Together we can end loneliness. via Did You Know


The world’s most famous museum—once the guardian of France’s looted treasures—apparently guarded itself with a password that could’ve been guessed… by a toddler.
On October 19, in broad daylight, the Louvre in Paris was hit by a group of bandits in an eight-minute spree worth $102 million. At around 10 a.m., four men in yellow vests and motorcycle helmets rolled up in a stolen cherry picker.
Tourists assumed it was a maintenance crew, until the “crew” started revving chainsaws inside the Apollo Gallery. And in under eight minutes, they shattered display glass, swiped eight royal gems (including a sapphire diadem and necklace once worn by 19th-century queens), and fled on scooters.
The whole thing took less time than ordering a latte in the museum café.
In the aftermath, investigators uncovered a revelation so ridiculous it belongs in a Monty Python sketch: the Louvre, home of the Mona Lisa, protected its video surveillance system with the password “LOUVRE.”
Yes, that’s it. Not “Louvre123.” Not “Louvre!” Not even “LouvreBoobs69.” Just an ALL CAPS… “LOUVRE”
So how did four blue-collar burglars outsmart the Louvre? By outsmarting absolutely no one. The museum’s security setup might as well have handed them a map and a thank-you note.
According to Libération, France’s National Cybersecurity Agency (ANSSI) discovered that this same password had been flagged and never changed.
Auditors wrote in the 2014 report:
“Type ‘LOUVRE’ to access a server managing the museum’s video surveillance, or ‘THALES’ to access one of the software programs.”
Sacrebleu, indeed. The hackers of history must be shaking their powdered wigs.
Subsequent audits found “serious shortcomings,” including systems still running on Windows 2000—an operating system so old that it probably remembers Y2K as if it were yesterday. The same report warned of a “dramatic incident” if no action was taken. Fast-forward to 2025: dramatic incident achieved.
Even more humiliating, the only camera near the Apollo Gallery window—the one the thieves broke through—was pointed away from it. Pierre Moscovici, head of France’s Court of Accounts, called the heist “a deafening alarm signal.”
During testimony before the French Senate, Louvre director Laurence des Cars offered this masterpiece of denial:
“The security system, as installed in the Apollo Gallery, worked perfectly. The question that arises is how to adapt this system to a new type of attack and modus operandi that we could not have foreseen.”
Translation: the system worked fine, except for the part where it didn’t.
Des Cars later admitted she’d been “appalled” by the museum’s security since 2021, adding:
“Today, we are witnessing a terrible failure at the Louvre.”
That “terrible failure” didn’t surprise anyone who’d read the audits. The Court of Accounts found that the museum had prioritized “visible and attractive” projects—such as renovations and shiny acquisitions—over protecting its priceless artifacts from theft.
The report also revealed that in 2024, the Louvre had just 432 CCTV cameras for 465 galleries, meaning 61 percent of the museum had zero coverage. By American comparison, the Detroit Institute of Arts, with a similar footprint, boasts more than 550 cameras.
So someone please tell Mr. Donald Trump—yes, that Donald Trump, who’s spent years trash-talking Detroit—that Motor City is officially better at guarding art than Paris.
Cybersecurity expert Dale Meredith summed it all up on X:
“I’m not stunned—this is a pattern of inept security. A 2014 audit flagged the laughably weak password ‘LOUVRE.’ Years of ignored warnings, no patches, no upgrades—stuck on Windows 2000 post-2010. Why no fix? Probably budget cuts or classic IT neglect.”
You can read the rest of his critique below:
As a cybersecurity expert, I'm not stunned—sadly, this is a pattern of inept security practices. A 2014 ANSSI audit flagged the laughably weak password "LOUVRE" for the surveillance system (and "THALES" for their software!). Where was the follow-up? YEARS of ignored warnings, no…
— Dale Meredith (@dalemeredith) November 5, 2025
Meanwhile, France’s culture minister, Rachida Dati, has been spinning harder than a carousel at the Tuileries.
The day after the robbery, she told lawmakers:
“Did the Louvre Museum’s security measures fail? No, they didn’t. It’s a fact.”
A week later, even she dropped the act, admitting that “security failures did indeed occur.”
Social media, of course, had a field day—with users serving up snark, disbelief, and password suggestions that would give your iPhone’s Face ID a midlife crisis.
Inside sources say the thieves weren’t part of any international ring, just local opportunists who noticed the Louvre’s “protection perimeter” had all the resilience of a croissant. To their credit, they used a lift, climbed through an unmonitored window, chainsawed open cases, and were gone before most visitors had finished filming their TikToks.
Police have since arrested four suspects—including a taxi driver, a garbage collector, and two small-time crooks from the Paris suburbs—after tracing DNA left at the scene. One was caught at Charles de Gaulle Airport with a one-way ticket to Algeria, proving that even getaways, like passwords, require better planning.
The Mona Lisa, of course, remains safe behind her bulletproof glass—watching the chaos with the same sly smirk she’s had for 500 years. Perhaps she knows something the rest of the museum doesn’t: sometimes the real masterpiece isn’t on the wall, but the comedy of human error happening just beneath it.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to update my password to something more secure—like “LouvreB00bZ69!”
Hulu recently premiered one of its latest shows, All's Fair, which follows an all-female law firm. Directed by Ryan Murphy, the legal drama stars Kim Kardashian, Glenn Close, Naomi Watts, and Niecy Nash-Betts.
Despite the popularity of legal dramas and a pretty solid cast, viewers were left wondering about the future of television, rather than being inspired by star-studded female empowerment plot points.
In fact, the show currently boasts at 0% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and it's already been called "a crime against television" and "campy."
But viewers became more disgruntled, and even confused, by the inconsistencies with Kim Kardashian's character. Not only were some unhappy with her acting chops, but they had some serious questions about her wardrobe choices as a supposedly powerful and independent divorce lawyer.
At one point during the first episode, Kardashian appears in a two-piece business suit. She wears a light blue button-down shirt, maroon red tie, and a black, button-down vest, and the top appears to be cropped to show some skin before moving into a black, form-fitting skirt.
But when seen from behind, it almost appears as if she struggled to pull the skirt all the way up, because the back of the skirt is pulled down, revealing some of her butt and a prominent thong in the same red to match the tie.
Here are front and back images that Kardashian originally shared on Instagram:
The episode goes on with the women chatting together, relaxing with glasses of wine, and paying no mind to Kardashian's character's apparel choices.
Viewers were confused by the choice, wondering if it was supposed to add something to the story.
The confusion spread to the "KUWTK" subReddit, where Redditors couldn't wrap their heads around the choice.
Redditor N_Ywasneverthesame included the following photo while asking:
"What is this, hunny???"

Fellow Redditors were also confused.
"I do not know why a lawyer has her a** half out. What type of styling is this?"
"I thought maybe her a** is too big to button it up, but again, why wouldn't they tailor it for her?"
"It makes no sense. You know what the terrible rating is on point, just based on the styling concept." - Cautious-Brush4454
"She looks like she stood up and her pants slipped down and she’s too embarrassed to bring attention to it by pulling them up." - genescheesezthatpls
"This is 100% a deliberate styling choice. If you look at other pics, it's a perfect rounded scoop."
"That being said, I don't get it AT ALL. What lawyer would ever?!" - TopInvestigator5518
"Omg, she's a lawyer in a show with that?!" - heygurl34
"I literally cannot wrap my head around why they would purposely have her looking like that, especially when her character on the show is supposed to be like a lawyer or something." - f**kstephanie
Viewers of this show are currently struggling with it, and they're full of questions. In future episodes, we hope some clarity will come in the form of character development and design choices that actually add to the plot.
If you thought the prevalence of the nonsensical phrase "six seven" was bad, just imagine all of the obscure memes you don't know about that could be mistaken for AI.
During gameplay between contestants Cindy, Sondra, and Dargan, Dargan requested the category, "Daddy, Is There Really A..." for $400.
For this category, the contestant must complete the question, like "Daddy, is there really a Santa Claus?" by using the clue provided, which is something a father might say in response, like, "Yes, he appears every year on Christmas Eve night."
But the $400 clue managed to baffle everyone, including Jeopardy! host Ken Jennings.
"No. AI generated the TikTok image of this pig/human eventually killed by Tim Cheese."
The camera panned to each stumped contestant, and Jennings admitted:
"I didn't understand any of that."
Then Jennings provided the answer:
"Who is John Pork."
You can watch the original video here:
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
This all seems harmless enough, albeit confusing, but some viewers took offense to the phrasing of the Jeopardy! question, namely the claim that John Pork was "AI-generated."
John Pork, an individual with a man's body and a pig's head on top, rose to fame back in 2018, sharing his interests in travel, music, and fashion. Fans of the character have also built their own stories and lore around him, some of it incredibly fantastic and nonsensical, like an individual with a man's body and a rat's head named "Tim Cheese" eventually leading to his demise.
Though photo editing and makeup were obviously involved, his obscure account launched before ChatGPT and AI-generated images rose to infamy.
Wishing to keep their already wholesome and informative platform clean of controversy, Jeopardy! host Ken Jennings issued a genuine and funny apology to John Pork and his social media followers.
Jennings said:
"When we played a clue recently on 'Jeopardy!' about John Pork, I remarked that I didn't understand a word of it."
"Well, I've had the chance to learn quite a bit since that clue aired about the late Mr. Pork, including the fact that some viewers took exception with our description of him as AI-generated."
"Now, even though AI is used heavily in many of his TikToks, it's possible that wasn't the best wording to refer to his original appearances."
"John, I hope you'll forgive me and all of us at 'Jeopardy!' for any insult we may have committed against you or your memory."
You can watch the apology video here:
@jeopardy Replying to @JoeG zz 🤭 Sorry to this pork. #Jeopardy! #JohnPork #KenJennings
Viewers found the apology to be funny—and somewhat baffling.












Imagine, an anthropomorphic pig-man "killed" by an anthropomorphic rat-man, and we're not even watching a contemporary rendition of The Nutcracker. With an apology from none other than the Jeopardy! host sprinkled on top.
What a time to be alive.
California Governor Gavin Newsom mocked MAGA Republicans on X after Democrats racked up significant victories in Tuesday's elections, including the passage of Proposition 50, which allows Democrats to draw a new redistricting map in California in response to the GOP's gerrymandering efforts.
Democrats won races around the country, particularly in Virginia, where Abigail Spanberger became the first woman to the win the governorship in the state's history, and in New York City, where Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, successfully took on the establishment to become the first South Asian, first Muslim, and first millennial mayor-elect.
Californians' approval of Democrats' redistricting push is also a major win for Newsom. He had framed his redistricting plan as an emergency response to a Texas plan that President Donald Trump championed. Trump supports that plan because he “got the highest vote in the history of Texas” and is therefore “entitled to five more seats.”
After the White House posted a picture of the November 2024 election electoral map and urged followers to "Never forget" the map that "made the left cry," Newsom replied, "We won't," and included a screenshot of a map outlining Proposition 50's successful passage.
He also posted an AI-generated video of a crying Trump wearing a hat that bears the slogan "NEWSOM WAS RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING."
And let's not forget a doctored video that shows him and former President Barack Obama beating Trump in a WWE-style wrestling match.
Or this very simple response to the White House's call to "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!":
"We just did."
People loved his responses.
Meanwhile, Republicans are trying to cope.
Earlier, House Speaker Mike Johnson said that "no one should read too much into" the election results despite major upsets. Johnson went on to attack Mamdani, saying New Yorkers had allowed their city to be taken over by "the communists."
Trump, when not firing off angry Truth Social posts, warned that Republicans would “get killed” and be seen as “do-nothing” if they didn’t change the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to pass most legislation.
These remarks put him at odds with Republicans, including Johnson, who have stood firm about not resolving the ongoing government shutdown, currently the longest in U.S. history.
The sense of entitlement to an artist's time and attention from some fans has become ridiculous, and perhaps even dangerous.
This was recently exemplified between Ariana Grande and her fans in Brazil when the singer was outright threatened with violence after a flight mishap caused her and her team to miss the Brazilian premiere of Wicked: For Good.
Grande had announced on Instagram that she would not be able to make it to the premiere due to maintenance issues on the plane that caused a significant delay. She went on to say that she and her team tried many solutions before realizing Grande would not be making it, and that she was very sorry.
"i am so heartbroken that i'm unable to be there with you all. we sincerely tried everything we could and i apologize from the bottom of my heart."

Grande stars in this second installment of the film adaptation of the Wicked musical, the first of which came out around this time only a year ago.
She plays Glinda (the good witch) to Cynthia Erivo's Elphaba (the Wicked Witch of the West) in the story of how the characters from The Wizard of Oz came to be. The multi-part adaptation also stars Jonathan Bailey as Fiyero, an actor known well for his work in Bridgerton as well as being 2025's "Sexiest Man Alive" at People magazine.
Many fans in Brazil received this news with sadness, but some were apparently so angry about Grande not showing up that they went as far as to threaten violence upon Grande.

Plenty of fans denounced the ones who threatened Grande and her team.
They pointed out the irony of being a fan so much that you threaten the very thing you say you're a fan of.
Some saw this as just another example of artists going on a world tour and skipping Brazil.
Ultimately, folks generally agreed: Grande is only human, just like us.
Wicked: For Good is having rolling premieres around the world this month.