Vous rêvez d’une immersion totale, sans compromis sur la qualité visuelle ? Le PSVR2 de […] Cet article Test du PSVR2 : vaut-il encore le coup en 2025 ? - juin 2025 a été publié sur REALITE-VIRTUELLE.COM.

Payphones "were the only things that were built to last for decades and be out in the elements," says electrical engineer Patrick Schlott. He should know; as a hobby, he buys secondhand payphones, rewires them, then asks local businesses in rural Vermont if they'd let him install them. His goal is to offer, for free, public telephone service. (Schlott foots the bill himself.) "It's assumed most folks own cell phones," writes Schlott. "Well, not everyone does, sometimes they don't work out on dirt roads, sometimes you forget your charger, and sometimes you just really need to make a phone call. We aim to provide a valuable public service to the community while teaching people about the US telephone system that has over a century of history behind it." Schlott's company, RandTel, currently operates three phones in his neck of Vermont: One at the North Tunbridge General Store in Tunbridge, one at the Latham Library and a third—a rotary model from the 1950s--at the town of Randolph's information booth. He's particularly proud of that last one, as "This installation is 100% solar-powered, provided graciously by Catamount Solar," he writes. "Many thanks to the White River Valley Chamber of Commerce for hosting!" Here's a look at what Schlott does:

It's the same every year. Like clockwork, both social media and real media clamour to do what they do best: moan. Not about politics. Not about the trains. Not even about the weather. No, it's Glastonbury Festival time, which means it's time for the annual whinge-fest over how much it costs and how bad the line-up is. It's a tradition as sacred as Glastonbury itself. Within minutes of the headliners being announced, someone somewhere will tweet "WHO?" as if that settles the matter. The tickets, they declare, are extortionate. The food is overpriced. The toilets are... well, they're not wrong there, to be fair. And yet Glastonbury sells out. Every. Single. Time. In minutes. Not hours, not days, but minutes; just 35 of them, this time around. A digital stampede of fans crashes the ticketing servers, elbows each other out of the virtual queue, and desperately parts with £373.50 of their hard-earned cash. If people really thought it wasn't worth it, why would that happen? Deep down, Glastonbury fans know it is worth it. Not just for the vibes. Not just for the bragging rights. In terms of basic maths alone, it remains a much cheaper way to see all your favourite bands compared with buying tickets to individual gigs. Let's break it down. From this year's stacked, genre-hopping, generation-spanning line-up, these are my 10 ride-or-die bands, the ones I'm determined to see come hell or high water at this year's Glastonbury. And next to them is a reasonable estimate of how much it would cost to see them individually on tour. Alanis Morissette: £60-£135 Charli XCX: £85-£200+ English Teacher: £25-£35 Gracie Abrams: £100-£400+ John Fogerty: £35-£130+ Lola Young: £25-£40 Olivia Rodrigo: £120-£200+ Raye: £50-£100+ Wet Leg: £30-£40 Wolf Alice: £40-£60 You can quickly see how these individual tickets would add up, and that's before the beer-soaked chips and £17 parking surcharges at the O2. But at Glastonbury, they're all included, alongside more than two thousand other acts. Plus five nights of camping, firewood, circus performers, standup comedy, theatre performers, secret gigs, DnB raves, late-night poetry slams, kids' clubs, drone shows, the visionary chaos of Shangri-La, a bloke dressed as a badger doing tai chi at 4am, and the very real possibility of watching Chris Martin duet with a kestrel. All for less than the price of one premium Olivia Rodrigo ticket at the Birmingham NEC with a half-decent sightline. © Amy Fern © George Harrison © Amy Fern No one involved with the festival will ever say this out loud... but in truth, this is underpricing. Glastonbury doesn't cost too much; it's that it's charging less than it's worth. The organisers know it, the scalpers know it, and deep down, so do we. Why else would the event remain massively oversubscribed year after year? The lesson for freelancers Herein lies the lesson for anyone who's ever said yes to a freelance gig, then immediately regretted it because the fee barely covers your oat milk habit. Every time you flinch at raising our rates, worrying, "What if they say no?" you need to remember that people will always complain about the price. But then they pay it anyway, if what you're offering is good. Just like a Glastonbury ticket, your work has value that goes beyond the sum of its parts. Clients might baulk at a day rate, grumble at a quote, or attempt the classic "Can you do it for exposure?". But if they really want you, they'll find the budget. Sure, you could try to undercut your peers. Offer the cheapest design package. Throw in extra concepts for free. Discount your fee before they even ask. But all that gets you is the creative equivalent of being the sad burger stand next to the rave tent: underpaid, undervalued, and slightly sticky. Here's the uncomfortable truth: clients don't always know what things should cost. They base their expectations on their last hire, a Fiverr ad, or what their mate's cousin paid a graphic design student in 2017. © George Harrison © Yushy Pachnanda © JodyHartley But it's not your job to price yourself within their comfort zone. It's your job to price yourself according to your value. If clients can't afford you, that's not rejection; that's redirection. Someone else—someone better, someone ready—will always pay you what you're worth. Just like someone always buys the last Glastonbury ticket. So ignore the noise. Just like the festival, you're not for everyone, and that's fine. Your rates should make you feel slightly nervous, not make your client feel overly comfortable. That's how you grow. That's how you stay booked. That's how you avoid burnout and build a business rather than a bargain bin. In other words, next time you feel the urge to knock 20% off your quote "just to be safe", picture yourself standing in a Somerset field surrounded by 200,000 sweaty strangers who all agreed—despite the price, despite the moaning, despite the toilets—that it was absolutely worth it. And then charge accordingly.

It may be time to suck it up — and we don't just mean the carbon in the atmosphere. No, we're talking about reckoning with the possibility that our attempts at capturing the greenhouse gas to stave off climate disaster are already hopelessly behind schedule, New Scientist reports, if they're not in vain entirely.To illustrate, here're some simple numbers. The CO2 removal industry expects to hit a milestone of removing one million metric tons of CO2 this year. And companies across the globe have bought carbon credits to remove 27 million more, according to data from CDR.fyi cited in the reporting (more on these carbon credit schemes in a moment).That sounds like a lot, but it really isn't. As New Scientist notes, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the leading authority on these issues — concluded in a 2022 report that we need to be removing up to 16 billion tons of carbon, not millions, each year to keep the rise in global temperature from exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming by the middle of the century, past which the most drastic effects of climate change are believed to be irreversible."It's not scaling up as fast as it would need to if we are going to reach multiple gigatons by 2050," Robert Höglund at Marginal Carbon, a climate consultancy based in Sweden, told the magazine. Carbon capture is not the be-all and end-all. The fact remains that humanity needs to drastically reduce its emissions, which probably means reorganizing society — or at least its energy production and consumption — as we know it. Simply removing the CO2 that's already there is more like a band-aid that buys us a little time; eventually, we'll need to rip it off.For these reasons, some critics fear that carbon capture — and even more drastic interventions, like attempting to dim the Sun — could distract from the climate change's systemic causes. But there's a lot of enthusiasm for the approach all the same, both from scientists and investors. The IPCC acknowledged in its 2022 report that carbon removal was "unavoidable" — as in, essential to meeting climate targets.One popular method of carbon removal is called direct air capture, which involves sucking the carbon straight from the air using massive industrial facilities. A more circuitous approach that's gaining steam involves extracting CO2 out of the ocean, freeing up room for the world's largest carbon sink to passively absorb even more of the greenhouse gas. All of these initiatives, though, are basically just getting off the ground. And the corporate investment, which once promised billions of dollars in cash, seems to be cooling. More than 90 percent of all carbon removal credits sold this year were bought by a single company, Microsoft, New Scientist notes, probably to gloss over its egregious energy bill it's accrued from building loads of AI datacenters.This also touches on the fact that the practice of buying carbon credits can be used as a means of corporate greenwashing. By paying to another firm to "certify" that they will remove a certain amount of carbon at some undetermined point in the future, a company can report a greener carbon balance sheet without actually reducing its emissions.In any case, staking the industry's hopes on corporate munificence is a dicey prospect indeed."I have been raising the alarm for about a year and a half," Eli Mitchell-Larson at Carbon Gap, a UK carbon dioxide removal advocacy organisation, told New Scientist. "If we're just waiting for the waves of free philanthropic money from corporations to fill a hole on their sustainability report, we're not really going to solve the problem."More on climate change: Scientists Just Found Who's Causing Global WarmingShare This Article

New York City’s Brooklyn-Queens Expressway is falling apart. Built between 1946 and 1964, the urban highway runs 12.1 miles through the heart of the two boroughs to connect on either end with the interstate highway system—a relic of midcentury car-oriented infrastructure, and a prime example of the dwindling lifespan of roads built during that time.  The degradation is most visible—and most pressing—in a section running alongside Brooklyn Heights known as the triple cantilever. This 0.4-mile section, completed in 1954, is unique among U.S. highways in that it juts out from the side of a hill and stacks the two directions of traffic on balcony-like decks, one slightly overhanging the other. A third level holds a well-loved park, the Brooklyn Heights Promenade.  This unusual layer cake of a freeway was a marvel of engineering in its day, though not without controversy. Masterminded by Robert Moses, the city’s all-powerful, often ruthless city planner for more than four decades, the roadway bisects working-class and immigrant neighborhoods that grapple with the health and environmental fallout to this day. Like the reputation of the man who built it, the triple cantilever has aged poorly. Its narrow width, (33.5 feet for the roadway in either direction) has made all but the most basic maintenance incredibly difficult, and its 71-year-old structure is constantly battered by the ever heavier automobiles and trucks. Designed to accommodate around 47,000 vehicles per day, it now carries more than three times that amount. Deteriorating deck joints and failing steel-reinforced concrete have led many to worry the triple cantilever is on the verge of collapse. An expert panel warned in 2020 that the triple cantilever could be unusable by 2026, and only then did interim repairs get made to keep it standing. [Photo: Alex Potemkin/Getty Images] The mounting concern comes amid a 50-year decline in direct government spending on infrastructure in the U.S., according to a recent analysis by Citigroup. Simply maintaining existing infrastructure is a challenge, the report notes. Meanwhile, the American Society of Civil Engineers’ grade for the country’s infrastructure has improved, from a D+ in 2017 to a C in 2025. Now even private credit firms are circling: As reported in Bloomberg, Apollo Global Management estimates that a boom in infrastructure deals help could grow the private debt market up to a staggering $40 trillion.   Independent urban designer Marc Wouters has an idea on how to fix BQE’s cantilever. He’s been working on it for years. “My process is that I always interview people in the community before I do any drawings,” he says. “So I really have listened to pretty much everybody over the past few years.” Unsolicited and developed in his own spare time, Wouters has designed an alternative for the triple cantilever that he named the BQE Streamline Plan. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] His concept, based on decades of experience in urban planning, infrastructure, and resilience projects in communities across the country, is relatively simple: extend the width of the two traffic-bearing cantilevers and add support beams to their outside edge, move both directions of traffic onto four lanes on the first level, and turn the second level into a large freeway cap park. Instead of major rebuilding efforts, Wouters’s proposal is more of a reinforcement and expansion, with a High Line-style park plopped on top. Though he’s not an engineer, Wouters is confident that his design would shift enough strain off the existing structure to allow it to continue functioning for the foreseeable future. (What actual engineers think remains to be seen.) “What I’ve done is come up with a plan that happens to be much less invasive, faster to build, a lot cheaper, and it encompasses a lot of what the community wants,” he says. “Yet it still handles the same capacity as the highway does right now.” So what will it take for this outsider’s idea to be considered a viable design alternative? This idea had been brewing in his mind for years. Wouters, who lives near the triple cantilever section of the BQE in Brooklyn Heights, has followed the highway’s planning process for more than a decade.  As complex infrastructure projects go, this one is particularly convoluted. The BQE is overseen by both the state of New York and New York City, among others, with the city in charge of the 1.5-mile section that includes the triple cantilever. This dual ownership has complicated the management of the highway and its funding. The city and the state have launched several efforts over the years to reimagine the highway’s entire length. In winter 2018, the city’s Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) released two proposals to address the ailing cantilever. Not seeing what they wanted from either one, Brooklyn Heights Association, a nonprofit neighborhood group, retained Wouters and his studio to develop an alternative design. He suggested building a temporary parallel bypass that would allow a full closure and repair of the triple cantilever. That proposal, along with competing ideas developed under the previous mayoral administration, went by the wayside in 2022, when the latest BQE redesign process commenced. Wouters found himself following yet another community feedback and planning process for the triple cantilever. The ideas being proposed by the city’s DOT this time around included a plan that would chew into the hillside that currently supports the triple cantilever to move the first tier of traffic directly underneath the second, and add a large girding structure on its open end to hold it all up. Other options included reshaping the retaining wall that currently holds up the triple cantilever, moving traffic below grade into a wide tunnel, or tearing the whole thing down and rebuilding from scratch. Each would be time-consuming and disruptive, and many of them cut into another well-loved public space immediately adjacent to the triple cantilever, Brooklyn Bridge Park. None of these options has anything close to unanimous support. And any of them will cost more than $1 billion—a price tag that hits much harder after the Federal Highway Administration rejected an $800 million grant proposal for fixing the BQE back in early 2024. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] Wouters is no highway zealot. In fact, he’s worked on a project heading into construction in Syracuse that will replace an underutilized inner-city highway with a more appropriately sized boulevard and developable land. But he felt sure there was a better way forward—a concept that would work as well in practice as on paper. “I just kept going to meetings and waiting to see what I thought was a progressive solution,” Wouters says. Unimpressed and frustrated, he set out to design it himself. Wouters released the Streamline Plan in March. The concept quickly gathered interest, receiving a flurry of local news coverage. He has since met with various elected officials to discuss it. But as elegant as Wouters’s concept may be, some stakeholders remain unconvinced that the city should be going all in on a reinterpretation of the triple cantilever. What might be more appropriate, critics say, is to make necessary fixes now to keep the triple cantilever safe and functional, and to spend more time thinking about whether this section of highway is even what the city needs in the long term. A group of local organizations is calling for a more comprehensive reconsideration of the BQE under the premise that its harms may be outnumbering its benefits. Launched last spring, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway Environmental Justice Coalition wants any planning for the future of the BQE to include efforts to address its health and environmental impacts on neighboring communities and to seek an alternative that reconnects communities that have been divided by the corridor. One member of this coalition is the Riders Alliance, a nonprofit focused on improving public transit in New York. Danny Pearlstein, the group’s policy and communications director, says implementing a major redesign of the triple cantilever would just reinforce car dependency in a place that’s actually well served by public transit. The environmental justice coalition’s worry is that rebuilding this one section in a long-term fashion could make it harder for change across the length of the entire BQE and could increase the environmental impact the highway has on the communities that surround it. “This is not just one neighborhood. This is communities up and down the corridor that don’t resemble each other very much in income or background who are united and are standing together for something that’s transformative, rather than doubling down on the old ways,” Pearlstein says. [Photo: ©NYC DOT] Lara Birnback is executive director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, representing a neighborhood of roughly 20,000 people. Her organization, which worked directly with Wouters in the past, is circumspect about his latest concept. “It’s certainly more interesting and responsive to the kinds of things that the community has been asking for when thinking about the BQE. It’s more of those things than we’ve seen from any of the designs that New York City DOT has presented to us through their engagement process,” she says. “But at the end of the day, it’s still a way of preserving more or less the status quo of the BQE as a major interstate highway running through the borough.” She argues it makes more sense to patch up the triple cantilever and use the extra years of service that buys to do a more radical rethinking of the BQE’s future. (For example, one 2020 proposal by the Brooklyn-based architecture studio Light and Air proposed a simple intervention of installing buttresses on the open-air side of the triple cantilever, propping it up with a relatively small addition of material.) “We really strongly encourage the city to move forward immediately with a more short-term stabilization plan for the cantilever, with repairs that would last, for example, 20 to 25 years rather than spending billions and billions of dollars rebuilding it for the next 100 years,” Birnback says. Birnback says a major rebuilding plan like the one Wouters is proposing—for all its community benefits—could end up doing more harm to the city. “I think going forward now with a plan that both embeds the status quo and most likely forecloses on the possibility of real transformation across the corridor is a mistake,” she says. NYC DOT expects to begin its formal environmental review process this year, laying the necessary groundwork for deciding on a plan for what to do with the triple cantilever, either for the short term or the long term. The environmental process will evaluate all concepts equally, according to DOT spokesperson Vincent Barone, who notes that the department is required to review and respond to all feedback that comes in through that process. There is technically nothing holding back Wouters’s proposal from being one of the alternatives considered. And he may have some important political support to help make that happen. Earlier this month, Brooklyn’s Community District 2 board formally supported the plan. They are calling for the city’s transportation department to include it in the BQE’s formal environmental review process when it starts later this year. [Photo: Sinisa Kukic/Getty Images] Wouters argues that his proposal solves the pressing structural problems of the triple cantilever while also opening resources to deal with the highway’s big picture challenges. “The several hundred million dollars of savings is now funding that could go to other parts of the BQE. And there are other parts that are really struggling,” he says. “I’m always thinking about the whole length and about all these other communities, not just this one.” With a new presidential administration and a mayoral primary election in June, what happens with the triple cantilever is very much up in the air. But if the environmental review process begins as planned this year, it only makes sense for every option to fall under consideration. What gets built—or torn down, or reconstructed, or reinterpreted—could reshape part of New York City for generations.

From soft yellows to heirloom-worthy teacups, vintage kitchen pieces add a sense of charm and comfort. These pieces can contribute to a cozy nook in your kitchen or simply make your countertops feel a little more timeless. Read on for some of the best nostalgic buys! Lily’s Home Retro Kitchen Wall Clock Buy on Amazon Equal parts retro and practical, this sunny yellow wall clock includes a thermometer and timer, bringing cheerful utility to your cooking space. A bestseller for a reason; it’s cute, clear, and accurate. VIYYIEA Vintage Framed Canvas Art Buy on Amazon A gentle still life of florals and lemons, this 9”x11” framed canvas painting has farmhouse written all over it. It’s graceful and adds just the right touch of old-world elegance. You can also find this artwork in other prints and sizes. Vanselia Ceramic Flower Vase (Retro) Buy on Amazon Rough-hewn and beautifully aged, this ceramic vase is the perfect home for fresh stems or faux greenery. Its earthen finish makes it look like it was plucked out of a vintage countryside kitchen. CHILDIKE European Porcelain Tea for One Set Buy on Amazon Nothing says quiet indulgence like a solo tea moment with this gold-rimmed, floral porcelain teapot and saucer set. Stackable, dainty, and dishwasher-safe: it’s the kind of piece that feels like a little ceremony in your day.

Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back.  Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night. “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023. Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required.  While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year. The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side. Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up.  That’s where Epirus comes in.  When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a $66 million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another $17 million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific. (The Army won’t get into specifics on the location of the weapons in the Middle East but published a report of a live-fire test in the Philippines in early May.)  Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon.  Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software. The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes. I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency.  On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls. Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.” Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality.  Why zap? Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says. He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating.  Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers.  As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat. Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them. The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly $850 million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones. In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control. But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available. (The company also says that this targeted hit of energy allows birds and other wildlife to continue to move safely.) Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added. The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly.  EPIRUS Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo. As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its $66 million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around $16.5 million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing less (and keep shooting) after it downs the first wave of a swarm. Raytheon’s radar, reversed Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget. Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense. Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC. (Tenet, the son of former CIA director George Tenet, may have inspired the company’s name—the elder Tenet’s parents were born in the Epirus region in the northwest of Greece. But the company more often says it’s a reference to the pseudo-mythological Epirus Bow from the 2011 fantasy action movie Immortals, which never runs out of arrows.)  While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world. From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep. (In fact, the other microwave drone zapper currently in the Pentagon pipeline, the Tactical High-power Operational Responder, or THOR, still relies on a physical vacuum tube. It’s reported to be effective at downing drones in tests but takes up a whole shipping container and needs a dish antenna to zap its targets.) By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances. Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away.  The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well. Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project. Waiting for the starting gun On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap.  Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend.  The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.”  But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.” And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.”  The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats.  Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones.  Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised $250 million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than $300 million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018. “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.” The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy.  While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan.  The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024.  It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade.  While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UAS [Unmanned Aircraft System] unfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.”  And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan. Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langley [or] they’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’” “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.”  Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times. This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official. 

Would you believe Google really wants to sell you on its AI? This week, we dive into the news from Google I/O 2025 with Engadget's Karissa Bell. We discuss how Gemini is headed to even more places, as well as Karissa's brief hands-on with Google's prototype XR glasses. It seems like Google is trying a bit harder now than it did with Google Glass and its defunct Daydream VR platform. But will the company end up giving up again, or does it really have a shot against Meta and Apple? Subscribe! iTunes Spotify Pocket Casts Stitcher Google Podcasts Topics Lots of AI and a little XR: Highlights from Google I/O 2025 – 1:15 OpenAI buys Jony Ive’s design company for $6.6B, in an all equity deal – 29:27 Fujifilm’s $850 X Half could be the perfect retro camera for the social media age – 39:42 Sesame Street is moving from HBO to Netflix – 44:09 Cuts to IMLS will lead to headaches accessing content on apps like Libby and Hoopla – 45:49 Listener Mail: Should I replace my Chromebook with a Mac or PC Laptop? – 48:33 Pop culture picks – 52:22 Credits  Hosts: Devindra Hardawar and Karissa BellProducer: Ben EllmanMusic: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien Transcript Devindra: [00:00:00] What's up, internet and welcome back to the Engadget Podcast. I'm Senior Editor Devindra Hardawar. I'm joined this morning by Senior Writer Karissa Bell. Hello, Karissa. Karissa: Hello. Good morning. Devindra: Good morning. And also podcast producer Ben Elman. Hey Ben, I'm muted my dang self. Hello. Hello, Ben. Good morning. It's been a busy week, like it's one of those weeks where. Three major conferences happened all at once and a varying like relevance to us. Google IO is the big one. We'll be talking about that with Karissa who was there and got to demo Google's XR glasses, but also Computex was happening. That's over in Taipei and we got a lot of news from that to, we'll mention some of those things. Also, Microsoft build happened and I feel like this was the less least relevant build to us ever. I got one bit of news I can mention there. That's pretty much it. It's been a crazy hectic week for us over at Eng Gadget. As always, if you're enjoying the show, please be free to subscribe to us on iTunes or your podcast catcher of choice. Leave us a review on iTunes, drop us email at podcast@enggadget.com. [00:01:00] Those emails, by the way, if you ask a good question, it could end up being part of our Ask Engadget section, so that's something we're starting out. I have another good one. I'll be throwing to asking Eng gadgets soon. So send us your emails podcast@enggadget.com, Google io. It's all about ai, isn't it? I feel like Karissa, we were watching the keynote for this thing and it felt like it went on and on of the thing about the things, like we all pretty much expect more about Gemini ai, more about their newer models a bit about xr. Can you give me, what's your overall impression of IO at this point? Karissa: Yeah, it's interesting because I've been covering IO long enough that I remember back when it used to be Android. And then there'd be like that little section at the end about, AI and some of the other stuff. And now it's completely reversed where it's entirely AI and basically no Android to the point where they had a whole separate event with their typical Android stuff the week before. So it didn't have to go through and talk about any of yeah, the mobile things. Devindra: That was just like a live stream that was just like a chill, live stream. No real [00:02:00] effort put into it. Whereas this is the whole show. They had a, who was it? But they had TOIs. TOIs, yeah. They had actual music which is something a lot of these folks do at keynotes. It's actually really disconcerting to see cool musicians taking the corporate gig and performing at one of these things. I think, it was like 20 13, 20 14, maybe the Intel one, IDF or something. But the weekend was there. Just trying to jam to all these nerds and it was sad, but yeah. How was the experience Karissa like actually going there? Karissa: Yeah, it was good. That keynote is always kind of a slog. Just, live blogging for our almost two hours straight, just constant is it's a lot. I did like the music. Towa was very chill. It was a nice way to start much. I preferred it over the crazy loop daddy set we got last year. If anyone remembers that. Devindra: Yeah. Ben: Yeah. Oh, I remember that. Mark Rub was at audio. That was so weird. Devindra: Yeah. Yeah, it was a little intense. Cool. So what are some of the highlights? Like there, there's a bunch of stuff. If you go look on, on the site on Engadget, we [00:03:00] have rounded up like all the major news and that includes a couple of things like hey, AI mode, chat bot coming to search. That's cool. We got more, I think the thing a lot of people were looking at was like Project Astra and where that's gonna be going. And that is the sort of universal AI assistant where you could hold your phone up and just ask it questions about the world. We got another demo video about that. Which again, the actual utility of it, I'm weirded out by. There was also one video where they were just like I'm gonna be dumb. I'm gonna pretend I'm very stupid and ask ask Astro, what is this tall building in front of me. And it was like a fire hydrant or something. It was like some piece of street thing. It was not a really well done demo. Do you have any thoughts about that, Krista? Does that seem more compelling to you now or is it the same as what we saw last year? Karissa: I think what was interesting to me about it was that we saw Astro last year and like that, I think there was a lot of excitement around that, but it wasn't really entirely clear where that. Project is going. They've said it's like an experimental research thing. And then, I feel like this year they really laid out that they want to [00:04:00] bring all that stuff to Gemini. Astra is sort of their place to like tinker with this and, get all this stuff working. But like their end game is putting this into Gemini. You can already see it a little bit in Gemini Live, which is like their multimodal feature where you can do some. Version of what ASRA can do. And so that was interesting. They're saying, we want Gemini to be this universal AI assistant. They didn't use the word a GI or anything like that. But I think it's pretty clear where they're going and like what their ambition is they want this to be, an all seeing, all knowing AI assistant that can help you with anything is what they're trying to sell it as. Devindra: It is weird, like we're watching the demo video and it's a guy trying to fix his bike and he is pointing his phone at like the bike and asking questions like which, which particular, I don't know. It's which particular nut do I need for this tightening thing and it's giving him good advice. It's pointing to things on YouTube. I. I don't know how useful this will actually be. This kind of goes to part of the stuff we're seeing with AI too, of just like offloading [00:05:00] some of the grunt work of human intelligence because you can do this right now, people have been YouTubing to fix things forever. YouTube has become this like information repository of just fix it stuff or home plumbing or whatever. And now it's just like you'll be able to talk to your phone. It'll direct you right to those videos or. Extract the actual instructions from those. That's cool. I feel like that's among the more useful things, more useful than like putting Gemini right into Chrome, which is another thing they're talking about, and I don't know how useful that is other than. They wanna push AI in front of us, just like Microsoft wants to push copilot in front of us at all times. Ben: What is a situation where you would have a question about your Chrome tabs? Like I'm not one of those people that has 15 chrome tabs open at any given time, and I know that I am. Yeah, I know. Wait, you're saying that like it's a high. Like it's high. Yeah, no I know. So I have a abnormally low number of chrome tabs open, but can you still come up [00:06:00] with an idea of why you would ask Gemini anything about your own tabs open? Hopefully you have them organized. At least Karissa: they should. A few examples of like online shopping, like maybe you have. Two tabs of two different products open. And you can say Devindra: exactly, Karissa: ask Gemini to like, compare the reviews. Or they use like the example of a recipe video, a recipe blog. And maybe, you wanna make some kind of modification, make the recipe gluten free. And you could ask Gemini Hey, make this how would I make this gluten free? But I think you're right, like it's not exactly clear. You can already just open a new tab and go to Gemini and ask it. Something. So they're just trying to reduce Devindra: friction. I think that's the main thing. Like just the less you have to think about it, the more it's in your face. You can just always always just jump right to it. It's hey, you can Google search from any your UL bar, your location bar in any browser. We've just grown to use that, but that didn't used to be the case. I remember there used to be a separate Google field. Some browsers and it wasn't always there in every browser too. They did announce some new models. We [00:07:00] saw there's Gemini 2.5 Pro. There's a deep think reasoning model. There's also a flash model that they announced for smaller devices. Did they show any good demos of the reasoning stuff? Because I that's essentially slower AI processing to hopefully get you better answers with fewer flaws. Did they actually show how that worked? Karissa. Karissa: I only saw what we all saw during the keynote and I think it's, we've seen a few other AI companies do something similar where you can see it think like its reasoning process. Yeah. And see it do that in real time. But I think it's a bit unclear exactly what that's gonna look like. Devindra: Watching a video, oh, Gemini can simulate nature simulate light. Simulate puzzles, term images into code. Ben: I feel like the big thing, yeah. A lot of this stuff is from DeepMind, right? This is DeepMind an alphabet company. Devindra: DeepMind and Alphabet company. There is Deep mind. This is deep Think and don't confuse this with deep seek, which is that the Chinese AI company, and they [00:08:00] clearly knew what they were doing when they call it that thing. Deep seek. But no, yeah, that is, this is partially stuff coming out of DeepMind. DeepMind, a company which Google has been like doing stuff with for a while. And we just have not really seen much out of it. So I guess Gemini and all their AI processes are a way to do that. We also saw something that got a lot of people, we saw Ben: Nobel Prize from them. Come on. Devindra: Hey, we did see that. What does that mean? What is that even worth anymore? That's an open question. They also showed off. A new video tool called Flow, which I think got a lot of people intrigued because it's using a new VO three model. So an updated version of what they've had for video effects for a while. And the results look good. Like the video looks higher quality. Humans look more realistic. There have been. The interesting thing about VO three is it can also do synchronized audio to actually produce audio and dialogue for people too. So people have been uploading videos around this stuff online at this point, and you have to [00:09:00] subscribe to the crazy high end. Version of Google's subscription to even test out this thing at this point that is the AI Ultra plan that costs $250 a month. But I saw something of yeah, here's a pretend tour of a make believe car show. And it was just people spouting random facts. So yeah, I like EVs. I would like an ev. And then it looks realistic. They sound synchronized like you could. I think this is a normal person. Then they just kinda start laughing at the end for no reason. Like weird little things. It's if you see a sociopath, try to pretend to be a human for a little bit. There's real Patrick Bateman vibes from a lot of those things, so I don't know. It's fun. It's cool. I think there's, so didn't we Ben: announce that they also had a tool to help you figure out whether or not a video was generated by flow? They did announce that Devindra: too. Ben: I've yeah, go ahead. Go Karissa: ahead. Yeah. The synth id, they've been working on that for a while. They talked about it last year at io. That's like their digital watermarking technology. And the funny thing about this is [00:10:00] their whole, the whole concept of AI watermarking is you put like these like invisible watermarks into AI generated content. You might, you couldn't just. See it, just watching this content. But you can go to this website now and basically like double check. If it has one of these watermarks, which is on one hand it's. I think it's important that they do this work, but I also just wonder how many people are gonna see a video and think I wonder what kind of AI is in this. Let me go to this other website and like double check it like that. Just, Ben: yeah. The people who are most likely to immediately believe it are the, also the least likely to go to the website and be like, I would like to double check Devindra: this. It doesn't matter because most people will not do it and the damage will be done. Just having super hyper realistic, AI video, they can, you can essentially make anything happen. It's funny that the big bad AI bad guy in the new Mission Impossible movies, the entity, one of the main things it does is oh, we don't know what's true anymore because the entity can just cr fabricate reality at whim. We're just doing that. [00:11:00] We're just doing that for, I don't know, for fun. I feel like this is a thing we should see in all AI video tools. This doesn't really answer the problem, answer the question that everyone's having though. It's what is the point of these tools? Because it does devalue filmmaking, it devalues people using actual actors or using, going out and actually shooting something. Did Google make a better pitch for why you would use Flow Karissa or how it would fit into like actual filmmaking? Karissa: I'm not sure they did. They showed that goofy Darren Aronofsky trailer for some woman who was trying to like, make a movie about her own birth, and it was like seemed like they was trying to be in the style of some sort of like psychological thriller, but it just, I don't know, it just felt really weird to me. I was I was just like, what are we watching? This doesn't, what are we watching? Yeah. Ben: Was there any like good backstory about why she was doing that either or was it just Hey, we're doing something really weird? Karissa: No, she was just oh I wonder, you know what? I wanna tell the story of my own birth and Okay. Ben: [00:12:00] Okay, but why is your relate birth more? Listen its like every, I need more details. Why is your birth more important? It's, everybody wants lots of babies. Write I memoir like one of three ways or something. Devindra: Yeah, it's about everybody who wants to write a memoir. It's kinda the same thing. Kinda that same naval ga thing. The project's just called ancestral. I'm gonna play a bit of a trailer here. I remember seeing this, it reminds me of that footage I dunno if you guys remember seeing, look who's talking for the very first time or something, or those movies where they, they showed a lot of things about how babies are made. And as a kid I was like, how'd they make that, how'd that get done? They're doing that now with AI video and ancestral this whole project. It is kinda sad because Aronofsky is one of my, like one of my favorite directors when he is on, he has made some of my favorite films, but also he's a guy who has admittedly stolen ideas and concepts from people like Satoshi kh as specific framing of scenes and things like that. In Requa for a Dream are in some cones movies as well. So [00:13:00] I guess it's to be expected, but it is. Sad because Hollywood as a whole, the union certainly do not like AI video. There was a story about James Earl Jones' voice being used as Darth Vader. In Fortnite. In Fortnite. In Fortnite, yeah. Which is something we knew was gonna happen because Disney licensed the rights to his voice before he died from his estate. He went in and recorded lines to at least create a better simulation of his voice. But people are going out there making that Darth Vader swear and say bad things in Fortnite and the WGA or is it sag? It's probably sag but sad. Like the unions are pissed off about this because they do not know this was happening ahead of time and they're worried about what this could mean for the future of AI talent. Flow looks interesting. I keep seeing play people play with it. I made a couple videos asked it to make Hey, show me three cats living in Brooklyn with a view of the Manhattan skyline or something. And it, it did that, but the apartment it rendered didn't look fully real. [00:14:00] It had like weird heating things all around. And also apparently. If you just subscribe to the basic plan to get access to flow, you can use flow, but that's using the VO two model. So older AI model. To get VO three again, you have to pay $250 a month. So maybe that'll come down in price eventually. But we shall see. The thing I really want to talk with you about Krisa is like, what the heck is happening with Android xr? And that is a weird project for them because I was writing up the news and they announced like a few things. They were like, Hey we have a new developer released to help you build Android XR apps. But it wasn't until the actual a IO show. That they showed off more of what they were actually thinking about. And you got to test out a pair of prototype Google XR glasses powered by Android xr. Can you tell me about that experience and just how does it differ from the other XR things you've seen from who is it from Several, look, you've seen Metas Meta, you saw one from Snap, right? Meta Karissa: I've seen Snap. Yeah. Yeah. I've seen the X reel. Yeah, some of the other smaller [00:15:00] companies I got to see at CES. Yeah, that was like a bit of a surprise. I know that they've been talking about Android XR for a while. I feel like it's been a little, more in the background. So they brought out these, these glasses and, the first thing that I noticed about them was like, they were actually pretty small and like normal looking compared to, met Orion or like the snap spectacles. Like these were very thin which was cool. But the display was only on one side. It was only on one lens. They called it like a monocular display. So there's one lens on one side. So it's basically just like a little window, very small field of view. Devindra: We could see it in, if you go to the picture on top of Chris's hands on piece, you can see the frame out. Of what that lens would be. Yeah. Karissa: Yeah. And I noticed even when we were watching that, that demo video that they did on stage, that like the field of view looked very small. It was even smaller than Snaps, which is 35 degrees like this. I would, if I had to guess, I'd say it's maybe like around 20. They wouldn't say what it was. They said, this is a prototype. We don't wanna say the way I thought about it, the way [00:16:00] I compared it to my piece was like the front screwing on a foldable phone, so it's you can get notifications and you can like glance at things, but it's not fully immersive ar it's not, surrounding your space and like really cha changing your reality, in the way that like snap and and meta are trying to do later when I was driving home, I realized it actually was reminded me like a better comparison might be the heads up display in your car. Speaker: Yeah. Yeah. Karissa: If you have a car that has that little hu where you can see how fast you're going and directions and stuff like that. Devindra: That's what Google Glass was doing too, right? Because that was a little thing off to the side of your revision that was never a full takeover. Your vision type of thing. Karissa: Yeah. It's funny, that's what our editor Aaron said when he was editing my piece, he was like, oh, this sounds like Google Glass. And I'm like, no, it actually, it's, it is better than that. These are like normal looking glasses. The, I tried Google Glass many years ago. Like the Fidelity was better. Actually I was thinking. It feels like a happy medium almost between, meta ray bands and like full ar Yeah, like I, I've had a meta ray band glasses [00:17:00] for a long time and people always ask me, like when I show it to someone, they're like, oh, that's so cool. And then they go, but you can see stuff, right? There's a display and I'm like. No. These are just, glasses with the speaker. And I feel like this might be like a good kind of InBetween thing because you have a little bit of display, but they still look like glasses. They're not bulky 'cause they're not trying to do too much. One thing I really liked is that when you take a photo, you actually get a little preview of that image that like floats onto the screen, which was really cool because it's hard to figure out how to frame pictures when you are taking using glasses camera on your smart glasses. So I think there's some interesting ideas, but it's very early. Obviously they want like Gemini to be a big part of it. The Gemini stuff. Was busted in my demo. Devindra: You also said they don't plan on selling these are like purely, hey, this is what could be a thing. But they're not selling these specific glasses, right? Karissa: Yeah, these specific ones are like, this is a research prototype. But they did also announce a partnership with Warby Parker and another glasses company. So I think it's like you can see them trying to take a meta approach here, which [00:18:00] actually would be pretty smart to say let's partner with. A known company that makes glasses, they're already popular. We can give them our, our tech expertise. They can make the glasses look good and, maybe we'll get something down the line. I actually heard a rumor that. Prototype was manufactured by Samsung. They wouldn't say Devindra: Of course it's Sam, Samsung wants to be all over this. Samsung is the one building their the full on Android XR headset, which is a sort of like vision Pro copycat, like it is Mohan. Yeah. Moan. It is displays with the pass through camera. That should be coming later this year. Go ahead Ben. Ben: Yeah. Question for Karissa. When Sergey brand was talking about Google Glass, did that happen before or after the big demo for the Google XR glasses? Karissa: That was after. That was at the end of the day. He was a surprise guest in this fireside chat with the DeepMind, CEO. And yeah, it was, we were all wondering about that. 'cause we all, dev probably remembers this very well the, when Google Glass came out and cereal and skydive [00:19:00] wearing them into io. Yeah. Speaker: Yep. Karissa: And then, now for him to come back and say we made a lot of mistakes with that product and. Ben: But was it mistakes or was it just the fact that like technology was not there yet because he was talking about like consumer electronic supply chain, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Devindra: He's right that the tech has caught up with what the vision of what they wanted to do, but also I think he fundamentally misread like people will see you looking like the goddamn borg and want to destroy you. They want you will turn into Captain Picard and be like, I must destroy whoever is wearing Google Glass because this looks like an alien trying to take over my civilization. And the thing that meta did right, that you've seen Karissa, is that make 'em look like normal glasses and Yeah, but nobody will knows, Ben: Karissa does not look entirely human in this picture either. Karissa: Yes. But listen from, if you see 'em straight on, they don't, they look transparent. That was I used that photo because I was trying to. Devindra: You get the angle, show The display. Karissa: Yeah. Devindra: [00:20:00] Yeah. There's another one like you. This looks normal. This looks totally normal. The glasses themselves look like, they look like typical hipster glasses. Like they're not like a super big frame around them. You're they look like the arms seem big. The arms seem wider than a typical pair of glasses, but you wouldn't know that 'cause it's covered in your hair. A lot of people won't notice glasses, arms as much. Ben: Yeah, Devindra: that is cool. The issue Ben: still is that all of these frames are so chunky. And it's because you need to hide all of the internals and everything, but you're not gonna get like the beautiful, like thin Japanese like titanium anytime soon. No, because this stuff needs to shrink way more. Devindra: This stuff that's not, those the kind of frames they are. I will say I had a meeting with the one of the I believe the CEO of X reel who. Came not, I did talk to them at c so they, they had like a lot of ideas about that. I talked to the the head of space top, which is [00:21:00] the, that's the company that was doing the sort of AR laptop thing. And then they gave up on that idea because AI PCs have the nmps that they need to do that stuff. And they're all in on the idea that, more people will want to use these sorts of glasses. Maybe not all the time, but for specific use cases. Something that co covers your field of vision more. Could be a great thing when you sit down at your desk. I could see people doing this. I could see people getting these glasses. I don't know if it's gonna be good for society, right? It feels when Bluetooth headsets were first popping up and everybody hated those people, and you're like, oh, we must shun this person from society. This one, you can't quite see the screen. So you can pretend to be a normal human and then have this like augmented ability next to you. If they can hide that, if they can actually hide the fact that you have a display on your glasses that would help people like me who are face blind and I walk around I don't, I know this person. I've seen them before. What is their name? What is their name? I could see that being useful. Ben: On the other side of it [00:22:00] though, if you have one standard look for glasses like this, then you know, oh, this person is, I. Also interacting with like information and stuff that's like popping up in front of their eyes. It's a universal signifier, just like having a big pair of headphones is Devindra: I think you will see people looking off to the distance. Krisa, did you notice that your eye line was moving away from people you were talking to while you were wearing these? Karissa: Yeah, and that was also one of the issues that I had was that the. Actual, like display was like, was it like didn't quite render right? Where I'm not a farsighted person, but I actually had to look farther off in the distance to actually get it to like my eyes to focus on it. And I asked 'em about that and they're like, oh it's a prototype. It's not quite dialed in. They weren't calibrating these things to your eyeballs. Like the way when I did the Meta Orion demo, they have to take these specific measurements because there's eye tracking and all these things and this, didn't have any of that. There. Yeah, there definitely was. You're, somebody's talking to you, but you're looking over here. Devindra: That's not great. That's [00:23:00] not great for society. You're having a conversation with people. I like how they're framing this oh yes, you can be more connected with reality. 'cause you don't have a phone in front of your face, except you always have another display in front of your face, which nobody else can see, and you're gonna look like an alien walking around. They showed some videos of people using it for like street navigation. Which I kinda like. You're in a new city, you'll see the arrows and where to turn and stuff. That's useful. But there is this, there was one that was really overwrought. It was a couple dancing at Sunset, and the guy is take a picture of this beautiful moment of the sun peeking through behind, my lady friend. And it just felt like that's what you wanna do in that moment. You wanna talk to your virtual assistant while you should be enjoying the fact that you are having this beautiful dancing evening, which nobody will ever actually have. So that's the whole thing. I will say my overall thoughts on this stuff, like just looking at this, the stuff they showed before they actually showed us the glasses, it doesn't feel like Google is actually that far in terms of making this a reality. Karissa the, like I'm comparing it to. Where Meta [00:24:00] is right now, and even where Apple is right now, like when Apple showed us the vision Pro. We were able to sit down and I had a 30 minute demo of that thing working, and I saw the vision of what they were doing and they thought a lot about how this was. How long was your demo with this thing? Karissa: I was in the room with them for about five minutes and I had them on for about three minutes myself. That's not a demo. That's not a demo. Ben: Oh, goodness. So all of these pictures were taken in the same 90 seconds? Yes. Yeah. God. That's amazing. Devindra: It's amazing you were able to capture these impressions, Karissa. Yeah, Karissa: I will say that they did apparently have a demo in December, a press event in December where people got to see these things for a lot longer, but it was, they could not shoot them at all. We, a lot of us were wondering if that was why it was so constrained. They only had one room, there's hundreds of people basically lining up to try these out. And they're like very strict. You got five minutes, somebody's in there like after a couple minutes, rushing you out, and we're like, okay. Like Devindra: They clearly only have a handful of these. That's like the main reason this is happening. I am, this is the company, that did Google Glass and that was too [00:25:00] early and also maybe too ambitious. But also don't forget, Google Cardboard, which was this that was a fun little project of getting phone-based vr happening. Daydream vr, which was their self-contained headset, which was cool. That was when Samsung was doing the thing with Meta as well, or with Oculus at the time. So and they gave up on those things. Completely. And Google's not a company I trust with consumer Hardaware in general. So I am. Don't think there is a huge future in Android xr, but they wanna be there. They wanna be where Meta is and where Apple is and we shall see. Anything else you wanna add about io, Karissa? Karissa: No, just that AI. A i a ai Devindra: a I didn't AI ao, A IAO a IO starline. The thing that was a, like weird 3D rendering teleconferencing video that is becoming a real thing that's turning to Google Beam video. But it's gonna be an enterprise thing. They're teaming up with AI to, with HP to bring a scaled down version of that two businesses. I don't think we'll love or see That's one of those things where it's oh, this exists [00:26:00] in some corporate offices who will pay $50,000 for this thing, but. I don't, normal people will never interact with this thing, so it practically just does not exist. So we shall see. Anyway, stay tuned for, we're gonna have more demos of the Gemini stuff. We'll be looking at the new models, and certainly Chris and I will be looking hard at Android XR and wherever the heck that's going. Let's quickly move on to other news. And I just wanna say there were other events, Compex, we wrote up a couple, a whole bunch of laptops. A MD announced a cheaper radio on graphics card. Go check out our stories on that stuff. Build. I wrote one, I got a 70 page book of news from Microsoft about build and 99% of that news just does not apply to us because Build is so fully a developer coding conference. Hey, there's more more copilot stuff. There's a copilot app coming to 360 [00:27:00] fi subscribers, and that's cool, but not super interesting. I would say the big thing that happened this week and that surprised a lot of us is the news that OpenAI has bought. Johnny i's design startup for six and a half billion. Dollars. This is a wild story, which is also paired with a weird picture. It looks like they're getting married. It looks like they're announcing their engagement over here because Johnny, ive is just leaning into him. Their heads are touching a little bit. It's so adorable. You're not showing Ben: the full website though. The full website has like a script font. It literally looks, yeah, like something from the knot. Devindra: It Is it? Yeah. Let's look at here. Sam and Johnny introduced io. This is an extraordinary moment. Computers are now seeing, thinking, understanding, please come to our ceremony at this coffee shop. For some reason, they also yeah, so they produced this coffee shop video to really show this thing off and, it is wild to me. Let me pull this up over here. Ben: While we're doing that. Karissa, what do you [00:28:00] have to say about this? Karissa: I don't, I'm trying to remember, so I know this is Johnny Ives like AI because he also has like the love from, which is still Devindra: this is love from, this is, so he is, let me get the specifics of the deal out here. Yeah. As part of the deal Ive and his design studio love form. Is it love form or love form? Love form. Yeah. Love form are gonna be joining are gonna work independently of open ai. But Scott Cannon Evans Hanky and Ang Tan who co-founded io. This is another io. I hate these. Yeah, so IO is his AI. Karissa: Focused design thing. And then love form is like his design Devindra: studio thing. Karissa: Sure. Yeah. I'm just, he Devindra: has two design things. Karissa: I'm trying to remember what they've done. I remember there was like a story about they made like a really expensive jacket with some weird buttons or something like Devindra: Yep. I do remember that. Karissa: I was just trying to back my brain of what Johnny Iiv has really done in his post Apple life. I feel like we haven't, he's made Devindra: billions of dollars courses. What's happened? Yes. [00:29:00] Because he is now still an independent man. Clearly he's an independent contractor, but love like the other side of io. Which includes those folks. They will become open AI employees alongside 50 other engineers, designers, and researchers. They're gonna be working on AI Hardaware. It seems like Johnny, I will come in with like ideas, but he, this is not quite a marriage. He's not quite committing. He's just taking the money and being like, Ew, you can have part of my AI startup for six and a half billion dollars. Ben: Let us know your taxes. It's all equity though, so this is all paper money. Six and a half billion dollars. Of like open AI's like crazy, their crazy valuation who knows how act, how much it's actually going to be worth. But all these people are going to sell a huge chunk of stock as soon as open AI goes public anyway. So it's still gonna be an enormous amount of money. Devindra: Lemme, let me see here, the latest thing. Open OpenAI has raised 57.9 billion of funding over 11 rounds. [00:30:00] Good Lord. Yeah. Yeah. So anyway, a big chunk of that is going to, to this thing because I think what happened is that Sam Altman wants to, he clearly just wants to be Steve Jobs. I think that's what's happening here. And go, I, all of you go look at the video, the announcement video for this thing, because it is one of the weirdest things I've seen. It is. Johnny I have walking through San Francisco, Sam Altman, walking through San Francisco with his hands in his pockets. There's a whole lot of setup to these guys meeting in a coffee shop, and then they sit there at the coffee shop like normal human beings, and then have an announcement video talking to nobody. They're just talking to the middle of the coffee bar. I don't know who they're addressing. Sometimes they refer to each other and sometimes they refer to camera, but they're never looking at the camera. This is just a really wild thing. Also. Yet, another thing that makes me believe, I don't think Sam Altman is is a real human boy. I think there is actually something robotic about this man, because I can't see him actually perform in real life [00:31:00] what they're gonna do. They reference vagaries, that's all. It's, we don't know what exactly is happening. There is a quote. From Johnny Ive, and he says, quote, the responsibility that Sam shares is honestly beyond my comprehension end quote. Responsibility of what? Just building this like giant AI thing. Sam Alman For humanity. Yeah, for humanity. Like just unlocking expertise everywhere. Sam Altman says he is. He has some sort of AI device and it's changed his life. We don't know what it is. We dunno what they're actually working on. They announced nothing here. But Johnny Ive is very happy because he has just made billions of dollars. He's not getting all of that money, but he, I think he's very pleased with this arrangement. And Sam Malman seems pleased that, oh, the guy who who designed the iPhone and the MacBook can now work for me. And Johnny, I also says the work here at Open AI is the best work he's ever done. Sure. You'd say that. Sure. By the way. Karissa: Sure. What do you think Apple thinks about all this? Devindra: Yeah, Karissa: their AI [00:32:00] program is flailing and like their, star designer who, granted is not, separated from Apple a while ago, but is now teaming up with Sam Altman for some future computing AI Hardaware where like they can't even get AI Siri to work. That must be like a gut punch for folks maybe on the other side of it though. Yeah, I Ben: don't think it's sour grapes to say. Are they going into the like. Friend, like friend isn't even out yet, but like the humane pin? Yes. Or any of the other like AI sidekick sort of things like that has already crashed and burned spectacularly twice. Devindra: I think Apple is, maybe have dodged a bullet here because I, the only reason Johnny and I just working on this thing is because he OpenAI had put some money into left Formm or IO years ago too. So they already had some sort of collaboration and he's just okay, people are interested in the ai. What sort of like beautiful AI device can I buy? The thing is. [00:33:00] Johnny Ive unchecked as a designer, leads to maddening things like the magic mouse, the charges from the bottom butterfly Karissa: keyboard, Devindra: any butterfly keyboard. Yeah, that's beautiful, but not exactly functional. I've always worked best when he Johnny, ive always worked best when I. He had the opposing force of somebody like a Steve Jobs who could be like, no, this idea is crazy. Or reign it in or be more functional. Steve Jobs not a great dude in many respects, but the very least, like he was able to hone into product ideas and think about how humans use products a lot. I don't think Johnny, ive on his own can do that. I don't think Sam Altman can do that because this man can barely sit and have a cup of coffee together. Like a human being. So I, whatever this is. I honestly, Chris, I feel like Apple has dodged a bullet because this is jumping into the AI gadget trend. Apple just needs to get the software right, because they have the devices, right? We are wearing, we're wearing Apple watches. People have iPhones, people have MacBooks. What they need to do, solidify the infrastructure the AI [00:34:00] smarts between all those devices. They don't need to go out and sell a whole new device. This just feels like opening AI is a new company and they can try to make an AI device a thing. I don't think it's super compelling, but let us know listeners, if any of this, listen to this chat of them talking about nothing. Unlocking human greatness, unlocking expertise just through ai, through some AI gadget. I don't quite buy it. I think it's kind of garbage, but yeah. Ben: Anything else you guys wanna say about this? This is coming from the same guy who, when he was asked in an interview what college students should study, he said Resilience. Karissa: Yeah. I just think all these companies want. To make the thing that's the next iPhone. Yes. They can all just stop being relying on Apple. It's the thing that Mark Zuckerberg has with all of their like Hardaware projects, which by the way, there was one of the stories said that Johnny I thing has been maybe working on some kind of. Head earbuds with cameras on them, which sounded [00:35:00] very similar to a thing that meta has been rumored about meta for a long time. And and also Apple, Devindra: like there, there were rumors about AirPods with head with Karissa: cameras. Yeah. And everyone's just I think trying to like, make the thing that's like not an iPhone that will replace our iPhones, but good luck to them, good, good Devindra: luck to that because I think that is coming from a fundamentally broken, like it's a broken purpose. The whole reason doing that is just try to outdo the iPhone. I was thinking about this, how many companies like Apple that was printing money with iPods would just be like, Hey we actually have a new thing and this will entirely kill our iPod business. This new thing will destroy the existing business that is working so well for us. Not many companies do that. That's the innovator's dilemma that comes back and bites companies in the butt. That's why Sony held off so long on jumping into flat screen TVs because they were the world's leader in CRTs, in Trinitron, and they're like, we're good. We're good into the nineties. And then they completely lost the TV business. That's why Toyota was so slow to EVs, because they're like, hybrids are good to us. Hybrids are great. We don't need an EV for a very long time. And then they released an EV that [00:36:00] we, where the wheels fell off. So it comes for everybody. I dunno. I don't believe in these devices. Let's talk about something that could be cool. Something that is a little unrealistic, I think, but, for a certain aesthetic it is cool. Fujifilm announced the X half. Today it is an $850 digital camera with an analog film aesthetic. It shoots in a three by four portrait aspect ratio. That's Inax mini ratio. It looks like an old school Fuji camera. This thing is pretty wild because the screen it's only making those portrait videos. One of the key selling points is that it can replicate some film some things you get from film there's a light leak simulation for when you like Overexpose film A little bit, a ation, and that's something Ben: that Fujifilm is known for. Devindra: Yes. They love that. They love these simulation modes. This is such a social media kid camera, especially for the people who cannot afford the $2,000 Fuji films, compact cameras. [00:37:00] Wow. Even the Ben: screen is do you wanna take some vertical photographs for your social media? Because vertical video has completely won. Devindra: You can't, and it can take video, but it is just, it is a simplistic living little device. It has that, what do you call that? It's that latch that you hit to wind film. It has that, so you can put it into a film photograph mode where you don't see anything on the screen. You have to use the viewfinder. To take pictures and it starts a countdown. You could tell it to do like a film, real number of pictures, and you have to click through to hit, take your next picture. It's the winder, it's, you can wind to the next picture. You can combine two portrait photos together. It's really cool. It's really cute. It's really unrealistic I think for a lot of folks, but. Hey, social media kits like influencers, the people who love to shoot stuff for social media and vertical video. This could be a really cool little device. I don't, what do you guys think about this? Karissa: You know what this reminds me of? Do you remember like in the early Instagram days when there was all these [00:38:00] apps, like hip, systematic where they tried to emulate like film aesthetics? And some of them would do these same things where like you would take the picture but you couldn't see it right away. 'cause it had to develop. And they even had a light leak thing. And I'm like, now we've come full circle where the camera companies are basically like yeah. Taking or like just doing their own. Spin on that, but Devindra: it only took them 15 years to really jump on this trend. But yes, everybody was trying to emulate classic cameras and foodie was like, oh, you want things that cost more but do less. Got it. That's the foodie film X half. And I think this thing will be a huge success. What you're talking about krisa, there is a mode where it's just yeah. You won't see the picture immediately. It has to develop in our app and then you will see it eventually. That's cool honestly, like I love this. I would not, I love it. I would not want it to be my main camera, but I would love to have something like this to play around when you could just be a little creative and pretend to be a street photographer for a little bit. Oh man. This would be huge in Brooklyn. I can just, Ben: Tom Rogers says cute, but stupid tech. I think that's [00:39:00] the perfect summary. Devindra: But this is, and I would say this compared to the AI thing, which is just like. What is this device? What are you gonna do with it? It feels like a lot of nothing in bakery. Whereas this is a thing you hold, it takes cool pictures and you share it with your friends. It is such a precise thing, even though it's very expensive for what it is. I would say if you're intrigued by this, you can get cheap compact cameras, get used cameras. I only ever buy refurbished cameras. You don't necessarily need this, but, oh man, very, but having a Karissa: Fuji film camera is a status symbol anyway. So I don't know. This is it's eight 50 still seems like a little steep for a little toy camera, basically. But also I'm like I see that. I'm like, Ooh, that looks nice. Devindra: Yeah. It's funny the power shots that kids are into now from like the two thousands those used to cost like 200 to 300 bucks and I thought, oh, that is a big investment in camera. Then I stepped up to the Sony murals, which were like 500 to 600 or so. I'm like, okay, this is a bigger step up than even that. Most people would be better off with a [00:40:00] muralist, but also those things are bigger than this tiny little pocket camera. I dunno. I'm really I think it's, I'm enamored with this whole thing. Also briefly in other news we saw that apparently Netflix is the one that is jumping out to save Sesame Street and it's going to, Sesame Street will air on Netflix and PBS simultaneously. That's a good, that's a good thing because there was previously a delay when HBO was in charge. Oh really? Yeah. They would get the new episodes and there was like, I forget how long the delay actually was, but it would be a while before new stuff hit PBS. This is just Hey, I don't love that so much of our entertainment and pop culture it, we are now relying on streamers for everything and the big media companies are just disappointing us, but. This is a good move. I think Sesame Street should stick around, especially with federal funding being killed left and right for public media like this. This is a good thing. Sesame Street is still good. My kids love it. When my son starts leaning into like his Blippy era, I. I just [00:41:00] kinda slowly tune that out. Here's some Sesame Street. I got him into PeeWee's Playhouse, which is the original Blippy. I'm like, yes, let's go back to the source. Because Peewee was a good dude. He's really, and that show still holds up. That show is so much fun. Like a great introduction to camp for kids. Great. In introduction to like also. Diverse neighborhoods, just Sesame Street as well. Peewee was, or mr. Rogers was doing Ben: it before. I think everyone, Devindra: Mr. Rogers was doing it really well too. But Peewee was always something special because PeeWee's Wild, Peewee, Lawrence Fishburn was on Peewee. There, there's just a lot of cool stuff happening there. Looking back at it now as an adult, it is a strange thing. To watch, but anyway, great to hear that Sesame Street is back. Another thing, not so quick. Ben: Yeah, let me do this one. Go ahead, if I may. Go ahead. So if you have any trouble getting audio books on Libby or Hoopla or any of the other interlibrary loan systems that you can like access on your phone or iPad any tablet. That's [00:42:00] because of the US government because a while ago the Trump administration passed yet another executive order saying that they wanted to cut a bunch of funding to the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the IMLS, and they're the ones who help circulate big quotation marks there just because it's digital files, all of these things from interlibrary loans. So you can, get your audio books that you want. The crazy thing about this is that the IMLS was created in 1996 by a Republican controlled Congress. What's the deal here, guys? There's no waste, fraud and abuse, but if you have problems getting audio books, you can tell a friend or if anybody's complaining about why their, library selection went down. By a lot on Libby recently, now you have the answer. Devindra: It is truly sad. A lot of what's happening is just to reduce access to information because hey, a well-formed population is [00:43:00] dangerous to anybody in charge, right? Terrible news. Let's move on to stuff from that's happening around in gadget. I wanna quickly shout out that Sam Rutherford has reviewed the ACEs RG flow Z 13. This is the sort of like surface like device. That's cool. This is the rise in pro Max chip. Sam seems to like it, so that's, it's a cool thing. Not exactly stealthy. He gave it a 79, which is right below. The threshold we have for recommending new products because this thing is expensive. You're paying a lot of money to get, essentially get a gaming tablet. But I tested out cs. It is cool that it actually worked for a certain type of person with too much money and who just needs the lightest gaming thing possible. I could see it being compelling. Let's see, what is the starting price? $2,100. $2,100 for a gaming tablet. Sam says it costs the same or more as a comparable RRG Zes G 14 with a real RTX 50 70. That is a great laptop. The RRGs Zes G 14, we have praised that laptop so much. So this is not [00:44:00] really meant for anybody ACEs lifts to do these experiments. They're getting there, they're getting there in terms of creating a gaming tablet, but not quite something I'd recommend for everybody at this point. All right. We have a quick email from a listener too. Thank you for sending this in, Jake Thompson. If you wanna send us an email, e podcast in gadget.com, and again, your emails may head into our Asking Gadget section. Jake asks. He's a real estate agent in need of a new laptop. He uses a Chromebook right now and it meets every need he has. Everything they do is web-based, but should they consider alternatives to a premium com Chromebook for their next computer, he says he doesn't mind spending $750 or more if he can get something lightweight, trustworthy with a solid battery life. What would we consider in the search? I would point to, I immediately point to Jake, to our laptop guides because literally everything we mention, the MacBook Air. The Asis [00:45:00] Zen book, S 14, even the Dell Xbs 13 would be not much more than that price. I think more useful than a premium Chromebook because I think the idea of a premium Chromebook is a, is insanity. I don't know why you're spending so much money for a thing that can only do web apps, cheap Chromebooks, mid-range Chromebooks fine, $500 or less. Great. But if you're spending that much money and you want something that's more reliable, that you could do more with, even if everything you're doing is web-based, there may be other things you wanna do. MacBook Windows laptop. There is so much more you can unlock there. Little bit, a little bit of gaming, a little bit of media creation. I don't know, Karissa. Ben, do you have any thoughts on this? What would you recommend or do, would you guys be fine with the Chromebook? Karissa: I like Chromebooks. I thought my first thought, and maybe this is like too out there, but would an iPad Pro fit that fit those requirements? 'cause you can do a lot with an iPad Pro. You Devindra: can do a lot that's actually great battery, Karissa: lightweight, lots of apps. If most everything he's doing is web based, there's. You can probably use iPad apps. Devindra: That's actually a good point. Karissa you can [00:46:00] do a lot with an iPad and iPad Pro does start at around this price too. So it would be much lighter and thinner than a laptop. Especially if you could do a lot of web stuff. I feel like there are some web things that don't always run well in an iPad form. Safari and iPad doesn't support like everything you'd expect from a web-based site. Like I think if you. There are things we use like we use Video Ninja to record podcasts and that's using web RTC. Sometimes there are things like zencaster, something you have to use, apps to go use those things because I, iOS, iPad OS is so locked down. Multitasking isn't great on iPad os. But yeah, if you're not actually doing that much and you just want a nice. Media device. An iPad is a good option too. Alright, thank you so much Jake Thompson. That's a good one too because I wanna hear about people moving on from Chromebooks. 'cause they, send us more emails at podcast@enggadget.com for sure. Let's just skip right past what we're working on 'cause we're all busy. We're all busy with stuff unless you wanna mention anything. Chris, anything you're working on at the moment? Karissa: The only thing I wanna flag is that [00:47:00] we are rapidly approaching another TikTok sale or ban. Deadline Yes. Next month. Speaker: Sure. Karissa: Been a while since we heard anything about that, but, I'm sure they're hard at work on trying to hammer out this deal. Ben: Okay. But that's actually more relevant because they just figured out maybe the tariff situation and the tariff was the thing that spoiled the first deal. So we'll see what happens like at the beginning of July, yeah. I think Karissa: The deadline's the 19th of June Ben: oh, at the beginning of June. Sorry. Karissa: Yeah, so it's. It's pretty close. And yeah, there has been not much that I've heard on that front. So Devindra: this is where we are. We're just like walking to one broken negotiation after another for the next couple years. Anything you wanna mention, pop culture related krisa that is taking your mind off of our broken world. Karissa: So this is a weird one, but I have been, my husband loves Stargate, and we have been for years through, wait, the movie, the TV shows, Stargate [00:48:00] SG one. Oh Devindra: God. And I'm yeah. Just on the Karissa: last few episodes now in the end game portion of that show. So that has been I spent years like making fun of this and like making fun of him for watching it, but that show's Devindra: ridiculously bad, but yeah. Yeah. Karissa: Everything is so bad now that it's, actually just a nice. Yeah. Distraction to just watch something like so silly. Devindra: That's heartwarming actually, because it is a throwback to when things were simpler. You could just make dumb TV shows and they would last for 24 episodes per season. My for how Ben: many seasons too, Devindra: Karissa? Karissa: 10 seasons. Devindra: You just go on forever. Yeah. My local or lamb and rice place, my local place that does essentially New York streetcar style food, they placed Arga SG one. Every time I'm in there and I'm sitting there watching, I was like, how did we survive with this? How did we watch this show? It's because we just didn't have that much. We were desperate for for genre of fiction, but okay, that's heartwarming Krisa. Have you guys done Farscape? No. Have you seen Farscape? 'cause Farscape is very, is a very similar type of [00:49:00] show, but it has Jim Henson puppets and it has better writing. I love Jim Henson. It's very cool. Okay. It's it's also, it's unlike Stargate. It also dares to be like I don't know, sexy and violent too. Stargate always felt too campy to me. But Farscape was great. I bought that for $15. On iTunes, so that was a deal. I dunno if that deal is still there, but the entire series plus the the post series stuff is all out there. Shout out to Farscape. Shout out to Stargate SG one Simpler times. I'll just really briefly run down a few things and or season two finished over the last week. Incredible stuff. As I said in my initial review, it is really cool to people see people watching this thing and just being blown away by it. And I will say the show. Brought me to tears at the end, and I did not expect that. I did not expect that because we know this guy's gonna die. This is, we know his fate and yet it still means so much and it's so well written and the show is a phenomenon. Chris, I'd recommend it to you when you guys are recovering from Stargate SG one loss and or is fantastic. I also checked out a bit of murderbot the [00:50:00] Apple TV plus adaptation of the Martha Wells books. It's fine. It is weirdly I would say it is funny and entertaining because Alexander Skarsgard is a fun person to watch in in genre fiction. But it also feels like this could be funnier, this could be better produced. Like you could be doing more with this material and it feels like just lazy at times too. But it's a fine distraction if you are into like half-baked sci-fi. So I don't know. Another recommendation for Stargate SG one Levers, Karissa Final Destination Bloodlines. I reviewed over at the film Cast and I love this franchise. It is so cool to see it coming back after 15 years. This movie is incredible. Like this movie is great. If you understand the final destination formula, it's even better because it plays with your expectations of the franchise. I love a horror franchise where there's no, no definable villain. You're just trying to escape death. There's some great setups here. This is a great time at the movies. Get your popcorn. Just go enjoy the wonderfully creative kills. [00:51:00] And shout out to the Zap lapovsky and Adam B. Stein who. Apparently we're listening to my other podcast, and now we're making good movies. So that's always fun thing to see Mount Destination Bloodlines a much better film. The Mission Impossible, the Final Reckoning. My review of that is on the website now too. You can read that in a gadget. Ben: Thanks everybody for listening. Our theme music is by Game Composer Dale North. Our outro music is by our former managing editor, Terrence O'Brien. The podcast is produced by me. Ben Elman. You can find Karissa online at Karissa: Karissa b on threads Blue Sky, and sometimes still X. Ben: Unfortunately, you can find Dendra online Devindra: At dendra on Blue Sky and also podcast about movies and TV at the film cast@thefilmcast.com. Ben: If you really want to, you can find me. At hey bellman on Blue Sky. Email us at podcast@enggadget.com. Leave us a review on iTunes and subscribe on anything that gets podcasts. That includes [00:52:00] Spotify. This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/mobile/smartphones/engadget-podcast-the-ai-and-xr-of-google-io-2025-131552868.html?src=rss

We may earn a commission from links on this page.Two months ago, I downloaded and started using the Steppin app, which locks up your most distracting apps and forces you to trade your real-world steps for them. After just three days, I was finding it enjoyable enough to review it, but now that I've spent 68 days with the app, I'm even more impressed. While it's still only available on iOS, an Android version is available on a waitlist and not much has changed in terms of interface or use since I first reviewed it, but I've found it much easier to navigate and incorporate into my life. My social media use is definitely downThe app works by syncing with your Apple Health data and pulling in the steps your phone or fitness tracker record, then converting them to minutes that you can redeem on your preferred apps. Once you add an app to your blocklist, you'll be prompted to open Steppin every time you try to open the blocked app. Then, you have the choice of selecting between one and 30 minutes of unlocked time or just abandoning the pursuit altogether. My settings are calibrated such that 50 steps unlocks one minute of app time. When I started, I added two apps to my blocklist: Instagram and a game called Project Makeover. My time on those apps has absolutely bottomed out. For the most part, this is a good thing. I can't even tell you the last time I watched a nonsensical Reel. On the flip side, though, I'll admit it's actually had a little bit of an impact on my social life. Instagram is where, for better or worse, people broadcast the goings-on in their lives, so I've missed out on a few things like milestone announcements from people I consider friends, but not best friends who would text me good news directly. I do feel rude for not "liking" these posts or congratulating them in the DMs when I eventually see or hear about the news days later. For as much as my mom complains that "social media isn't real life," that's not exactly true anymore and I am missing out on some real-life-adjacent things in my quest to stop looking at so many stupid Reels. I think it's a fine trade-off, but it's definitely something I've noticed.Still, it's given me a lot of time back and I'm grateful for it. I check my screen time every week and have seen it taking a nosedive. This week, my daily average is down 18% from last week, my "pickups"—or the amount of times I've unlocked my phone—are down 14% from last week, and my average notifications are down 8% from last week, though Poshmark, with over 6,000 notifications this week, is an outlier because I get a notification every time someone shares, likes, or buys one of my listings and have been using a third-party app to maximize how often those things happen. Don't worry, though. I set those alerts to appear quietly in my notification feed; they don't generate a push notification that lights up my lock screen.As it all relates to the little dopamine bops my brain has become wired to seek out from short-form videos and bite-sized hot takes, I've definitely noticed I'm just less interested in seeking that stuff out—to a point. Time without it has certainly acted like a detox and I don't necessarily feel the urge to look at posts that will shock, enrage, titillate, or otherwise entertain me, which wasn't true three months ago. That said, I've noticed that it's been a little easier for me to get sucked in by other apps that I didn't used to look at that often and didn't initially add to my blocklist—it was as though some of my previous Instagram time just spilled over into other apps. For a while there, I was spending an inordinate amount of time on X, for example. I noticed, added it to my Steppin blocklist while writing this, and carried on. Streaks make this workI am motivated heavily by arbitrary personal rewards. My workout streak on Peloton keeps me motivated to hop on my bike every day. My self-care streak on Finch keeps me motivated to log all my daily wins. My listing streak on Poshmark and my purchase streak on the Dunkin' Donuts app even earn me real-world rewards like discounted shipping and free coffee, respectively. It's no surprise the streak feature on Steppin has kept me similarly locked in. You maintain your streak by not removing any apps from your blocklist or overriding the app to get at your blocked apps. I have maintained my streak for 68 days and am quite proud of it. Adding new apps to your blocklist doesn't reset your streak and neither does altering the amount of steps you have to take to earn one minute.My steps aren't necessarily up (but I knew they wouldn't be)My distracting app use is definitely down and I'm feeling the positive effects, but Steppin's whole deal is that it facilitates change by encouraging you to be more active. It's supposed to be a two-for-one benefit. I was already active before downloading this and haven't noticed a significant increase in my daily average steps, but I don't mind. I teach three to four spin classes per week and do the majority of my cardio using my Peloton bike at home—while those activities burn calories and keep me active, they don't count toward "steps." I still take as many steps in an average day as I ever did, walking to the post office, Dunkin', the gym, and the bus—all the places I was already walking before installing Steppin. I have noticed I have not just a willingness, but an eagerness, to walk slightly farther distances than normal, though. Sometimes, instead of taking my Poshmark sales to the post office two blocks from my apartment, I walk up to the one 10 blocks away. I also get off the bus two or so stops early from time to time just to walk a little, although that might have more to do with my excitement that it's finally getting warmer outside. Generally, I know I'm doing this so I can bank some minutes of Instagram time, but I don't really end up using it, anyway. My banked minutes reset every Sunday at midnight and I usually end up with about five to six hours of unclaimed time. (It is very annoying to wake up on Sundays and not be able to even glance at Instagram while I brush my teeth and make my coffee, which results in me kind of shuffling around in a circle in the living room to generate some quick steps, but if I were to reconfigure my settings so that my minutes rolled over week-to-week, I'd lose my streak and I simply can't do that.) All in all, my Apple Health data shows I'm taking the same amount of steps now, on average, as I was this time last year, but I consider it a win that I'm even consciously choosing to walk when I wouldn't normally. Just this week, besides going to the farther post office, I've opted to go golfing for my weekly sports outing, walk around a shopping center instead of order all my summer clothes online, and use Peloton's guided walking workouts instead of doing all my cardio on my bike. This is definitely because of Steppin, which is forcing me to consciously make minor, healthy tweaks to my day.When I first reviewed Steppin, I interviewed its founder, Paul English. He mentioned he and his team are looking into ways to count things beyond steps that could equate to unblocked minutes, like time spent reading on a Kindle. That's a feature I'll be looking forward to. It would be great if the workouts my Apple Health records—like my cycling and my strength training—could somehow reflect in my Steppin time bank, although at this point, I'm not sure I'd use the extra minutes, anyway. I'm just not as interested in social media anymore.

Google I/O 2025 happened earlier this week, and while there was no new hardware to speak of, the company barraged developers with new AI announcements, search features and bafflingly pricy subscriptions. First up is the new AI Mode chatbot in search. AI Mode handles more complex queries than traditional search, somewhere between striking up a chat with Gemini and barreling into a traditional Google search. You could, for example, compare multiple cars you’re considering buying or parse travel options for your next big vacation. AI Mode can simulate how you might look in a new piece of clothing (you have to upload a photo of yourself first to do so), and Google can even track pricing in your size and preferred color. AI Mode augments Google’s AI Overviews, powered by Gemini. You’ve probably seen them summarizing your search requests (and often getting things wrong, in my experience). When the Overviews do get things right, it means you never have to leave Google Search, which is great for Google but not for the places where Google got the answer. In fact, the News/Media Alliance says AI Mode is theft. President and CEO Danielle Coffey said, “Google just takes content by force and uses it with no return, the definition of theft.” The most interesting announcement for me was Google’s latest upgrades to video generation and AI video creation tools. Google It unveiled Veo 3, the first iteration of Google’s AI video generator that can make videos with sound slightly more realistic (less unhinged video). It’s joined by a new filmmaking app called Flow, which is based on the experimental VideoFX feature Google’s been working on for a few years. With Flow, you can edit and extend existing shots, add and choose camera movement and perspective controls and even fold AI video content generated with Veo into projects. But it still looks kinda weird. — Mat Smith Get Engadget's newsletter delivered direct to your inbox. Subscribe right here! The news you might have missed The Dyson PencilVac is the most stick-like stick vacuum ever What to expect at WWDC 2025: A new look, Apple Intelligence and more Google’s most powerful AI tools aren’t for us The best Memorial Day tech sales from Amazon, Apple, Samsung and more So far: laptops, speakers, cordless vacuums. In years past, we’ve seen solid Memorial Day sales on many of our favorite tablets, headphones, charging accessories, robot vacuums and more. That’s on top of all the seasonal items that usually get discounted at this time, like smart grills, pizza ovens and outdoor tech. If you’re tempted but not entirely sold, here’s your reminder that Amazon Prime Day typically happens in July. Maybe you can wait. Continue reading. ​​ Google’s $250 subscription for AI Got too much money? Google Maybe you want access to the most impressive AI features Google revealed this week. Maybe you want to play around with Flow. Well, you need either AI Pro ($20 a month) or the insane $250 sub to AI Ultra for some of the most intriguing, creativity-threatening features. Don’t worry, though! AI Ultra has an introductory offer of $125 for the first three months! What. A. Deal. Google is trying to justify its pricing by including YouTube Premium and 30TB of cloud storage. But YouTube Premium is $14 per month — what about the other $200-plus? Continue reading. OpenAI buys Jony Ive’s design startup for $6.5 billion This week’s technology wildcard. io OpenAI is buying Jony Ive’s startup, io, for $6.5 billion. And to celebrate, it took a black and white photo on an iPhone. Ive and his design studio, LoveForm, will continue to work independently of OpenAI. However, the other cofounders will become OpenAI employees alongside about 50 other engineers, designers and researchers. Does this mean physical OpenAI devices on the horizon? Apparently, it won’t be a phone or a wearable. Continue reading. The Fujifilm X Half is a tiny $850 digital camera With an optional retro date stamp. Fujifilm The latest trend-baiting camera from Fujifilm is, well, adorable. The X Half is an 18-megapixel digital compact camera, but it uses half of a 1-inch sensor to shoot 3:4 vertical photos. The name comes from half-frame cameras that use a 35mm film frame sawed in half, which were popular in the ’60s, like the famous Olympus Pen F. It was great for ’60s photographers, who could double-up the shots on a single roll of film — but that’s not really an issue in the digital era. The X Half has the same 3:4 vertical ratio as Fuji’s Instax Mini instant cameras, so you can make prints using an Instax Mini printer. Fujifilm had a viral hit with the X100 VI, so the even more unique (and tiny!) X Half could appeal to a similar group of shooters. It’s now on pre-order for $850 (in black, charcoal silver and silver) with shipping set to start on June 12. Continue reading. Netflix figured out a way to make ads even worse Yeah, it’s using AI. Netflix will roll out AI-generated ads in 2026, which will play in the middle of a show or whenever users hit pause in its ad-supported plans. Netflix has been steadily increasing subscription costs for its ad-free plans, so maybe 2026 will offer a final push to the pricier subscriptions. Continue reading.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/the-morning-after-engadget-newsletter-111549412.html?src=rss