The 94-room Belmond Hotel Cipriani has a storied history. It was opened in the 1950s by the inventor

Kitty Song-Covey (Anna Cathcart) might have just usurped Lara-Jean (Lana Condor) and Peter (Noah Centineo)

SAVE $40: As of October 26, the Skullcandy Push Active earbuds are on sale for

With splashy marketing campaigns and major donors like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, DKT International has become

The federal government is reportedly investing at least $22m into developing clothes that “can record audio, video, and geolocation data.” According to a 22 August press release from the office of the Director of National Intelligence’s Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), the research and development arm of the organisation, “recently launched a cutting-edge program that aims to make performance-grade, computerized clothing a reality”. The DNI touted the SMART ePANTS program, which stands for Smart Electrically Powered and Networked Textile Systems, that “seeks to develop clothing with integrated audio, video, and geolocation sensor systems that feature the same stretchability, bendability, washability, and comfort of regular textiles,” IARPA stated. They will be used by the intelligence community, IARPA wrote. Since the surveillance technology will be woven into the clothing, “Intelligence Community staff will be able to record information from their environment hands-free, without the need to wear uncomfortable, bulky, and rigid devices.” For example, according to the release, the technology could “assist personnel and first responders in dangerous, high-stress environments, such as crime scenes and arms control inspections without impeding their ability to swiftly and safely operate.” The SMART ePANTS program’s mission is to to incorporate “sensor systems” into clothes, like shirts, pants, socks, and underwear. The Intercept reported that the federal government has dedicated at least $22m in funding to the program. It’s unclear just how big of a gamble IARPA might be making with its investment. Its website describes itself as investing “federal funding into high-risk, high-reward projects to address challenges facing the intelligence community.” “A lot of the IARPA and DARPA programs are like throwing spaghetti against the refrigerator,” Annie Jacobsen, author of a book called The Pentagon’s Brain about ​​the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, told the outlet. “It may or may not stick.” Dr Dawson Cagle, an IARPA program manager leading the SMART ePANTS program, said that while he is “proud of the intelligence aspect” of the program, he’s “excited about the possibilities that the program’s research will have for the greater world.” He said that he was inspired in part to create the program by his father, who was a diabetic, and therefore had to monitor his health multiple times a day. His father’s experience paired with the research that supports that the components of a computer “have already been developed, just as individual pieces,” he explained. If you can convert all of the components into a single, wearable device, the program’s goal will have been achieved, Dr Cagle said. Ms Jacobsen warned that the advancement of smart wearables could lead to future concerns over biometric surveillance by the government. “They’re now in a position of serious authority over you. In TSA, they can swab your hands for explosives,” Ms Jacobsen told The Intercept. “Now suppose SMART ePANTS detects a chemical on your skin — imagine where that can lead.” But IARPA pushed back on this assertion, as spokesperson Nicole de Haay told the outlet: “IARPA programs are designed and executed in accordance with, and adhere to, strict civil liberties and privacy protection protocols. Further, IARPA performs civil liberties and privacy protection compliance reviews throughout our research efforts.” Read More Swedish citizen goes on trial on charges of collecting information for Russia Seoul's spy agency says Russia has likely proposed North Korea to join three-way drills with China Biden says he is ‘disappointed’ at Xi Jinping skipping India’s G20 summit Vodafone users say they can’t call people World’s first solar-powered hybrid truck tested on public roads Apple is about to make a huge change to the iPhone that it never wanted to do

Svitlana Povar knew her husband would not approve when she enlisted in Ukraine's military and deployed to the embattled Donetsk region, where fighting...

With beaming smiles, their hair dyed a red ochre and adorned with a ceremonial headdress of ostrich feathers, the young Maasai men...

It takes a few utterances of the word "motherfucker," fired with the concussive rhythm of

WASHINGTON U.S. import prices rebounded more than expected in July amid higher costs for petroleum products and food,

Toymakers are tweaking original classic games or coming out with new ones that embrace an audience that’s been around for a while: people over 65 years old

Our top picks Best deal overall Fitbit Charge 5 $119.95 at Amazon (save $30) Get

The owner of a Chinese takeaway has become an internet icon for her fiery responses to disgruntled customers. Alice Cheung, the boss of Oriental Express restaurant in Pudsey, West Yorkshire has garnered 149 reviews on Just Eat – and she’s made a point of personally replying to every negative one. While most customers award the eatery five or six stars, Cheung refuses to pander to the complaints of some of the “sillier” reviews, she told Leeds Live. So when one woman complained that the food was “terrible”, she was having none of it. Sign up to our new free Indy100 weekly newsletter “You ordered a Vegetarian Munch Box and then called the shop to complain there was no MEAT in it,” Cheung wrote back. “We sent what you ordered and there was nothing wrong with it. The bad review is to cover your error,” she continued, before ending the response: “Please do not call again.” Another reviewer moaned that her meal was “not good, soggy and old” and that she “threw most of it away,” before condemning it for being much more expensive than her regular takeaway. Cheung, or rather Oriental Express, replied: “I suggest you stay with the other takeaway and take your false review with you.” Responding to a one-star reviewer, whose full comment has been deleted, Cheung wrote: “What sort of idiot orders ‘Salt & Pepper Chicken’ and then complains it has salt in it, our delivery record shows it was NOT late and it was NOT cold. “A fake review and derogatory too. Take your foul mouth and business somewhere else.” Another critic – who offered the restaurant a similarly measly two stars out of six – said her meal had been “totally ruined” by “small pieces of battered dry chicken mixed in with battered prawns.” The furious response read: “Will you please open your eyes and read the descriptions, you ordered the ‘Special sweet and sour’ which contains king prawns. You got what you ordered so how is this our fault? “The food was fresh and perfectly cooked. We are good but mind reading the stupid is not one of our skills.” Another two-star reviewer failed to write a justification for his low score. So Cheung replied sardonically: “Thank you Kyle, whay? Too much food, too hot, too tasty, delivered too quickly?” Speaking to Leeds Live, Cheung defended her tough tactics: “If you’re writing a review just be honest about the situation,” she said. "If we messed up, we’ll reply seriously. If not, expect some banter.” Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.