Valve has significantly increased the price of the Steam Deck - but now, it's also in stock. The 512GB Steam Deck OLED now costs $789, up from $549, while the 1TB model costs $949, up from $649. As I write this, both models are available to buy on Steam with an estimated delivery date of three to five business days. Some refurbished Steam Deck models are also currently available, including the 512GB OLED model at $629 and the 1TB OLED model at $759. In February, updated the Steam Deck's store listing to say that the handheld gaming PC would be out of stock "intermittently in some regions due to memory and storage shortages." Memory and sto … Read the full story at The Verge. View the full article

I won't waste a ton of words on this one, but I want to share a quick play that has nothing to do with this article. The Colorado Rockies are +330 tonight, and the Los Angeles Dodgers are -440. I'm going to take a shot on the Rockies — not a full unit, but a sprinkle. The Dodgers shouldn't be thrown in a parlay, which is the natural instinct with heavy favorites. Too often in baseball, these big dogs cash, and I pick these spots every season. I will stay on the West Coast for a play between the Seattle Mariners and the Athletics. The Mariners are underperforming. Through about a third of the games this season, the Mariners just aren't where people expect them to be. Maybe they are fine where they are at, considering no one in their division is exactly overperforming. They are in probably the easiest division this season, so they can get hot and win this with relative ease. The Mariners are 27-29 for the year and are 13-14 on the road. So what is troubling the Mariners? They are one of the worst-hitting teams in baseball at .228. I think that eventually turns around, but for now, they are struggling. Their team ERA is keeping them afloat at 3.58, and a strong 1.22 WHIP helps too. Logan Gilbert hasn't been fully locked in, going 2-4 with a 4.04 ERA and a 1.11 WHIP. He has, however, been awesome on the road with a 1.19 ERA. In fact, he has allowed just three earned runs over four road starts. He faced the Athletics once this season and allowed three earned runs over four innings. Overall, the Athletics are just 20-for-108 against him in their at-bats. The Athletics are about where we should've expected them. Are they competitive? Yes. Are they ready to make a postseason run? Probably not. They are 27-28, and as mentioned, they are in a division that seems like no one wants to win. I have mentioned this before, but the Athletics are on a good path. Most of their timeline seems to align with when they have a permanent home in Las Vegas, so it will be interesting to see what they do now that we are heading into trade season. CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM Their pitching staff will need to be addressed at some point. They have a 4.33 ERA and a 1.41 WHIP as a team, which means there is a lot of traffic on the basepaths. Today, they send out Jeffrey Springs, who owns a 3-5 record, 4.11 ERA and a 1.17 WHIP. He has been worse on the home rubber than the road starts this season. His home ERA is a full run higher. The Athletics have also lost four straight Springs starts. He hasn't faced the Mariners this season, but has been good against them overall, holding them to a .197 average in 71 at-bats. None of the Mariners or Athletics have great numbers against the opposing starter, so that makes me think the edge here is the under through five innings. I think both starters should be able to keep the opponent's bats at bay. I'll take under 4.5 through five innings. ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW! I'm also going to back the Mariners to win this game at -130. They took the first two games of the series, and the Athletics are bad at home. I also think Seattle has a better starter, and Gilbert has been great on the road this season. For more sports betting information and plays, follow David on X/Twitter: @futureprez2024 View the full article

A lawsuit by the Department of Justice (DOJ) against the University of California system claims abhorrent treatment of Jewish and Israeli students on campus, including exclusion zones and even physical assaults by anti-Israel demonstrators. That lawsuit says that Jewish and Israeli students were victims of targeted violent crime, including being beaten with sticks and blunt objects, being pummeled into the ground causing a wound that led to hospitalization, being kicked and slapped and being pepper sprayed. The suit, filed Tuesday in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, claimed that the University of California, Los Angeles, turned a blind eye to the horrific alleged behavior in 2024. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ZEROES IN ON UCLA FOR ALLEGED ILLEGAL DEI ADMISSIONS AS ELITE SCHOOL CRACKDOWN EXPANDS "On April 25, 2024, following months of antisemitic and anti-Israeli demonstrations, masked and armed agitators, many of whom were openly hostile to Jews and Israelis, occupied the heart of the University of California, Los Angeles ... campus," the lawsuit begins. "They built an illegal encampment, surrounded it with barriers, and formed 'human phalanxes' to block Jews and Israelis from entering academic buildings," it continues. "They kicked and slapped Jews, beat Jews with sticks, and assaulted Jews with pepper spray. One Jewish student was knocked unconscious and was taken to the hospital with an open head wound." The suit says UCLA "inexplicably took no serious action whatsoever" until May 2025, and claims that the school's alleged decision to ignore the "harassment of, and discrimination against, Jewish and Israeli students also violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits race and national-origin discrimination in higher education." On April 25, 2024, UC Divest, a group of anti-Israel student groups including the infamous Students for Justice Palestine (SJP), built an encampment in Royce Quad, described as a heavily trafficked and very important area of the UCLA campus. Some UCLA faculty members are also accused of joining in the demonstration, and "aiding and abetting" illegal activities. The DOJ describes how antisemitic and anti-Israel demonstrators "built a barrier around it, fashioned with sheets of plywood, some of which were affixed to metal bicycle racks," and "barricaded the doors of Royce Hall and Powell Library with garbage cans, tents, ropes, and bicycle racks." ANTI-ISRAEL AGITATORS TERRORIZE AMERICANS: SEE 2024'S MOST EXTREME MOMENTS They graffitied buildings and made signs vile messaging, including "F-— ISRAEL," F-— ALL Jews" and 'israelis Are Native 2 HELL," according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit claims that the anti-Israel demonstrators created human chains to block Jewish and Israeli students — or those perceived to be Jewish or Israeli — from freely entering the quad which contains key campus buildings, including a library. The demonstrators even passed out wristbands to those who were allowed free passage through the zone, but excluded Jewish and Israeli students. Worse, physical violence against "Zionists" and Jewish and Israeli students became commonplace, according to the lawsuit, and demonstrators began arming themselves with weapons like pepper spray and lumber and "established militia-style checkpoints on UCLA’s campus and refused to allow Jews to traverse public property unless those Jews denounced a core tenet of their religion." HOW A KEFFIYEH-WEARING KEYNOTE SPEAKER SPARKED BOOS FOR JEWS AT MY UCLA GRADUATION The lawsuit describes a Native American Jewish woman counter-demonstrating with a sign that read, "Hamas supporters are not welcome on Native land," who was then "quickly surrounded by a mob" and "violently assaulted." Meanwhile, UCLA police were standing "directly behind [her] and [did] absolutely nothing," according to the lawsuit. Occupiers pepper sprayed a woman wearing a Star of David and holding an Israeli flag, knocked a pro-Israel woman to the ground, beating her unconscious and causing an open head wound that required hospitalization, and physically assaulted a Jewish man and told him, "Hitler missed one," the suit says. WATCH: CHAOS ERUPTS AS LEFTISTS INTERRUPT CONSERVATIVE GROUP'S UCLA EVENT FEATURING DHS LAWYER On April 30, 2024 UCLA administrators "declared the encampment illegal and directed all those involved to leave or face discipline" and UCLA Chancellor Gene Bock acknowledged that, "Jewish students [were] in a state of anxiety and fear" and that "students on their way to class have been physically blocked from accessing parts of the campus." That same day, counter-protesters clashed with the occupiers in what is described in the lawsuit as a hectic scene that included violent skirmishes, including "occupiers and counter-protestors attack[ing] each other with pepper spray, blunt objects, and even fireworks." The following day, a van marked with a Star of David inside a swastika parked on campus in support of the anti-Israel encampment. The van had messaging "antisemitic writing referring to Jews as ‘puppet masters,’ was parked on UCLA’s campus in support of the encampment," and was welcomed by passersby, according to the suit. ANTISEMITIC ‘VENOM’ INFECTING CAMPUSES GETS WORSE AS UNIVERSITIES PLAY ‘ROPE-A-DOPE’ WITH TRUMP ADMIN: EXPERT Clashes between occupiers and police and Jewish students continued through May and June 2024, the lawsuit says. Later, 428 Jewish and Israeli students, faculty members and staff from the college were surveyed about their experiences during the unrest. About 50% of them said they "witnessed physical threats or attacks directed at Jews and Israelis." "I was assaulted, threatened, and harassed during the encampment. I had an Israeli flag and a man ran towards me in order to push me," one student said in the survey. "I was blocked for being Jewish. They were calling for an intifada collectively which is to kill the Jews." LAWMAKERS DEMAND ANSWERS AFTER DEM MAYOR ALLEGEDLY DECLINED POLICE SUPPORT TO UNIVERSITY AMID ISRAEL PROTESTS All told, physical damage to the taxpayer-funded school totaled $12.3 million. In a Tuesday press release announcing the lawsuit, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said the DOJ will hold UCLA "to account for its toleration of the equally appalling hostile educational environment against its Jewish and Israeli students." "Universities have an obligation to maintain safe and inclusive campuses for all students," First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California said in the release. "Universities that violate our nation’s civil rights laws by repeatedly failing to shield Jewish students from antisemitism will be held accountable." University of California President James Milliken issued a statement Tuesday after the lawsuit was filed. "The Board of Regents and administrative leadership have been unequivocal: antisemitism has no place at the University of California. We have instituted numerous systemwide reforms and programs to promote safety and combat antisemitism on our campuses," he said. " "UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk, whose family was profoundly affected by Nazi antisemitism and the Holocaust, has made the protection of Jewish students, faculty, and staff on campus the highest priority since the day he took office. It is so disappointing that this most recent lawsuit shows no recognition of or respect for that essential work. This litigation — and other actions taken by the federal government targeting the University of California — does nothing to aid our ongoing efforts to address antisemitism and create safe and welcoming campus environments for all members of our community." Fox News Digital reached out to UCLA. View the full article

If the annual fee just came due for one of your travel rewards cards, you may find it difficult to justify the expense if you're not getting enough value in return. If you can't maximize the card's benefits, earning rates or redemption opportunities, there may be an option besides paying the annual fee, canceling your card or calling to see if you can snag a retention offer. That option is to downgrade your card. As a result of provisions of the Credit CARD Act of 2009, you'll generally need to wait until you've had your card for a year before you can downgrade it. However, some issuers have different policies, and there are also some other aspects to consider. Here's when you can downgrade your credit card account for most major card issuers — and when it might be a good option. What does it mean to downgrade a card?Downgrading your card means switching to another credit card offered by the same issuer with a lower annual fee (or none at all). Because you usually aren't opening a new account, there typically won't be a new inquiry on your credit report, and your online login information should stay the same. You'll receive a new physical card in the mail that may have a new card number, but your account history, credit limit and other major factors that affect your credit score shouldn't change. FRESHSPLASH/GETTY IMAGESYou can save on annual fees by downgrading your premium cards. However, some issuers base your eligibility for welcome bonuses on which credit cards you've had open, not just which cards you've earned a bonus on. So be wary that downgrading a card might prevent you from earning a valuable future bonus. Most issuers only allow you to upgrade or downgrade within a single family of cards. However, issuers may not offer the same downgrade options to all cardholders, and some of your cards may not have any downgrade options. Finally, while issuers may offer bonus points when you upgrade to a new credit card product, it's unusual for an issuer to provide bonus points to downgrade. Related: 11 major mistakes people make with travel rewards credit cards When can you downgrade an American Express card?American Express doesn't publicly state a required waiting period before downgrading a card. However, it's generally best to wait at least one year, as American Express has historically included language in its card offers warning that customers who cancel or downgrade cards within the first year could lose rewards or even have their accounts closed. American Express Centurion Lounge in Seattle. ZACH GRIFF/THE POINTS GUYAmex also generally doesn't allow product changes between personal and business cards, and you typically have to stay within the same card family (such as Delta SkyMiles, Hilton Honors or Marriott Bonvoy). To determine your options and request a downgrade, call the number on the back of your card or log in to your online account and chat with an Amex representative. American Express has a "one bonus per lifetime" rule. But this rule can be worse than it sounds, as Amex also has some "family" rules that can prohibit you from earning a welcome offer on a card if you hold or have held a higher-tier card in the same family. Hence, it may make sense to downgrade to a card if you wouldn't be eligible to earn a welcome offer on it anyway. Related: 3 reasons to downgrade from the Amex Platinum to the Amex Gold When can you downgrade a Chase card?Chase may allow you to downgrade your card to another card within the same family if the account you want to downgrade has been open for at least one year. Call the number on the back of your credit card to learn your options or request a downgrade. WYATT SMITH/THE POINTS GUYDue to Chase's 5/24 rule, many cardholders prefer to downgrade Chase cards instead of canceling them. But there are other reasons to downgrade a Chase card. For example, you might try to downgrade the Marriott Bonvoy Boundless® Credit Card (see rates and fees) to the Marriott Bonvoy Bold® Credit Card (see rates and fees) to avoid paying the annual fee. Related: Transfer Chase Ultimate Rewards points before downgrading your card When can you downgrade a Citi card?Citi generally requires you to wait at least 12 months after opening an account before downgrading or product changing your card. 10'000 HOURS/GETTY IMAGESUnlike many issuers, Citi has historically allowed some product changes outside a card's original family. However, available downgrade options can vary over time and differ from one account to another. Specifically, some recent reports suggest that cross-family conversions may not be available for Citi / AAdvantage and ThankYou Rewards points-earning cards. To determine your current options, call the number on the back of your card and ask a Citi representative about eligible product changes. Related: When (and why) you should downgrade from the Citi Strata Premier to the Citi Strata Card When can you downgrade a Capital One card?Capital One doesn't appear to have a hard-and-fast rule about how long your account must be open before you can downgrade a card. However, it's generally best to wait at least one year before requesting a product change. Capital One's downgrade and upgrade options are often account-specific, so call the number on the back of your card or check your online account to see what offers are available. WYATT SMITH/THE POINTS GUYYou generally can't earn a new welcome bonus on most Capital One cards if you've earned a bonus on that card within the last 48 months. Capital One sometimes extends this restriction to other cards within the same card family. So, downgrading your card may let you reduce the annual fees you're paying until you become eligible for a new welcome bonus. Related: The best time to apply for these popular Capital One credit cards based on offer history When can you downgrade cards from other issuers?Other issuers may allow you to downgrade your card, although some smaller issuers may not offer product changes. A good rule of thumb is to wait until your annual fee posts and then call the number on the back of your card to ask about your downgrade options. Related: 5 types of credit cards you probably shouldn't have in your wallet Bottom lineIf you're not getting your money's worth from one of the rewards cards in your wallet, downgrading to a no-annual-fee card can be an excellent way to keep your card's credit line open while avoiding the annual fee. When in doubt, call the customer service line on the back of your card to learn about your options. Related: How to decide if a credit card's annual fee is worth paying Editorial disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are the author’s alone, not those of any bank, credit card issuer, airline or hotel chain, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any of these entities. View the full article

MIRAMAR BEACH, Florida -- Following years of trying to push the SCORE Act to the House floor to no avail, a new bipartisan bill called the 'Protect College Sports' Act has been agreed to in hopes of saving college athletics. Since first getting involved last summer, President Donald Trump has signed two executive orders in an attempt to find some sort of unified solution that could help curtail the ongoing issues in college athletics pertaining to the transfer portal, NIL payments, eligibility rules and other problems that have led to a plethora of lawsuits filed against the NCAA. The problem is that with Congress having a hard time agreeing to just about anything related to issues regarding the country, putting some type of legislation together that would appease both sides of the aisle has been an uphill battle, with the SCORE Act being the latest victim. SEC SPRING MEETINGS TURN INTO BLUNT REALITY CHECK FOR BROKEN COLLEGE ATHLETICS After last week's debacle, with the National Black Caucus and NAACP coming out against the SCORE Act, that saw congressional leaders push back on any type of legislation that would involve states within the SEC footprint, hope was essentially lost on the Republican-pushed bill. So, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) ramped up their work on putting together a bipartisan bill that could be seen as a win-win for both sides of the aisle. The bill, which was finally agreed to by both sides, will not be introduced until next week, when the Senate is back in session. "College sports are at a breaking point," Cruz said. "Fans can see their favorite teams being hollowed out by transfer chaos, fake NIL bidding wars, eligibility lawsuits, and a system that allows the richest programs to keep pulling away. The Protect College Sports Act is a bipartisan plan to restore order. Student athletes can profit from their name, image, and likeness, but college sports still needs real rules, competitive balance, rivalries, and a true connection to education. This bill protects athletes and fans and keeps college sports from becoming a two-conference minor league." Taking a few elements of the SCORE Act, while adding certain ideas from the Presidential Committee on college sports that was initiated by Donald Trump, there was hope that some sort of resolution could be agreed upon. In a letter signed last week by members of the committee, chaired by New York Yankees President Randy Levine and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the panel had urged members of Congress to agree on this latest effort. The problem for the Big Ten and SEC was that they claimed at the time that the reason for not signing the letter was based on the conferences not having seen any type of legislation. While this was true, commissioners from both leagues were also hoping that the SCORE Act would make it to the House floor, which obviously isn’t the case now. On Tuesday, Greg Sankey hinted that while he knows certain elements of the new legislation, he had still not seen the actual bill. CONGRESS MAY FINALLY HAVE A BIPARTISAN PATH FORWARD ON COLLEGE ATHLETICS WITH CRUZ-CANTWELL LEGISLATION Now, as SEC presidents and chancellors gather inside the Hilton SanDestin Resort here in Florida, the timing of this legislation being introduced will certainly make for an interesting end to spring meetings. One of the biggest issues facing any type of bill that is introduced is the likelihood that it's challenged through the court system. The bill looks to protect the NCAA from antitrust litigation, while also codifying rules around the transfer portal, NIL payments through third parties and also an option for all conferences to pool their media rights. "We’re seeing thousands of men’s and women’s athletic roster slots and a hundred athletic programs being cut," Cantwell said. "Collegiate athletics is a hallmark for human development. Let's not ruin it with out-of-control chaos. This bill puts new tools and new rules on the table to rein in runaway costs while still preserving NIL, revenue sharing, and women and Olympic sports." FEDERAL JUDGE APPROVES $2.8B SETTLEMENT ALLOWING SCHOOLS TO DIRECTLY PAY COLLEGE ATHLETES YOU CAN READ THE FULL 'PROTECT COLLEGE SPORTS ACT' HERE Obviously, conferences like the Big Ten and SEC have no reason to join others in pooling together their media rights, given the amount of money each makes off their deals with FOX and ESPN. But for others, like the Mountain West or Conference USA for example, this could make financial sense once their current deals are complete. The current spending problem in college football is a perfect example, with the price of putting together rosters exceeding $40 million this season, which is obviously above the $20.5 million 'cap' that is supposed to be abided by. "If we don’t find a way to create some level of regulation in the market, a lot of people are going to go bankrupt pretty quick," Texas A&M head coach Mike Elko said Tuesday. "We’re two and a half years away from having an NIL budget that’s greater than the TV revenue for our entire university." Now, with this bill mentioning that the House settlement 'cap' will be enforced at the federal level, I'm curious to see the pushback. I can promise you, lawyers across the country who have been involved in recent litigation are licking their chops, as billable hours have been the true winners over the past few years. An important discussion point for those representing the actual athletes has centered around them having protections, with medical care afforded to them for a certain time period once their time in college is complete being a focal point of these talks. In addition, college athletes having representation (agents) that are certified and part of a registry system has been something of note. In the bill, Where this goes from here will literally be up for debate. From here, there will be arguments made, hearings held and amendments introduced. This is only the start, and will be worth watching from a conference standpoint, where those within influential leagues like the Big Ten and SEC will take a very hard look to decide whether they will put their support behind this legislation. Right now, conversations are being had inside both conferences on how to implement and enforce their own rules pertaining to compensation, eligibility and enforcement. As we've seen, relying on a federal bill to solve problems has led to college athletics running amok, with coaches openly admitting that there are zero guardrails to curtail them working outside the perceived lines. Buckle up, folks. This is going to be an entertaining summer, with a lot on the line. FOLLOW TREY WALLACE ON X AND ALL SOCIAL PLATFORMS: @TREYWALLACE View the full article