Jessica Simpson Brings Grunge Y2K-inspired Glam Back
The bubblegum blush on her cheekbones matched that of her gloss on stage, adding warmth to the otherwise moody aesthetic, which was comprised of charcoal shimmer dragged across her lids and under eyes, black liquid eyeliner and lash extensions. The aesthetic looked as if she'd added a touch more glitter to her eye makeup, she'd accidentally slept in; her eyebrows just as dark as the shadow below them. She added more sparkle to her appearance, particularly along her collarbone and in the middle of her chest, under her black cross pendant.
More from WWD
Vanessa Kirby Continues Her Sheer Style Streak in Alaïa on 'Seth Meyers,' Talks 'The Fantastic Four'
How This Live Shopping Platform Is Quietly Scaling Beauty
How Lindsay Lohan Reimagined the Princess Look in Miu Miu for the 'Freakier Friday' Premiere
For her hair, Simpson opted against the tight curls she once loved to wear. Instead, her dirty blond tresses were loosely waved, which was the work of her longtime hairstylist Ken Paves, who famously works with Eva Longoria. Paves also styled Simpson's hair later that night, parting her hair on the left side of her head and tucking it behind her ears.
Bringing her trendy bombshell mood into the 21st century, Simpson opted for long, almond-shaped talons with unique designs and three-dimensional embellishments. Though nail trends seem to be settling on short, natural nails recently, the long-tip extensions were the desired style for the last few years.
Simpson's music hiatus started after the release of her 2010 holiday album, 'Happy Christmas.' Fifteen years later, she's returned to the main stage, dropping her latest work titled 'Nashville Canyon.' Part one out of the two-part installment officially debuted on March 21 with just five tracks. Her single 'Fade' is the first hit to be announced as part of 'Nashville Canyon Part Two.'
Jessica Simpson's Looks Through the Years: Y2K Fashion Trends to Red Carpet Glamour [PHOTOS]
View Gallery
Launch Gallery: Jessica Simpson's Looks Through the Years: Y2K Fashion Trends to Red Carpet Glamour [PHOTOS]
Best of WWD
Amanda Anisimova's On-court Tennis Style Through the Years: From Teen Phenom to Wimbledon Finalist
A Look Back at Fourth of July Celebrations at the White House
Princess Diana's Birthday Looks Through the Years: Her Sleek Black Jacques Azagury Dress, Vibrant Colors and More
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
10 minutes ago
- News24
Man dies after falling at Oasis gig in London
A man in his 40s has died after falling at an Oasis concert at London's Wembley Stadium, the police said Sunday. Brothers Liam and Noel Gallagher, who brought the iconic Britpop band back together for a blockbuster world tour this year, told the BBC they were 'shocked and saddened' by the fan's death at the Saturday evening gig. According to a spokesperson for the London Metropolitan Police, officers and medics were called to the scene after 22:00 (2100 GMT) following 'reports that a person had been injured' at the packed stadium. 'A man aged in his 40s was found with injuries consistent with a fall. He was sadly pronounced dead at the scene,' the spokesperson said, urging any witnesses to come forward. 'Our thoughts go out to his family,' a spokesperson for Wembley said, while adding that 'tonight's Oasis concert will go ahead as planned'. Sunday's gig was Oasis' last London date of the band's 41-gig reunion world tour after 16 years of estrangement between the famously volatile Gallaghers. The tour has sold around 900 000 tickets. Next, the group will head to Edinburgh before its international leg, which will take them to the United States, Japan, Australia, and Brazil.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wordle hints today for #1,507: Clues and answer for Monday, August 4
Hey, there! Welcome to the start of a new week. We hope it's a joyful one for you. One thing that will help keep a lot of folks happy is extending their Wordle streaks. To that end, here's our daily Wordle guide with some hints and the answer for Monday's puzzle (#1,507). It may be that you're a Wordle newcomer and you're not completely sure how to play the game. We're here to help with that too. What is Wordle? Wordle is a deceptively simple daily word game that first emerged in 2021. There is one five-letter word to deduce every day by process of elimination. The daily word is the same for everyone. Wordle blew up in popularity in late 2021 after creator Josh Wardle made it easy for players to share an emoji-based grid with their friends and followers that detailed how they fared each day. The game's success spurred dozens of clones across a swathe of categories and formats. The New York Times purchased Wordle in early 2022 for an undisclosed sum. The publication said that players collectively played Wordle 5.3 billion times in 2024. So, it's little surprise that Wordle is one of the best online games and puzzles you can play daily. How to play Wordle To start playing Wordle, you simply need to enter one five-letter word. The game will tell you how close you are to that day's secret word by highlighting letters that are in the correct position in green. Letters that appear in the word but aren't in the right spot will be highlighted in yellow. If you guess any letters that are not in the secret word, the game will gray those out on the virtual keyboard. However, you can still use those letters in subsequent guesses. You'll only have six guesses to find each day's word, though you still can use grayed-out letters to help narrow things down. It's also worth remembering that letters can appear in the secret word more than once. Wordle is free to play on the NYT's website and apps, as well as on Meta Quest headsets and Discord. The game refreshes at midnight local time. If you log into a New York Times account, you can track your stats, including the all-important win streak. How to play Wordle more than once a day If you have a NYT subscription that includes full access to the publication's games, you don't have to stop after a single round of Wordle. You'll have access to an archive of more than 1,500 previous Wordle games. So if you're a relative newcomer, you'll be able to go back and catch up on previous editions. In addition, paid NYT Games members have access to a tool called the Wordle Bot. This can tell you how well you performed at each day's game. Previous Wordle answers Before today's Wordle hints, here are the answers to recent puzzles that you may have missed: Yesterday's Wordle answer for Sunday, August 3 — LUMPY Saturday, August 2 — DAUNT Friday, August 1 — BANJO Thursday, July 31 — FRILL Wednesday, July 30 — ASSAY Today's Wordle hints explained Every day, we'll try to make Wordle a little easier for you. First, we'll offer a hint that describes the meaning of the word or how it might be used in a phrase or sentence. We'll also tell you if there are any double (or even triple) letters in the word. In case you still haven't quite figured it out by that point, we'll then provide the first letter of the word. Those who are still stumped after that can continue on to find out the answer for today's Wordle. This should go without saying, but make sure to scroll slowly. Spoilers are ahead. Today's Wordle help Here is a hint for today's Wordle answer: Adjective for something stiff and inflexible, such as a refusal to compromise. Are there any double letters in today's Wordle? There is a pair of repeated letters in today's Wordle answer. What's the first letter of today's Wordle? The first letter of today's Wordle answer is R. The Wordle answer today This is your final warning before we reveal today's Wordle answer. No take-backs. Don't blame us if you happen to scroll too far and accidentally spoil the game for yourself. What is today's Wordle? Today's Wordle answer is... RIGID Not to worry if you didn't figure out today's Wordle word. If you made it this far down the page, hopefully you at least kept your streak going. And, hey: there's always another game tomorrow.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The New York Times thinks generative AI is like Pac-Man ghosts and also the Matrix, because nobody gets to be normal about this stuff anymore
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The New York Times is being hazed by game dev social media over what I can only describe as one of the most naive articles about AI I've ever seen. The pointing and laughing is happening on BlueSky, among other places, over a paragraph that claims generative AI is being embraced by the videogame industry, which sure, makes sense, because we were giving those funny Pac-Man ghosts AIs in the past. And isn't that the same thing? No. No it's not—though being wary of simply taking a lone paragraph out of context, I went ahead and read the full thing. It does not get much better. Get out your bingo cards. The piece immerses us into a nice balmy pot of misunderstanding soup with the sentence "It sounds like a thought experiment conjured by René Descartes for the 21st century." Hoo boy. Its writer, Zachary Small, then goes on to reference this video that went viral a couple of years ago, wherein a YouTuber gets proportionately freaked out as generative AI NPCs start getting a bit existential in a tech demo by Replica. I'd link to Replica's website, but the company doesn't exist anymore which, to be fair, the article does acknowledge several paragraphs down. The NYT frames this as some kind of brush with the machine god: "Everything was fake, a player told them through a microphone, and they were simply lines of code meant to embellish a virtual world. Empowered by generative artificial intelligence like ChatGPT, the characters responded in panicked disbelief. 'What does that mean,' said one woman in a gray sweater. 'Am I real or not?'" This sort of open-mouthed astonishment might've been apropos three years ago, when all of this tech was still relatively new, but AI doesn't actually think or understand anything. It didn't then, and it doesn't now. Here's a solid breakdown by MIT from the time period, which explains: "In this huge corpus of text, words and sentences appear in sequences with certain dependencies. This recurrence helps the model understand how to cut text into statistical chunks that have some predictability. It learns the patterns of these blocks of text and uses this knowledge to propose what might come next." In other words, what we might call an 'educated guess'. Replica's AI was trained on text written by people, and people have written about machines becoming self-aware before, which is why the NPCs spat out lines about being self-aware when they were told they were machines. This is like saying Google is sapient because it fed me a link to Isaac Asimov's I, Robot when I searched for it: A program taking educated guesses does not a singularity make. To be clear, generative AI has been having a major impact on videogames—both in the fact that there are legitimate use-cases being found, and in the fact that excitable CEOs are getting ahead of themselves and mandating employees use it, which is totally a normal thing you do with a technology you're naturally finding use cases for. The paragraph that active developers are dunking on, however, is this doozy: "Most experts acknowledge that a takeover by artificial intelligence is coming for the video game industry within the next five years, and executives have already started preparing to restructure their companies in anticipation. After all, it was one of the first sectors to deploy AI programming in the 1980s, with the four ghosts who chase Pac-Man each responding differently to the player's real-time movements." I'm just gonna rattle off the problems with this statement one-by-one. First up, which experts? Sure, Nvidia's CEO says AI is coming for everybody's jobs, but also, it's sort of his job to sell AI technology. You know who else said we'd all have to adapt to AI? Netflix's former VP of GenAI for Games, who stopped working there four months later. CEO of Larian Studios Swen Vincke (note: someone who actually makes games) isn't nearly as convinced—while the developer does use generative AI for the early, early stages of prototyping, basically anything thereafter is made by hand. CD Projekt is also steering clear, because the quagmire of legal ownership just isn't worth it. Some executives have done some restructuring that may or may not be related to AI—I certainly don't doubt that AI plays a part, but widespread layoffs and studio closures are also down to, say, buying a company for $68 billion, or flubbing a $2 billion investment deal. You know. CEO things. And then there's the coup de grâce on this lump of coal—the comparison to the ghosts in Pac-Man, as if that has anything to do with anything. No, the programming of Pac-Man's ghosts has nothing to do with generative AI or deep learning models, a completely different technology. Tōru Iwatani, a person, gave them their distinct 'personalities'. "We're gonna be making our games differently, but to say that it'll replace the craftsmanship? I think we're very far from it." Larian CEO Swen Vincke (GameSpot interview, April 2025) To be clear, this is about as relevant as saying the videogame industry's adopting AI because Crazy Taxi had a pointing arrow in it that leads to your next objective—it's a loose association by someone who saw the word "AI" twice and assumed those things must be related. I could continue ribbing on this thing. For example, there's a one-two punch where Small references fretting over gen AI npcs "dying" when a game gets shut down as developers "forgoing those moral questions in their presentations to studio executives," then proceeds to talk about how Sony made an AI Aloy without also noting that the character's voice actor, Ashley Burch, found the whole thing repulsive. It also happens to suggest that using "AI programs to complete repetitive tasks like placing barrels throughout a virtual village" is novel, when procedural generations have existed for years (and in fact might be a more apt comparison, if we're going to draw a line from point A to point B). But I think what's really telling is how noncommittal the answers Small receives are. Microsoft's response was the most gung-ho, though it still clarified that "Game creators will always be the center of our overall AI efforts". Nintendo pointed Small in the direction of its prior statements, wherein the company said "would rather go in a different direction". Even the experts at companies Small quotes are downright tepid, often pointing towards cost and realistic expectations for the things he says are just five years around the corner. Look—generative AI's gonna have, and already has had, an impact on game development, and will be used inside of it. But I would implore both the writers at the NYT, and just about anyone else, to apply a little bit of skepticism before you believe claims that these models are forming relationships, inventing art styles, or becoming self-aware. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.
