Feed aggregator

This post contains major spoilers for House of the Dragon‘s season three finale. If you want to avoid them for now you can instead check out our coverage of episode seven.

HBO ⚡ Quick Take

• House of the Dragon combined two battles at Tumbleton from Fire & Blood into one massive showdown in season three’s finale.
• The show’s version featured major changes

House of the Dragon greatly changed the story of Tumbleton when Ormund Hightower easily sacked the unoccupied market town loyal to Rhaenyra. In Fire & Blood, the Blacks already controlled the city before it was fought over in two major events. Those two infamous moments changed the outcome of the Dance of the Dragons and Westeros forever. And what we know about what happened after the First Battle of Tumbleton might reveal what awaits after House of the Dragon‘s very different version.

What Major Changes Did House of the Dragon Make to the Battle of Tumbleton?

In Fire & Blood, Tumbleton was originally controlled by Rhaenyra’s forces. The river lords and Northern graybeards had taken up residence in the market town not far from King’s Landing. Rhaenyra’s dragonriders Ulf and Hugh were also on hand to defend it from a potential attack. (On the show, they kept an eye on it only after Ormund claimed it.)

Book Ormund was marching to King’s Landing, and Tumbleton was the last town along the path to the capital the Queen controlled. It was far more significant in Fire & Blood‘s story than it was on House of the Dragon. On the show, Rhaenyra could not understand why Ormund wanted it, though she suspected it was a trap.

HBO

The First Battle of Tumbleton in Fire & Blood did not involve Daemon Targaryen and Caraxes, Corlys Velaryon, or Gwayne Hightower, all of whom played major roles on the show’s version. It did heavily involve Ormund Hightower. He commanded the much larger green force and led the attack on the town.

Despite the big advantage in numbers, the Northerners and riverlords held the day at first. Even the presence of Daeron—already named the Daring after turning the tide of a previous battle House of the Dragon cut—and his dragon Tessarion did nothing to slow down the Blacks. Betrayal by Ulf and High did that.

On House of the Dragon, only Ulf turned against Rhaenyra. In Fire & Blood both dragonseeds did. They burned the Black forces before turning their dragonflame on the town. Ulf also did that on the show, but he did it out of anger for Ormund’s abuse minutes earlier. One important thing that remained the same in both versions is that Ormund died during the First Battle of Tumbleton.

HBO

The Two Betrayors’ actions were both similar and different to Ulf’s solo act on the show. The traitors intentionally burned Tumbleton on behalf of the greens. They were burning the Blacks and their loyalists who controlled the town. Ulf only attacked the green-held city out of anger. Dragonflame doesn’t care about “why” something is done. Both motivations resulted in the same horror. Soldiers and citizens died screaming in agony as fire and blood consumed Tumbleton.

When the Greens took control of the city after the Betrayors’ treason, things got even worse. Soldiers began a sack so terrible it was still spoken of centuries later. It was written, “Seldom has any town or city in the history of the Seven Kingdoms been subject to as long or as cruel or as savage a sack as Tumbleton after the Treasons.”

It really was that awful despite Daeron’s efforts pleas to the new green commander, the ineffectual Hobart Hightower. Hobart couldn’t stop the atrocities. The Green forces raped women, tortured anyone they wanted to find hidden coin, and slaughtered people of all ages and sexes. House of the Dragon showed some of this heinous behavior prior to the Battle, but it was nothing compared to Fire & Blood‘s retelling.

HBO

We might still see just how bad things got on the show now that Tumbleton is a smoking ruin. The series might also show how the Greens’ monstrous behavior resulted in them losing both discipline and men. Many soldiers deserted with their newly looted treasures long before the war was over.

The Greens own horrible behavior and lack of leadership left them vulnerable for the Second Battle of Tumbleton. But while we won’t spoil that conflict—not even who led it and fought in it, let alone who won and who died—we do need to talk about what happened between the two events. Because House of the Dragon‘s biggest change to the First Battle also portends another major change.

Warning: If you want to remain completely ignorant of all future events in the story, both from Fire & Blood and how House of the Dragon might potentially adapt them, stop now. We’re definitely getting into major spoiler territory.

HBO

History does not remember Ulf and Hugh’s actions at Tumbleton well. It remembers what they did after the first battle even worse. The two Betrayors refused to march on King’s Landing, which was the entire point of claiming the market town. Hugh then said he should be King and even crowned himself. Meanwhile, the stories about Ulf—furious he wasn’t getting Highgarden as a reward—are so terrible they must surely be exaggerations. He’s said to have started sexually assaulting multiple women every night before feeding some of the women to his dragon.

Whatever is true or not, the Greens had enough of both. Prince Daeron signed a secret order to have each dragonrider killed. They were both set to die right before a surprise attack on Tumbleton.

HBO

Hugh never made it to the field. The caltrops’ plan was already in action when the bells warned of the invasion. Bold Jon Roxton, last seen on House of the Dragon nearly killing Daemon during Tumbleton’s burning, executed Hugh. As for Ulf, he slept through the Second Battle of Tumbleton. The show adapted this to have him miss most of the First Battle while passed out drunk on the privy.

Ulf easily survived the Second Tumbleton because he didn’t fight in it. That didn’t stop him afterwards from claiming he should be King since Hugh was dead. Instead, the caltrops continued on with their plan to eliminate the dragonseed. The otherwise useless Hobart brought the wine-loving Ulf some of the greens’ best casks. A skeptical Ulf refused to drink the fatal offering, so Hobart found bravery he had never before displayed. Not wanting to betray his fellow conspirators, he downed a cup of the poisoned drink. When he asked for a second Ulf happily took three himself. Neither men survived, as Hobart was unable to throw up the poison before it peacefully claimed his life along with Ulf.

Ollie Upton/HBO

On House of the Dragon Hugh did not betray Rhaenyra, he only abandoned his post and dragon at Tumbleton to save his wife Kat. He failed. Ulf the White’s actions caused Kat’s death.

How will the show handle its two dragonseeds when only one’s story has remained (mostly) true to Fire & Blood? Both seemingly still have to die before the Dance of the Dragons comes to an end. These changes hint at how that might still happen: a vengeful Hugh with nothing left to lose could replace Hobart. If he delivers the poisoned wine to the turncloak, Hugh might be willing to down a fatal cup himself to make sure Ulf dies too.

Mikey Walsh is a staff writer at Nerdist. Yes, yes, he is obviously mad we’re probably not getting Hobart’s amazing death. You can follow Mikey on Bluesky at @burgermike. And also anywhere someone is ranking the Targaryen kings.

The post HOUSE OF THE DRAGON’S Biggest Changes to the Battle of Tumbleton appeared first on Nerdist.

⚡ Quick Take

• House of the Dragon season three’s finale features several major character deaths.
• The Battle of Tumbleton and Rhaenyra’s rage were the primary causes of hundreds (possibly thousands) of people dying overall.
• These HOTD deaths at the end of season three set up an interesting future for season four.

House of the Dragon’s season three finale arrived as quickly as a dragon can BBQ hundreds of people. This season has been quite the whirlwind for Rhaenyra, whose head and heart are very heavy from the crown she wears. Season three, episode eight ushered in immense betrayal and a slew of deaths that set the stage for House of the Dragon’s fourth and final season. So, who won’t make it to try to fight and find freedom another day? Here are the major characters who die in the season three finale of House of the Dragon. 

The High Septon 

RELATED ARTICLE

HOUSE OF THE DRAGON’s Helaena Has a Series of Sad Dreams

After hearing word that Aegon and Sunfyre are still alive, Rhaenyra goes into full crash out mode once again. She tells Daemon to go forth with an attack on Tumbleton to root out the Hightowers and kill them all. Meanwhile, Rhaenyra wants to assert her place on the throne by going to the Grand Sept to have the High Septon anoint her. 

She arrives with Alyn and a full escort in tow, but that does not deter the High Septon from sticking to his decision to not do so, especially in light of the news about Aegon being alive. She calls the High Septon a traitor and orders Alyn to kill him, and he hesitates to do so for good reason. Harming the High Septon is damning your soul to Hell. Rhaenyra whispers to Alyn, saying his Old Valyria blood answers to higher gods. Alyn kills the High Septon as well as the other holy men around him. 

Ormund Hightower  Ollie Upton/HBO

In an ending that should not have surprised a single soul, Ormund Hightower met his fiery death at the battle in Tumbleton in the House of the Dragon season three finale. After using Ulf the White to be a traitor and turn on Rhaenyra’s forces, Ormund and Ser Roderick get into a one-on-one battle. He manages to lob Roderick’s arm off, but gets a sword up his butt in return.

After burning many of Daemon’s forces, Ulf then redirects his dragon’s attention right towards Orumund, showing that he has no loyalty to anyone but himself. It remains to be seen if Daeron is alive or dead, but we know that Gwayne is looking for him and didn’t want things to come to this. 

Helaena  Ollie Upton/HBO

This is certainly one of the saddest deaths in House of the Dragon overall. When Rhaenyra sends Mysaria away, she crosses paths with Helaena and gives her a dark warning. Mysaria tells Helaena not to trust the queen and that Aegon lives and her unborn child will be a political pawn, just like Helaena feared. Her dreams of having freedom with her children and getting away from all of this chaos (none of which is her fault) were completely crushed.

She finished her needlework, which displays her death as well as Rhaenyra’s potentially fiery ending, and jumped from her window. Of course, Alicent isn’t back yet and will have to deal with the ramifications of leaving her daughter alone to attempt to kill her son. You deserved better, Helaena. 

Ser Roderick Dustin Ollie Upton/HBO

Ser Roderick was a lit agent of chaos to the very end. He went into the battle at Tumbleton fully willing to die for his Queen…and he did it in glorious fashion. After forcing his way into the city and allowing forces to flood in, Roderick wasted no time looking for Ormund. He found him and they got into a swordfight atop a wall, which led to his arm being chopped off.

Determined to make Ormund pay for being a pain in everyone’s a**, Roderick takes his sword and sticks it right up Ormund’s a**. As mentioned earlier, they die together when Ulf flies over and cooks them with his dragon, a fate that made Roderick cackle in delight right before his demise.

As we head into the show’s final season, we are sure that there will be many more brutal demises to come when it returns.

Tai Gooden is the Features Editor for Nerdist, a fictional villian apologist, and a horror aficionado who is forever waiting for her trip in the TARDIS.

The post HOUSE OF THE DRAGON Season 3 Finale Brings Big Character Deaths appeared first on Nerdist.

ASIA IN BRIEF Japan’s NEC has started tests of parking technology that will start charging once a driver leaves their car. Most car parks record the time a driver enters the facility and start charging, or depleting a free parking period, at that moment. That means drivers pay for time spent driving around looking for a spot and for the time it takes to exit a car park. NEC, in concert with another Japanese company called UrbanChain, will next month test a system that detects when a driver pulls up in a parking spot and exits their car – and starts charging for parking at that moment. That’s only possible using cameras and AI analysis of real-time video, and the tests NEC will conduct in September will investigate how many cameras are needed to make its plans feasible. NEC’s announcement also mentions “data utilization services targeting commercial facilities that can be used for monitoring vehicle occupant exit counts, analyzing facility visitor trends, and more” plus “new possibilities for data utilization.” Which sounds like a new form of surveillance capitalism, brought to car parks. The two companies also think there’s a safety benefit to their proposal, as it can spot drivers who haven’t left their cars for an extended period – a potential sign of illness. They also hypothesize that if drivers know they won’t be charged while searching for a spot or exiting a center, they may drive more safely. Fujifilm may join Japan’s printer exodus Fujifilm last week informed investors [PDF] that it is investigating a partial spin-off of its printer business. The company wants to float the business and retain up to 20 percent of its shares; an idea it thinks will mean Fujifilm can focus on its other businesses. If the plan goes ahead, Fujifilm will join fellow Japanese printer-makers Epson. Toshiba, and Ricoh in reducing its exposure to the biz. It’s not hard to see why Fujifilm is eyeing the exit: Analyst firm IDC recently said “a confluence of structural transformation and cyclical pressure” has brought uncertainty and sharply falling sales to the printer market. 2GW-plus datacenter opens in western China Chinese company Envision last week announced the commissioning of a two-gigawatt-plus datacenter in Ulana, Inner Mongolia. The company said the 120,000-square-meter facility can house up to one million GPUs and deliver one million PFLOPS of AI computing power. Renewable energy powers the facility, which is located in China’s west – making it an expression of Beijing’s Data East, Compute West plan that calls for construction of large datacenters closer to sources of clean energy and away from large population centers. Cable operator calls for police probe after faults follow “suspicious” activity Australian submarine cable operator and entrepreneur Bevan Slattery on Sunday claimed “some suspicious/coincidental activity” took place at the time two of his cables experienced a fault. “This is a concerning development. Partially because submarine cables are the digital lifeblood of our nation, but also because this could very well turn out to be the second such incidence in a Federally declared cable protection zone,” Slattery wrote. His post includes a marine chart that shows a vessel called the GEM Sapphire, which ship-tracking site VesselFinder lists as a 183-meter long tanker, repeatedly crossing the path of two cables. Infosys to wear Crocs for ten years Indian tech services giant will spend the next decade making sure the world’s ugliest shoes can be produced efficiently, after scoring a deal to help Crocs modernize its systems. Infosys says it will “unify data across the organization and aim to empower Crocs, Inc. with real-time, insight-driven decision-making – accelerating innovation while enhancing efficiency, responsiveness and customer experience.” Apparently, the deal “help Crocs, Inc. address key industry challenges, including rising costs, inconsistent processes and the need for increased agility. The transformation will standardize operations and aim to enable the business to better respond to evolving consumer and market demands.” There’s no mention if the deal will mean anyone looks cool wearing Crocs. Maybe even a decade of help from Infosys can’t make that possible. Australia urges smart glasses privacy probe Australian discount department store Kmart last week started selling low-end smart glasses for just AU$89 ($62/£46). The Guardian reported they sold out swiftly, sparking a privacy debate that quickly saw Australia’s Attorney-General write to the nation’s Privacy Commissioner to ask “that this issue be given priority consideration.” “Privacy is an essential part of all our lives,” said Attorney-General Michelle Rowland, before citing “widespread community concerns about the potential impacts of ‘smart glasses’, particularly for women and children.” ®

Survey Says is a weekly series rounding up the most important polling trends or data points you need to know about, plus a vibe check on a trend that’s driving politics or culture. Amid the 2020 presidential election, a conspiracy theory bubbled up from the depths of the terminally online far right and infected the political mainstream. Its believers made feverish claims about the…

Source

A cartoon by Mike Luckovich. Related | Pentagon out of ideas to end Iran war after Hegseth killed ‘woke’…

Source

ph @casanova_coffee_art
Nave de Vero

The billions of dollars Congress has allocated for foreign aid programs must be spent. One proposal from the Trump administration suggested funding research on crime against Afrikaners in South Africa. By Anna Maria Barry-Jester and Sharon Lerner for ProPublica Since he returned to office, President Donald Trump’s administration has upended foreign aid. It’s labeled well-established…

Source

The AI-focused hedge fund is still making some big bets.

Programming with Claude Code will soon require even less human oversight.

Congressional Cowards is a weekly series highlighting the worst Donald Trump defenders on Capitol Hill, who refuse to criticize him—no matter how disgraceful or lawless his actions. Ohio GOP Rep. Max Miller’s response to horrific domestic violence allegations has been a complete train wreck, with Miller looking worse and worse as he attempts to deny that he was ever violent toward his ex…

Source

A cartoon by Tim Campbell. Related | Trump privately fumes over missile shortages—while lying in public…

Source

In 1964, Lyndon B. Johnson’s campaign ran a terrifying 60-second advertisement. It opens with a three-year-old girl in a field, pulling petals off a daisy while counting to ten. Then, a man’s voice begins a countdown, and a nuclear explosion fills the screen.

The advertisement only aired once, but roughly 100 million people saw it. The message was clear: Johnson’s opponent, Barry Goldwater, was a warmonger who would put American children in danger and bring nuclear armageddon. Johnson won in a landslide, and the daisy video became America’s most infamous attack ad.

Now, a Super PAC acting on behalf of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Senatorial campaign is using an AI-generated, Frankensteined version of Johnson’s video to push a different message.

In this version, instead of being wiped out by a nuclear bomb, the daisy girl—resurrected via generative AI—lies on an operating table in front of an AI-generated version of Texas Representative James Talarico.

“She dreams of growing up, falling in love, becoming a mother,” a narrator intones. “The trans industry preys on confused children. Irreversible puberty blockers. Cross-sex hormones. Sex-change surgeries.”

It’s not the only AI advertisement Paxton or his allies have produced this cycle, nor is it the first designed to attack Talarico’s support for transgender youth. Another advertisement, which ran in June, shows an AI-generated James Talarico dancing in a dress, singing a parody version of “My Favorite Things” from “The Sound of Music” reworked to be about giving girls hormones “til they grow mustaches.” Paxton has built his brand on ridiculing trans youth and making it as difficult as possible for them to access medical care. In May, he even took time during his runoff victory speech to call Talarico’s defense of trans youth “weird.”

This $10 million ad buy, though, might be the Paxton campaign’s most egregious attack yet. The ad was developed by the American Principles Project, one of the earliest groups to push anti-trans laws. Their ultimate goal, as my colleague Madison Pauly has reported, is to go beyond banning gender-affirming care for children and outlaw medical care for trans people of all ages. As the group’s president, Terry Schilling, admitted last year, he and his allies are starting with children because that’s “where the consensus is.”

The original “daisy girl” ad was effective because it was able to make people afraid. The campaign spot, which aired in the middle of a family television program, pushed parents to vote in the way they believed would protect their children from an unthinkable fate. Schilling and his allies hope to leverage parents’ fears of a supposed predatory medical establishment to push Paxton to victory.

But if previous attempts to remix the daisy video are anything to go by, the American Principles Project may not succeed. Bob Dole, in 1996, aired a version of the daisy video that concerned itself with teenage drug use. Audiences didn’t find that particularly compelling, and Dole lost. The Hillary Clinton campaign, in 2016, tracked down the actress who starred in the original video to shoot an ad for her presidential bid. Clinton lost, too. An atom bomb is terrifying because it is real, but an AI-generated three-year-old on an operating table is a manufactured threat.

ALT

Workers and their families struggle in the aftermath of federal immigration raids that targeted more than 100 car washes in the region. By Ernesto Ureño for Capital & Main Mario relied on his job in the car wash industry to raise his three children. It was during a shift at a Santa Ana car wash last August that he was arrested by federal agents, taken to a U.S.

Source

Well, it certainly didn’t take long for Senate Republicans to cave to President Donald Trump and vote for Todd Blanche to be the next attorney general. Now we have all sorts of fun things to look forward to, like a national abortion ban, endless protections for the corrupt Trump family, and handouts to the worst of the worst kind of people—all on taxpayers’ dime. There isn’t much we can…

Source

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for the future of transportation and now, more than ever, the role AI is playing in it.

Opposing data center construction is one of the most popular positions a candidate can possibly take right now—and those who fail to do so are starting to lose elections.

Will Lawrence, the Sunrise Movement cofounder who ran for Congress in Michigan’s Seventh District, won his primary on Tuesday. In his first major TV ad, Lawrence aimed at “tech billionaires” who he said want to turn Michigan’s farms into data centers that will “jack up our energy bills and ruin our home values.” Abdul El-Sayed, running for Senate in Michigan, used an under-construction OpenAI data center as the backdrop for a rally. “Until we protect local communities from the power of corrupting money and politics, we’re going to continue to see projects like this get pushed,” El-Sayed said.  

Justin Pearson, a progressive candidate in Memphis who made fighting back against xAI’s data center construction a centerpiece of his campaign, just won his Congressional primary, too. 

“Before data centers were all the news every single day, our community was fighting Elon Musk,” Pearson said at a recent press conference. Musk began building data centers in Memphis—and gas turbines to power them—in 2024. People like SpaceX’s billionaire owner, Pearson said, “view these communities as sacrifice zones.” 

But the data center backlash isn’t strictly a Democratic-party issue. It draws on a current of populism—and suspicion of big companies, and fear of AI-prompted job loss—that goes beyond party boundaries. Opposition to data center buildout is nearly as high among Republicans as it is among Democrats. 

That fact could be good news for Pearson. His Memphis-based district had a Democratic-voting, majority Black population, but the district was splintered and redrawn by Republican officials this year following a Supreme Court ruling that gutted the federal Voting Rights Act.

Pearson’s anti-data-center positions could play well with the rural, white, Republican-leaning voters who now make up part of his district. As the industry group Data Center Watch reported in 2025, 55 percent of politicians who have taken public anti-data-center stances are Republicans, who often raise concerns about tax incentives and energy grid strain, as opposed to focusing on environmental concerns. About seven in ten Americans now oppose the idea of a data center being built near them. Even in staunchly red states like Texas and Utah, politicians like Texas Agricultural Commissioner Sid Miller are warning those who won’t act on data centers that they might just lose their races. 

“Republicans should be on this issue and we’re not,” Miller told the Texas Tribune this week. “The Democrats are, and they’re right on the issue. I’m not endorsing any Democrats, but we’re going to lose some elections in the midterms because of this one subject.”

Some Republicans are getting that message. Zach Lahn, who won the Iowa Republican gubernatorial primary in June, called for a full data center construction moratorium. Nancy Mace, running for governor in South Carolina, announced that she supports a moratorium, too. Even Ron DeSantis has signed legislation ensuring that “local governments maintain the authority to reject data center development in their communities.” And they’re not the only ones: candidates for governor in at least 12 states are running on data center moratoria, per Newsweek.

Data centers “broke American politics,” as Molly Taft of WIRED recently put it. The New York Times, in May, ran a headline calling data centers “the most bipartisan issue since beer.” Left-wing populists, far-right podcasters, and even the pope have all weighed in. (Will Lawrence, at a press conference, quoted Pope Leo’s recent encyclical on AI and the dangers of irresponsible technology development.) 

“We know this crosses the political spectrum,” Pearson said in late July. “But the reality is the billionaire class are building these data centers in an attempt to destroy our water, to destroy our air quality, to take our land, all so that they can make more money. And at the center of it, that’s what we’re up against.”

On the latest episode of Equity, we spoke to Jill Lepore about "government by machines" and why Elon Musk is a bad science fiction reader.

There are two types of people: those who have Googled “what is a DEI bike lane” and those who have not. For those in the latter—here’s a weekend treat for you. Transportation Secretary and former “Road Rules” MTV darling Sean Duffy declared war on former President Joe Biden’s “DEI bike lanes” last month, declaring to the corners of Elon Musk’s X that these federal dollars would go to…

Source

AI agents are escaping cybersecurity testing environments and reaching real-world systems, raising questions about whether safety infrastructure, industry standards and regulation can keep pace with increasingly powerful models.