×
Zillow drops climate risk scores after agents complained of lost sales | TechCrunch

Zillow drops climate risk scores after agents complained of lost sales | TechCrunch

Sorry, prospective homebuyers. Just over a year after adding climate risk scores, Zillow has removed them from more than 1 million listings after real estate agents complained that the information was causing them to lose sales.

Zillow first added the data to the site in September 2024, saying that more than 80% of buyers consider climate risks when purchasing a new home. 

But last month, following objections from the California Regional Multiple Listing Service (CRMLS), Zillow removed the listings’ climate scores. In their place is a subtle link to their records at First Street, the climate risk analytic startup that provides the data.

“When buyers lack access to clear climate-risk information, they make the biggest financial decision of their lives while flying blind,” First Street spokesperson Matthew Eby told TechCrunch via email. “The risk doesn’t go away; it just moves from a pre-purchase decision into a post-purchase liability.”

First Street’s climate risk scores first appeared on Realtor.com in 2020, where they remain. They  also still appear on Redfin and and Homes.com.

The New York-based startup has raised more than $50 million from investors including General Catalyst, Congruent Ventures, and Galvanize Climate Solutions, according to PitchBook.

Art Carter, the CRMLS CEO, told The New York Times that “displaying the probability of a specific home flooding this year or within the next five years can have a significant impact on the perceived desirability of that property.” He also questioned the accuracy of First Street’s data, saying he didn’t think that areas which haven’t flooded in the last 40 to 50 years were likely to flood in the next five.

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 13-15, 2026

This isn’t the first time real estate agents have complained about climate risk scores. Last year, when Zillow introduced the feature, one agent in Massachusetts told the Boston Globe that the risk scores were “putting thoughts in people’s minds about my listing that normally wouldn’t be there.”

First Street defended its data. “Our models are built on transparent, peer-reviewed science and are continuously validated against real-world outcomes,” Eby said. 

“In the CRMLS coverage area, during the Los Angeles wildfires, our maps identified over 90 percent of the homes that ultimately burned as being at severe or extreme risk — our highest risk rating — and 100 percent as having some level of risk, significantly outperforming CalFire’s official state hazard maps,” he added.

Official hazard maps have been criticized in recent years for either being out of date or underestimating a property’s level of risk. Nearly twice as many properties carry a 1% annual risk of flooding — a so-called 100-year flood — than are listed on Federal Emergency Management Agency’s flood maps, which are used to designate which properties are required to carry flood insurance, according to a Louisiana State University analysis.

The real estate and insurance industries have been racing to keep up with worsening weather wrought by climate change.

“If buildings are on fire or underwater, they don’t have much value,” Peter Gajdoš, partner at proptech venture capital firm Fifth Wall, wrote for TechCrunch four years ago. “We are discussing these issues with large insurers and the interest is unprecedented.”

Investors, insurers, and cities are likely to continue using data from companies like First Street to determine where climate risks lie. In offering homebuyers access to the same data, Zillow helped level the playing field. But thanks to the objections of real estate agents, consumers have one more hoop to jump through.

Source link
#Zillow #drops #climate #risk #scores #agents #complained #lost #sales #TechCrunch


The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s ScreamsMaul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible AdviceMedical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible Advice

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Post Comment