html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd" If your child is begging you to get them the Apple Watch Ultra thats wrapped around your wrist right now, Pinwheel has unveiled a kid-friendly smartwatch that costs $160, giving you and your wallet some peace of mind.Pinwheel, a company that sells smartphones that teach kids to use them responsibly with parental guidance, revealed the new smartwatch for kids at Pepcom during CES 2025 on Monday, showing off safety features that would please parents interested in buying the product. According to Engadget, kids have the ability to use the watch as a standalone device to make calls, send text messages, play preinstalled games (including a puzzle game resembling Tetris), and talk to a kid-friendly chatbot dubbed PinwheelGPT. The company said that kids can ask the AI chatbot any question they want, and itll respond to them in an age-appropriate manner. However, it wont respond to inappropriate questions, prompting them to talk to a trusted adult about such topics instead.Recommended VideosLike its smartphones, Pinwheels kid-friendly smartwatch has strong parental controls. Parents can remotely monitor text messages and call history, turn off certain features for each individual contact on their childs list, use GPS tracking to monitor their childs whereabouts through notifications telling them when they arrive and/or leave a saved location, and vet every contact their kid adds to their contact list until theyre 14. They can also monitor conversations their kid has had with PinwheelGPT, even after those chats have been deleted.PinwheelThe watch also has a camera built on the side so that kids can conduct video chats with their friends and family. Unfortunately, Pinwheel said they wont be able to use the camera until later this year.Please enable Javascript to view this contentThe Pinwheel watch for kids costs $160 plus an additional $15 a month with a mobile plan. Parents interested in buying the watch for their child instead of the Apple Watch Ultra or any other Apple Watch model, for that matter can join the waitlist on the Pinwheel website.Editors Recommendations

While we could never suggest drinking as one of our tips and tricks in real life, there's no harm in brewing a pale ale or two in Stardew Valley if you're looking for a cold drink or valuable item to sell. Plus, depending on who you are pining over, pale ale also makes a great gift for certain villagers. If you're not a master brewer yet, there's no need to turn to mods because we will show you the exact recipe for pale ale in Stardew Valley.Recommended VideosDifficultyEasyDuration20 minutesConcernedApeIf you're unfamiliar with the brewing process, that's fine because Stardew Valley simplifies it to an incredibly easy formula. All you need is a keg and some hops.Step 1: Making a keg requires you to be at least at farming level 8 to learn the recipe. Once you're there, you can craft it with the following materials:30 wood1 copper bar1 iron bar1 oak resinStep 2: Hops will need to be purchased at Pierre's General store. Look for the Hops Starter item they sell for 60g and grab as many as you want to brew.Plant the seeds and wait for your hops to grow.RelatedStep 3: Place your hops into the keg and wait for around a day and a half them to turn into pale ale.Step 4: If you want to age your ale to increase its value, you can then put it into a cask to increase its quality from normal all the way to iridium if you leave it for 34 days total.If you're not looking to sell it, there's not much point in actually drinking your pale ale. All it does is give your character the "tipsy" status that reduces your speed by 1.Editors Recommendations

Digital TrendsOne of the best parts of owning an iPad is being able to use the Apple Pencil. More than your average stylus, this first-party accessory allows you to take notes, draw, and highlight, but thats merely scratching the surface. The Apple Pencil can completely change the way you interact with iPadOS, and right now, the first-gen model is on sale for 30% off its sticker price! When you purchase the Apple Pencil (1st Gen), youll only pay $70, when normally, this digital writing tool sells for $100.Precision and performance are front and center with the first-gen Apple Pencil, providing a lag-free touchscreen experience thats hard to walk away from. Thanks to advanced pressure and tilt sensitivity, youll be able to vary shading and line weight as you would on a regular piece of paper. On a full charge, you can expect up to 12 hours of battery life from the first-gen Pencil, along with quick recharge times. It works with pretty much any iPad model you can think of, too! Should you own a newer iPad with USB-C instead of Lightning, just use the USB-C to Apple Pencil Adapter that comes in the box.The Apple Pencil (1st Gen) is portable and lightweight, too, so you wont have to worry about it taking up too much space in your backpack or tablet case. And thanks to palm rejection, theres no need to fret over where you decide to rest your non-dominant hand while youre notating or daydream-doodling!RelatedWere not sure how long this $30 discount is going to stick around, but if youve been looking for top sales on iPad accessories, this one is definitely worth considering. Purchase the Apple Pencil (1st Gen) and pay only $70 while this deal is still in effect. You should also check out our roundups of the best iPad deals, best tablet deals, and best Apple deals. Apple Pencil dealsWe reviewed the Apple Pencil (2nd Gen) a few years ago. While its more expensive than the first-gen model, it might be worth a look if youre into magnetic charging (the newest Apple Pencil magnetizes directly to your iPad).Editors Recommendations

Samsung Electronics forecast a two-fold increase in its fourth-quarter operating profit, signaling a continued slowdown in earnings growth that analysts largely attributed to weaker-than-expected semiconductor prices.

Bird flu fears As US marks first H5N1 bird flu death, WHO and CDC say risk remains low No human-to-human spread identified and no concerning mutations circulating. Beth Mole Jan 7, 2025 6:14 pm | 11 A colorized image shows H5N1 avian flu strain viruses (gold) grown in dog kidney cells (green). Credit: uafcde A colorized image shows H5N1 avian flu strain viruses (gold) grown in dog kidney cells (green). Credit: uafcde Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreThe H5N1 bird flu situation in the US seems more fraught than ever this week as the virus continues to spread swiftly in dairy cattle and birds while sporadically jumping to humans.On Monday, officials in Louisiana announced that the person who had developed the country's first severe H5N1 infection had died of the infection, marking the country's first H5N1 death. Meanwhile, with no signs of H5N1 slowing, seasonal flu is skyrocketing, raising anxiety that the different flu viruses could mingle, swap genetic elements, and generate a yet more dangerous virus strain.But, despite the seemingly fever-pitch of viral activity and fears, a representative for the World Health Organization today noted that risk to the general population remains lowas long as one critical factor remains absent: person-to-person spread."We are concerned, of course, but we look at the risk to the general population and, as I said, it still remains low," WHO spokesperson Margaret Harris told reporters at a Geneva press briefing Tuesday in response to questions related to the US death. In terms of updating risk assessments, you have to look at how the virus behaved in that patient and if it jumped from one person to another person, which it didn't, Harris explained. "At the moment, we're not seeing behavior that's changing our risk assessment," she added.In a statement on the death late Monday, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention emphasized that no human-to-human transmission has been identified in the US. To date, there have been 66 documented human cases of H5N1 infections since the start of 2024. Of those, 40 were linked to exposure to infected dairy cows, 23 were linked to infected poultry, two had no clear source, and one casethe fatal case in Louisianawas linked to exposure to infected backyard and wild birds."Additionally, there are no concerning virologic changes actively spreading in wild birds, poultry, or cows that would raise the risk to human health," the CDC said.Ongoing threatIn its own announcement of the death, the Louisiana health department noted that the person who was infected was over the age of 65 and had underlying medical conditions, which made the person particularly vulnerable to severe disease.A 13-year-old girl in Canada also developed severe disease from an H5N1 infection in November and required intensive care, intubation, and the use of the life-support therapy extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The teenager is, fortunately, recovering, according to a medical report published December 31 in the New England Journal of Medicine.But, fatalities are not uncommon with H5N1 infections overall. According to data collected by the WHO, there have been 954 documented cases between 2003 and 2024. Of those, 464 were fatal, leading to a fatality rate of about 49 percent among documented cases.Without sustained human-to-human transmission or other dangerous changes to the virus, the risk to the general population remains low. But, both the CDC and Harris emphasized that people who work with birds and other animals are at greater risk of infection and should take precautions. Since March, at least 919 dairy herds across 16 states have been infected with H5N1, 703 of which have been in California. Since January 2022, over 130 million birds have been affected.With the continued spread in birds and other animals, the virus has more opportunities to adapt to humans. Health experts have criticized the US handling of the outbreaks and not doing more to curb the spread of the virus, which has moved seemingly unabated through dairy farms.Beth MoleSenior Health ReporterBeth MoleSenior Health Reporter Beth is Ars Technicas Senior Health Reporter. Beth has a Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attended the Science Communication program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She specializes in covering infectious diseases, public health, and microbes. 11 Comments

Digging into financials Nearly two years after its radical pivot, Fidelity slashes Relativitys valuation But a Silicon Valley billionaire might bail the company out. Eric Berger Jan 7, 2025 5:41 pm | 6 Artist's rendering of a Terran R rocket launching from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Credit: Relativity Space Artist's rendering of a Terran R rocket launching from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Credit: Relativity Space Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreFor several years, an innovative, California-based launch company named Relativity Space has been the darling of investors and media.Relativity promised to disrupt launch by taking a somewhat niche technology in the space industry at the time, 3D printing, and using it as the foundation for manufacturing rockets. The pitch worked. Relativity's chief executive Tim Ellis liked to brag that his first investor call was to Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, who cut the company's first check. Cuban invested half a million dollars.That was just the beginning of the torrent of fundraising by Ellis, who, by November 2023, turned the privately held Relativity into a $4.5 billion company following its latest, Series F funding. This was an impressive start for the company founded by Ellis and Jordan Noone, both engineers, in 2016.A big betThe Series F round occurred as Relativity was amid a bold gamble that, in hindsight, may have been a poor bet. In March 2023, the company launched its Terran 1 rocket for the firstand onlytime. After this flight, Ellis announced that the company was pivoting immediately to developing the much larger and more capable Terran R rocket."It's a big, bold bet," Ellis said in an interview. "But it's actually a really obvious decision."With an advertised capacity of more than 1 metric ton to low-Earth orbit and a "backlog" of launch contracts valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars, according to Ellis, Terran 1 had the potential to draw significant revenue. It could also have nabbed a share of launch contracts that have since been snared by competitors such as Rocket Lab, with its smaller Electron vehicle, and Firefly, with its comparably sized Alpha rocket.Instead, the lack of an operational rocket meant that Relativity has likely been subsisting on little revenue since the decision to go all in on the Terran R nearly two years ago. And it has not been an easy pivot. In September, Ars reported on some of the challenges that developing the much larger Terran R vehicle has entailed, including the need to procure large components of the rocket from outside suppliers rather than manufacturing or printing them in-house.Fidelity's financialsUntil recently, it was unclear how these financial pressures and technical issues have been received by the company's investors. However, new and publicly released financial reports provide some clues. The data come from holdings reports filed quarterly and monthly by two funds operated by Fidelity Investments, "Contrafund" and the "Blue Chip Growth Fund." The fund reports provide information on the quantity of shares held by the investment firm and its internal valuation of those shares.In its March 2024 quarterly report for Contrafund, Fidelity noted its holdings from the Series D, E, and F fundraising rounds held by Relativity. For example, Contrafund held 1.67 million shares from the Series D round, worth an estimated $31.8 million. Thus, Fidelity valued the privately held shares at $19 apiece. By the third quarter report last year, Fidelity's valuation of those shares had fallen a little to $16.However, in a report ending November 29 of last year, which was only recently published, Fidelity's valuation of Relativity plummeted. Its stake in Relativity, valued at $31.8 million last March, was now thought to be worth just $866,735a per-share value of 52 cents. Shares in the other fundraising rounds are also valued at less than $1 each.In other words, what was once valued as a $4.5 billion company might now be worth something around $100 million, at least according to one of its institutional investors. Moreover, the Fidelity documents indicate that the value of some "common stock" held by employeesworth about $15 a share a year agomay be worth close to zero.A Silicon Valley backer?Since this data is now about 30 days old, it may not reflect the present value of the company's shares. As Relativity is a private company, the public cannot know its financial situation. Typically, companies don't comment publicly on third-party reports, and the methodology by which Fidelity derived its valuation remains opaque.In response to a query from Ars, the company said Terran R remains on track."Our team is focused on achieving key milestones and accelerating our progress, positioning us for sustained success in the aerospace industry," a Relativity spokesperson said. "We remain confident in our ability to execute on our strategic vision. And we continue to align ourselves with strong capital partners who believe in our mission and are supporting our ambitious programs."Two sources said that a Silicon Valley engineer and multibillionaireArs is not naming this person at this time because his involvement could not be confirmedhas been financially supporting Relativity in recent months and may be considering a larger investment.A significant investment would give Relativity Space some funding runway to continue working on the Terran R rocket and possibly bring the booster to market within the next couple of years. Multiple people have told Ars that the development of the rocket's Aeon R main engine continues to go well. But there's still a way to go before the vehicle is ready for its debut launch.Eric BergerSenior Space EditorEric BergerSenior Space Editor Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston. 6 Comments

Sam Altman's estranged sister, Ann Altman, has sued the OpenAI CEO for childhood sexual abuse.She had previously accused her brothers of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse on social media.The Altman family on Tuesday issued a statement denying the accusations.Sam Altman's estranged younger sister, Ann Altman, filed suit against the OpenAI CEO on Monday, accusing him of childhood sexual abuse.In the suit, Ann Altman alleges her older brother groomed and sexually assaulted her multiple times during the 1990s and 2000s, causing post-traumatic stress disorder and physical injuries.On Tuesday afternoon, Sam Altman posted a statement on social media, signed by his mother, Connie, and brothers, Max and Jack, denying the allegations."Our family loves Annie and is very concerned about her well-being. Caring for a family member who faces mental health challenges is very difficult," the statement reads. "Over the years, we've tried in many ways to support Annie and help her find stability, following professional advice on how to be supportive without enabling harmful behaviors."The statement indicates the Altman family has offered Ann Altman monthly financial support and "attempted to get her medical help" in addition to offering to buy her a home through a trust "so that she would have a secure place to live, but not be able to sell it immediately.""Despite this, Annie continues to demand more money from us. In this vein, Annie has made deeply hurtful and entirely untrue claims about our family, especially Sam," the statement continues. "We've chosen not to respond publicly, out of respect for her privacy and our own. However, she has now taken legal action against Sam, and we feel we have no choice but to address this."Ann Altman had previously made her accusations public through posts on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter. In November 2021, she posted that she "experienced sexual, physical, emotional, verbal, financial, and technological abuse from my biological siblings, mostly Sam Altman and some from Jack Altman.""I feel strongly that others have also been abused by these perpetrators," Ann Altman wrote in 2021. "I'm seeking people to join me in pursuing legal justice, safety for others in the future, and group healing. Please message me with any information, you can remain however anonymous you feel safe."The Tuesday Altman family statement vehemently denies the allegations against Sam Altman and other members of the Altman family, reading: "All of these claims are entirely untrue. This situation causes immense pain to our entire family. It is especially gut-wrenching when she refuses conventional treatment and lashes out at family members who are genuinely trying to help."Representatives for OpenAI and an attorney for Ann Altman did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

Microsoft plans job cuts targeting underperforming employees.The reductions are happening across the company, including in its important Security division.Performance-based cuts are often backfilled by Microsoft, so total headcount may not change much.Microsoft is planning job cuts soon and the company is taking a harder look at underperforming employees as part of the reductions, according to two people familiar with the plans.A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed cuts, but declined to share details on the number of employees being let go."At Microsoft we focus on high performance talent," the spokesperson said. "We are always working on helping people learn and grow. When people are not performing, we take the appropriate action."When people leave for performance reasons, Microsoft often backfills the roles, so there may be little change to the company's overall headcount, the spokesperson added. At the end of June, Microsoft had roughly 228,000 full-time employees.Microsoft is taking a stronger stance on performance management like its competitors, the people familiar said, and managers at the company have spent the last few months evaluating employees all the way up to level 80, one of its highest levels. The people asked not to be identified discussing sensitive matters.The cuts are happening across the company, including in its important Security division, the people said.Are you a Microsoft employee or do you have insight to share? Contact reporter Ashley Stewart via the encrypted messaging app Signal (+1-425-344-8242) or email (astewart@businessinsider.com). Use a nonwork device.

On a family vacation, we booked an excursion to go parasailing. We were all so excited to try it, but on the boat, I started to feel nauseated. I got sick while in the air and was horrified, but it's become a funny family story.I was 12 years old when the grossest but also funniest thing happened to me on vacation.My family and my aunt, uncle, and younger cousin rented a house in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. One day, we booked an excursion to go parasailing. We clambered excitedly onto the small boat at the bayside dock.It was fairly windy, but the two men running the operation assured our parents it was a fine day for parasailing. We set off to the open ocean, a few hundred feet from the shoreline. The boat slowed. The water was choppy, and I felt a not-quite-pleasant swaying sensation.We were all excited to try parasailingMy sunburn-prone dad had stayed behind, and we paired each kid with an adult to be hoisted in joint harnesses. Our cousin and uncle went first, and we watched, enthralled, as they sailed upward, big smiles plastered on their faces.I was grinning, too, at first. But as the boat bobbed over the surface, I started to feel a little off. But I didn't want to spoil the fun, though, and I was anxious for my turn, so I said nothing about the nausea that was building. When it was time, I strapped in with my aunt and watched the boat become tiny as we rose 200 feet in the air.After a few minutes of oohing and aahing at the view, I went quiet. The queasy feeling had intensified. I shut my eyes, willing it to abate. I said, "Aunt Susan...I don't feel very good." The author and her aunt were excited to go parasailing. Courtesy of Megan Bungeroth My experience didn't exactly go as plannedMy sweet aunt jumped into comfort mode, rubbing my arms and coaxing me to fix my eyes on the horizon. We sang a Carly Simon song, my voice wobbly and thin.It wasn't working.I turned back to look at my aunt for reassurance, and that's when it happened.I vomited. All over both of us. In the direction of the wind and her face.To her everlasting credit, squeamish Aunt Susan held it together, stroking my hair and telling me it was OK. She tried signaling to the boat that we wanted to come in.I was blubbering and apologizing, still feeling awful. We saw the men wave back at us, but instead of moving toward the boat, we began moving downward toward the ocean."Oh no," Aunt Susan said. "I think they're going to dunk us."We looked down and discovered we were rapidly descending onto a huge school of pale blue jellyfish.Shrieking, we grasped our barf-covered legs, praying we didn't crash into a jellyfish. Luckily, we avoided them as we dipped into the sea."At least our legs are cleaned off," Aunt Susan said, trying to make me laugh as we rose again into the sky. Finally, my mom, noticing something was amiss, told the boat guys to reel us in.I clutched the side of the boat while Aunt Susan collapsed next to me, looking pale and fairly nauseous herself. I assured my sister and mom they could take their turn. "I felt a little better after throwing up," I said, feeling guilty that Aunt Susan couldn't say the same.It's now a funny family storyBack at the beach house, my dad greeted us jovially."So," he said, "how was it?"I burst into tears and gasped out, "I threw up all over Aunt Susan!" My dad couldn't contain the laugh that bubbled up, which only made me cry harder.Aunt Susan gave me a big hug. "It's OK, sweetie," she said. "I am going to go take a shower, though." I cracked a small smile. I knew, even as upset as I was, that someday it would be a funny story.Sure enough, it became the big joke for the rest of our family vacation and for many years afterward. It was a disgusting, hilarious bonding experience for me and my aunt, who I'm still close to today.And now, whenever anyone mentions parasailing, I say, "Make sure you bring Dramamine! I've got a story about that"

In the final days of its tenure, the Biden administration has banned credit reporting agencies from including medical debts in their reports, aiming to make it easier for people to access credit, including loans and mortgages.No one should be denied economic opportunity because they got sick or experienced a medical emergency, Vice President Kamala Harris said in a White House statement announcing the new rule Tuesday.The administration first proposed the rule in June 2024, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued the final ruling today. The new rule is part of a constellation of federal, state, and local strategies, stretching back to the Obama administration, to reduce the burden of medical debt on Americans. Advocates hail the change as an important step, but its effects may not be as significant as the administration hopes. And with Republicans already speaking out against it, its possible the rule might be reversed or not enforced at all.How the ban and medical debt reporting worksIts up to individual medical providers whether they report debt to credit agencies. The information in that report is then used to calculate a persons credit score, which helps lenders like banks determine how likely a person is to pay off debt they accrue. The idea to remove medical debt from credit reports isnt new. In 2023, major companies like TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax stopped including medical debt under $500 in their credit reports.The new rule will remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of about 15 million Americans, according to the CFPB. The CFPB claims that medical debt isnt actually a very good predictor of a persons overall creditworthiness, and that consumers frequently report receiving inaccurate bills or being asked to pay bills that should have been covered by insurance or financial assistance programs.The new rule only addresses medical debt when it has already gone into collections, Stanford University economics professor Neale Mahoney explained. You can basically either address medical debt at the source, like right after hospitalization, or you can sort of address things downstream, like the new rule, he said. Other downstream interventions include retiring medical debt, as some municipalities have done. The change can improve peoples financial situations, according to Francis Wong, an economist at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. Our research indicates that people are better off, in the sense that having medical debt removed from their credit reports leads to meaningful increases in credit scores, especially for those who do not show signs of financial distress outside of their medical debt, Wong wrote in an email.As part of the broader landscape of medical debt interventions, the new rule is an important tool because it could encourage people to continue seeking medical care, according to Eva Marie Stahl, vice president of programs and policy at Undue Medical Debt, an organization that helps pay off medical debt and advises on policy solutions to medical debt.In some cases, [reported medical debt] could prevent somebody from accessing work or a place to live, Stahl said. Its top of mind for people when they access health care. So were hoping that people are just sort of breathing a sigh of relief today and thinking a little bit differently about how they engage with the health system, so that theyre putting their health care needs first.Will the new policy make a difference?However, Wong and Mahoney, who worked together on a research paper about paying off medical debt, also cautioned how the new rule will impact peoples financial situations.The change will be most significant for people who dont carry much other debt, according to Mahoney. There are people who have otherwise good credit except for medical debt and collections, and so for those folks you see, I think, meaningful increases in credit scores, Mahoney told Vox. This might look like an increase of 14 points on average and an increase of $900 in credit limits, which is not insignificant.Simply leaving medical debt off credit reports doesnt address the broader problem of continued medical debt. Those who owe medical debt may be grappling with ongoing issues associated with the original medical event, such as poor health and inability to work, Wong wrote. For many people, it also probably wont mean the difference between getting a home loan and being denied, he said. Although removing medical debt from credit reports is likely to increase access to credit card borrowing, the same may not be true for access to mortgages, given that few people with medical debt may be in a position to afford a mortgage.Ultimately, the debt still exists, whether or not it shows up on a credit report, and it impacts peoples finances and their ability to access medical care. Then theres the possibility that whatever relief the rule brings to people in debt will not last. Republicans in Congress have already spoken out against the rule, both from a policy perspective and as part of an effort to curtail the CFPBs regulatory agenda.In an August memo to CFPB director Rohit Chopra, members of the House Committee on Financial Services wrote that restricting inclusion of medical debt in credit reports and scores will undermine underwriting processes and increase risk in the financial system, to the detriment of consumers, and argued that the rule would have significant negative effects on access and affordability of credit for all consumers, and particularly for low-income borrowers.Banking industry lobbying groups, like the Bank Policy Institute and the Consumer Bankers Association, urged Chopra to withdraw the rule, saying that it would actually make credit more expensive because it would be riskier and more scarce if access improved. The groups also pushed back against the common argument that medical debt, as a product of circumstances beyond peoples control, is different from other kinds of debt related to a lack of financial knowledge or adequate planning. A Republican Congress might not have the votes to roll back the new rule. But the CFPB will change dramatically under the incoming Trump administration, and leadership may not enforce the medical debt credit reporting ban or the other protections the agency has put in place in the last months of the Biden administration. Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More: