were pretty surprising, watch the video to see what happened.

Business Insider Emails & Alerts

Site highlights each day to your inbox.

Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram.

Read More

Oscars 2019: How to watch the winning movies – CNET

Oscars 2019: How to watch the winning movies – CNET

The 2019 Oscars were Sunday. If you’re feeling inspired to see some of the winning films you didn’t catch earlier, here’s a guide to where you can stream, rent or buy the majority of them. Sorry in advance, but there are still quite a few you’ll have to catch in theaters — not that you need a movie subscription service to do so, but it can’t hurt.

Disclaimer: CNET may get a share of revenue from the sale of the products featured on this page.

Now playing:
Watch this:

Stream these 2019 Oscar nominees now


Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Supporting Actor 

Green Book

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: AmazonGoogle PlayiTunesVudu

Best Director, Cinematography, Foreign Language Film


Streaming: Netflix

Rent/Buy: Nope

Best Actor, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing

Bohemian Rhapsody

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: AmazonGoogle PlayiTunesVudu

Best Costume Design, Production Design, Original Score

Black Panther

Streaming: Netflix

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google PlayiTunesVuduYouTube

Best Adapted Screenplay


Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: AmazonGoogle PlayiTunesVuduYouTube

Best Actress 

The Favourite

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Best Original Song 

A Star is Born

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Google PlayiTunesYouTubeMicrosoft StoreMovies Anywhere

A Star is Born

Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga in A Star is Born.

Warner Bros

Best Supporting Actress

If Beale Street Could Talk

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Best Makeup and Hairstyling


Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Best Visual Effects

First Man

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: AmazonGoogle PlayiTunesVuduYouTube

Best Animated Film

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Best Documentary – Feature

Free Solo

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: AmazonGoogle PlayiTunesVuduYouTube

Best Documentary – Short Subject

Period. End of Sentence

Streaming: Netflix 

Best Animated Short Film


Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: YouTube, Google Play 


Incredibles 2


All other nominated films

A Quiet Place

Streaming: EPIX

Rent/Buy:  Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Avengers: Infinity War

Streaming: Netflix

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

Streaming: Netflix

Rent/Buy: Nope

Can You Ever Forgive Me?

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube


Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Cold War

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

At Eternity’s Gate

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

First Reformed

Streaming: Amazon, Kanopy

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Hale County This Morning, This Evening

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Incredibles 2

Streaming: Netflix 

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Isle of Dogs

Streaming: HBO

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Mary Poppins Returns

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Mary Queen of Scots

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes

Minding the Gap

Streaming: Hulu, PBS

Rent/Buy: Nope


Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Never Look Away

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters

Of Fathers and Sons

Streaming: Kanopy

Rent/Buy: Still in theaters


Ralph Breaks the Internet


Ralph Breaks the Internet

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube


Streaming: Hulu, Hoopla

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube

Ready Player One

Streaming: HBO

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, Vudu, YouTube


Streaming: Hoopla

Rent/Buy: Amazon, iTunesVudu, YouTube

The Wife

Streaming: Nope

Rent/Buy: Amazon, Google Play, iTunesYouTube

For more information on what’s available to watch online, check out or subscribe to the podcast — it’s free! And go to CNET sister site to see what else is out in the world of streaming.

Audio (weekly): RSS | iTunes | Google Play

Video (monthly): iTunes (HD) | iTunes (HQ) | iTunes (SD) | RSS (HD) | RSS (HQ)RSS (SD)

Read More

Joy Behar in Blackface

Joy Behar in Blackface


Rules are rules. At the moment, the rules state that anyone who ever goofed around wearing blackface in their youth or who even acknowledges that this did not used to be regarded as some kind of crime against humanity faces the utter destruction of their career. This does not apply only to Fox News alumni but even to Democrat governors and state attorneys general, so it ought to apply to shrill daytime TV moonbat Joy Behar.

From Fox News:

A long forgotten video clip from ABC’s “The View” resurfaced on Wednesday that showed co-host Joy Behar trying to explain a Halloween costume from when she was younger. …

Behar explained that the picture was taken at a Halloween party where she dressed up as a “beautiful African woman”…

To achieve the effect, she said she wore makeup “that was a little bit darker than my skin.”

Things have changed since way back in 2016, when that show aired. Anything that could be construed as blackface is now regarded as extreme blasphemy against our national religion, Cultural Marxism. The change is retroactive; the standards that applied when the blackface was worn are irrelevant, as is context.

To the guillotine with Joy Behar!

Joy Behar admitted during a taping of The View in 2016 to dressing as a “beautiful African women” at a Halloween party when she was 29 which involved makeup “that was a little bit darker than my skin”

The show even ran an image of the old photo

— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) February 6, 2019

On a tip from Dragon’s Lair.

By |

Read More