By Chris Snellgrove
| Updated 19 hours ago

One of the biggest fumbles in Warner Bros. history is Green Lantern. The movie should have been a surefire hit: the title character is one of DC’s most popular heroes, and he was played by a reliable leading man (and future Deadpool actor) Ryan Reynolds. Plus, the film is filled with an entire galaxy of colorful characters. Nonetheless, a combination of bad writing and shoddy CGI made this blockbuster film into something worse than a failure: an embarrassment. Since then, the studio has been hesitant to bring the character back. However, that all changes with Lanterns, the DCU show premiering on HBO Max on August 16th.

The show takes the surprising approach of making Hal Jordan (the most popular Green Lantern) into an older character, one who is responsible for training Jon Stewart, the new kid on the block. Together, they must solve a murder on Earth that Jordan is convinced is tied to a larger extraterrestrial mystery. These space cops have to make nice with the local law enforcement, one of whom is deeply resentful of these big-time heroes muscling in on her jurisdiction. Does all of this add up to a show worth watching? Below, you can decide for yourself by watching the first full-length trailer for Lanterns.

The Lanterns Always Ring Twice

This Lanterns trailer quickly establishes the dynamic between our two main characters. Hal Jordan (played by Kyle Chandler) is training a rookie Lantern, John Stewart (played by Aaron Pierre). The new guy seems ready and willing to become a full-fledged space cop; meanwhile, Jordan has mixed feelings about the fact that he’s training his own replacement. In the trailer, we see a handful of fun mentor/mentee moments, several cool action moments, and even a brief conversation between Jordan and Sinestro, his greatest nemesis. Towards the end, we get a cool action montage to go along with Green Lantern’s familiar oath, followed by a cutesy moment between Jordan and his sheriff love interest.

For the most part, the trailer makes Lanterns look really exciting. I was on the fence about making Jordan an older character because I hoped that he (my personal favorite) would be the one to join the Justice League. However, the performances of the two leads really put my concerns to rest. Chandler is great as a grizzled space cop, and I’m now excited to see him in a Logan-style story about a cowboy hero going for one last ride. It helps that Pierre is so compelling as Stewart: he has a stern coolness that belies a fiery passion, and I’m hyped to see him evolve into the DCU’s next big character.

A Different Dynamic Duo

This is admittedly a low bar to clear, but Lanterns looks like it is going to be much better than Supergirl. While it’s something of an apples-to-oranges comparison (movie vs. TV show and all that), Lanterns already seems like it’s going to strike a better balance between its more grounded elements (like character relationships and an ongoing investigation) and its cosmic elements (like visiting Sinestro’s jail cell in deep space and making a mysterious alien enemy). The trailer also distances itself from most of the whimsy of Superman, Supergirl, and even Peacemaker, presenting a show with the sensibilities of your favorite cheesy action movies from the ‘90s.

Sure, it’s a great trailer, but will the TV show blow our minds or suck like the vacuum of space? Only time will tell, but we don’t have to wait that long. Lanterns premieres on HBO Max on August 16. Considering the high quality of Peacemaker Season 2, it’s fair to say that fans have high expectations for the DCU’s second live-action television show. Fingers are crossed it lives up to those hopes and that Green Lantern finally becomes the popular mainstream character he deserves to be. If not, the show might end up like Supergirl: an evil that we only wish would escape our sight!

TL;DR: As of July 25, Hostinger’s Website Builder starts at $2.69 per month (down from $11.99 per month), with plans available directly on Hostinger. You can build a full site by chatting with AI, plus get a free domain for the first year.

Building a website used to mean either paying someone else to do it or losing a weekend fighting with a clunky drag-and-drop editor that never quite matched what you had in your head. Hostinger has an easier approach: you just describe your site to their AI, and it builds a live, professional-looking site in seconds.

This weekend, you can get up to 82% off Hostinger, with prices starting at $2.69 per month.

There are two plans to pick from, and which one is right for you depends on what you’re building. The Premium Website Builder is the more basic option at $2.69 per month (regularly $11.99 per month), letting you build up to three websites with 20GB of storage and a free domain for the first year. Here’s what you get:

• Drag-and-drop website builder

• 300+ designer-made templates

• AI tools to write your copy and design your logo

• Free domain for 1 year

• Email campaigns with AI

• Mobile editing

That’s solid if you’re building something like a portfolio, a blog, or a simple business site. It’s worth noting that you save the most with the 48-month plan, totaling $446.35. The 12-month plan saves less, at $100.79.

If you’re planning to sell products, the Business Website Builder is the one for you. It’s $3.41 per month (down from $18.99 per month), and on top of everything in Premium, you get the following:

• Sell up to 1,000 products with zero transaction fees

• Support for 100+ payment methods

• Live analytics

• Printful integration for custom merch

• AI blog post generator

• AI SEO assistant

• AI tools that write product descriptions for you

Just like with Premium, the 48-month plan saves you the most, with total savings of $747.79. The 12-month plan saves less, at $173.99.

This deal is worth considering if you’re a new business owner who’s been hesitant to explore website building. Between the discount and the 30-day money-back guarantee, it’s a low-risk way to try it out — both plans include real hosting, a free domain, and 24/7 support.

Stop putting it off — build your dream site with Hostinger, with plans starting as low as $2.69 per month.

If a chatbot can insist it’s right while being totally wrong, imagine the stakes when NASA starts leaning on artificial intelligence to help with life detection.

Could the rovers suddenly hallucinate aliens?

Michigan State University researchers wanted to know, so they trained an AI system to spot the difference between digital “organisms” that can copy themselves and others that can’t, using a computer program called Avida. In test runs, the algorithm nailed the distinction, getting it right 99.97 percent of the time. 

Then, the team tried to fool it. They took nonliving chunks of code and made small changes over and over, nudging the AI to feel more confident that it was looking at something alive. Eventually, the system became almost 100 percent certain that many of the fakers were alive, even though they never exhibited the one behavior defined as “alive” in that virtual world: replication.

The work shows how AI can latch onto patterns in its training data without fundamentally understanding what makes something alive, said Ankit Gupta, a doctoral student in computer science and engineering. Gupta and his coauthor, Christoph Adami, a professor of microbiology and molecular genetics, physics, and astronomy, warn that this weakness could foil space missions that send smart instruments to Mars, icy moons, or other extraterrestrial environments to hunt for signs of life.

The team will present their findings in August at the 2026 Conference on Artificial Life in Waterloo, Canada.

“AI is highly accurate at classifying things that are ‘usual,'” Gupta told Mashable. “The problem occurs when it is presented with examples that are unlike the common things, which AI will misclassify with confidence. This is much more likely with extraterrestrial life, for obvious reasons.”

The Perseverance rover on Mars collected a rock sample with fossilized material that ancient alien microorganisms could have created.
Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / ASU / MSSS

At the same time, NASA and its partners are pouring money into AI‑driven life‑detection projects, betting that machine learning can sift through huge, complex data sets that scientists could never fully analyze on their own. It’s setting the stage for a future in which AI helps flag promising clues, with humans making the final call. 

In one NASA‑funded effort, a large team led by Carnegie Science’s Michael L. Wong and NASA’s Caleb Scharf is building machine‑learning tools to pick out patterns of life in complex chemical data. Their project, supported by a $5 million grant, aims to train AI on at least 1,000 samples — from meteorites and rocks to fossils and living organisms.

Some of the data comes from real instruments, including mass spectrometers like those already flying on NASA missions. The algorithm learns how a mix of molecules shifts when life has shaped that material versus when simple physics and chemistry have done the job.

While Wong welcomes the fresh scrutiny, he isn’t sure the experiments exposed a serious vulnerability in AI approaches. In his view, the way the study actually created its fake life matters. The authors used a kind of selection process that kept refining the code until it looked increasingly lifelike.

“I don’t think it’s that bad, to be honest,” he told Mashable. “To generate their life mimics — their spoofs — they actually had to perform natural selection, which is a living process. I don’t know of any actual physical environment that performs that kind of selection, where it says, ‘I will prefer entities that just look like life, but don’t actually do lifelike things.'”

But the research did push Wong to think more about what kinds of examples he feeds into life‑detection models. His group wants to continue training AI not just on things that are alive, but also on the remains and byproducts of life — the fossils, goo, and waste. 

After all, if the models are only taught to identify living things, they won’t be able to recognize the dead ones, he said. That could create a massive blind spot if Mars or another world hosts only the chemical leftovers of a long‑extinct biosphere. 

Some sea squirts host photosynthetic algae in their outer tissues.
Credit: Hal Beral / Getty Images

“A fossil is evidence of life. So is the chair that I’m sitting on because those don’t just magically pop into existence thanks to geology,” he said. “A fossil and my chair are not alive, but I think they’re part of life. They are a product of life.”

Wong’s team also spends a lot of time trying to deceive its models. In some cases, the algorithm has surprised the scientists by picking up on patterns the humans initially missed. In one test, the system kept insisting that a sea squirt sample looked photosynthetic, even though sea squirts don’t make their own food from sunlight. What initially looked like an error was anything but, Wong said: Those creatures often host algae that do use sunlight, and the AI had spotted the chemical fingerprints. 

Despite the advances in technology, the Michigan State team is not convinced the tools are ready for spacecraft. The team’s lab is also working on its own machine-learning methods to defend against this kind of trickery. 

“We can wait,” Gupta said. “Clearly, we are not there yet.”