We test a lot of smart home devices, most of which are meant to work indoors. But there are also plenty of great gadgets that work outside, whether it's to balance the pH content of your pool, mow your lawn, or keep an eye on your property when you're out of town.Here, we've gathered some of the best backyard-friendly gadgets we've tested. It's a diverse selection, from beach-friendly speakers to robotic pool cleaners. There's even a TV you can keep out in a thunderstorm. So, if you're looking to bring the technological comforts of home to the great outdoors, look no further. Best Floodlight Camera Eufy Floodlight Camera E340 4.5 Excellent Keep your driveway or yard fully illuminated and secure with the Eufy E340 floodlight camera. It isn't solar-powered like the S340 below it and so you'll have to wire it, but it has a 2,000-lumen floodlight and mechanical pan-and-tilt so you can cover every inch of your property in its range. Eufy Floodlight Camera E340 review Best Battery-Powered Projector Anker Nebula Mars 3 4.0 Excellent The Anker Nebula Mars 3 is a capable 1080p projector that's ideal for use in the backyard or at a vacation rental thanks to its water-resistant design and its battery that can last up to five hours (in Eco Mode, or two hours at full-blast). It features Android 11, so you can stream from plenty of services without plugging in another device. Plus, it has a useful handle so you can lug it anywhere. Anker Nebula Mars 3 review Best Budget Outdoor Security Camera TP-Link Tapo Indoor/Outdoor Home Security Wi-Fi Camera C120 4.5 Excellent If you want to monitor the outside of your home without spending much money, the TP-Link Tapo C120 Indoor/Outdoor is worth looking into. For just $40, it's loaded with features usually only found on more expensive models, including 2K resolution (2,560 by 1,440 pixels), color night vision, and local video storage. The camera records video when it detects motion and offers free intelligent alerts that differentiate between people, pets, vehicles, and other motion events, a feature many competitors charge extra for. It requires a nearby GFCI outlet for power but saves you a lot of money compared with wireless 2K alternatives. TP-Link Tapo Indoor/Outdoor Home Security Wi-Fi Camera C120 review Best Affordable Bluetooth Speaker Anker Soundcore Motion 300 4.0 Excellent The Anker Soundcore Motion 300 is a deceptively small, cheap outdoor speaker, considering the sound it can produce. It offers robust sound with high-res LDAC Bluetooth codec support and is also completely waterproof. Best of all, it's well under $100 and easy to slip into a bag. Anker Soundcore Motion 300 review Best Portable Speaker JBL Charge 5 4.0 Excellent JBL’s portable, outdoor-friendly Charge 5 Bluetooth speaker is an excellent choice for parties. It has a dust-tight build for the beach, with powerful drivers and dual passive radiators to deliver an impressive amount of sound for its size. You don't get a speakerphone function or an adjustable EQ in the companion app, but those are relatively minor drawbacks. For less than $200, you can't do much better. Best Robot Lawn Mower Husqvarna Automower 435X AWD 4.0 Excellent As with every robot lawn mower we've reviewed, the Husqvarna Automower 435X AWD doesn't come cheap, but it does an excellent job of mowing and trimming your lawn. It features both GPS and cellular radios, plus it connects to a slick companion app that enables remote controls, mowing schedules, and IFTTT integrations. Best of all (depending on your yard), it won't struggle to handle hilly terrain. Best Outdoor Smart Plug TP-Link Kasa Smart Wi-Fi Outdoor Plug EP40A 4.0 Excellent TP-Link’s dual-outlet Kasa Smart Wi-Fi Outdoor Plug EP40A ($29.99) doesn't care what smart home system(s) you use: It works with all the major platforms, including Amazon Alexa, Apple HomeKit, Google Assistant, and Samsung SmartThings. That broad compatibility and an IP64 weatherproof rating make it a good choice for bringing smart features to your backyard appliances. TP-Link Kasa Smart Wi-Fi Outdoor Plug EP40A review Best Robot Pool Cleaner Polaris Freedom Plus Cordless Robotic Pool Cleaner 4.0 Excellent Polaris robotic pool cleaners have long been among our favorites because of their sturdy build and superb cleaning performance, and the cordless Freedom Plus continues the streak. It's battery-operated, which means it can clean the pool without a cable for power. It has Bluetooth and Wi-Fi to activate it in its charging station and a light-based remote for controlling it underwater. Otherwise, you can simply let it roam around until it comes back up to charge and empty. Polaris Freedom Plus Cordless Robotic Pool Cleaner review Best Smart Sprinkler System Rachio 3 Smart Sprinkler Controller 4.5 Excellent If you love your lawn enough to install a sprinkler system, you need a good sprinkler controller. The Rachio 3 is one of the best: It supports up to eight separate sprinkler zones with automatic weather-based or custom app-controlled watering schedules. You can even control it with Alexa or Google Assistant voice commands and IFTTT applets. Best Smart Hose Timer Orbit B-Hyve Smart Hose Faucet Timer With Wi-Fi Hub 4.0 Excellent You don't need a full sprinkler system to automate watering your lawn. The Orbit B-Hyve Smart Hose Faucet Timer turns your ordinary garden hose into a smart watering system that you control from your phone, complete with programmed watering schedules and smart weather-based watering. It's a breeze to install and program, and it works with Amazon Alexa voice commands. Best Pool Water Monitor Crystal Water Monitor 4.0 Excellent The Crystal Water Monitor keeps track of your pool's health, with plenty of water analysis features beyond simple pH levels including oxidation reduction potential (ORP) and total alkalinity. It's a bit pricey and requires a subscription after the first year, but the subscription includes a continuous warranty and replacement sensors when needed. Crystal Water Monitor review Best Wireless Outdoor Security Camera Eufy SoloCam S340 4.0 Excellent The Eufy SoloCam S340 is one of the most feature-filled wireless outdoor security cameras available, starting with a built-in solar panel for keeping its battery charged. It also features dual lenses, 3K video, color night vision, mechanical pan and tilt, a built-in spotlight, and local video storage. That's a lot packed into a single camera, and it easily justifies its high price if you want to keep a close eye on your home. Eufy SoloCam S340 review Best Smart Lock Ultraloq Bolt Smart WiFi Deadbolt Fingerprint Edition 4.5 Excellent The Ultraloq Bolt Fingerprint is one of the most flexible smart locks we've seen for securing your front door. You can use an app, your fingerprint, a key, or a PIN code to unlock it. It also works with every major smart home standard except Matter. Ultraloq Bolt Smart WiFi Deadbolt Fingerprint Edition review Best Speaker for Outdoor Parties Sony ULT Field 7 4.0 Excellent If you really want to drive an outdoor party, the big and booming Sony ULT Field 7 is the speaker to get. It's a chunky, completely weatherproof cylinder with stereo woofer/tweeter pairs that can easily fill your backyard with music. It also has colored lighting effects and a mic input for karaoke. Sony ULT Field 7 review Best Smart Bird Feeder Bird Buddy Smart Feeder Pro 4.5 Excellent The Bird Buddy Smart Feeder Pro sends highly shareable snapshots and video postcards of the local bird population to your phone, while its companion app is smart enough to call out their species. Overall, the Bird Buddy is a charming piece of tech for naturalists and an Editors' Choice winner—if you're going to get a smart feeder, get this one. Bird Buddy Smart Feeder Pro review Best Video Doorbell Tapo D225 Video Doorbell 4.0 Excellent Besides a good front door lock, you probably want to be able to see who's knocking or who might be stealing your packages. The TP-Link Tapo D225 video doorbell offers sharp video, both local and cloud storage, and plenty of smart home integration options, and it's surprisingly affordable. Tapo D225 Video Doorbell review Best for Roku-Centric Households Roku Outdoor Smart Plug 4.0 Excellent Roku's Outdoor Smart Plug SE features an IP64 weatherproof build, and makes it easy to control appliances and other electronics with your phone or voice and conveniently tracks how much power they use. It's appealing if you also use Roku devices since you don't need to set up anything else to control the plug from your couch. It also works with Alexa and Google Assistant voice commands, but the TP-Link EP40A offers offers better third-party device support. Roku Outdoor Smart Plug review Best Outdoor TV SunBriteTV 55-Inch Veranda 3 Series (SB-V3-55-4KHDR-BL) 4.0 Excellent Most TVs aren’t built to survive the elements, let alone pouring rain, blowing snow, flying sand, or scorching heat, but SunBriteTV’s Veranda Series 3 is up to the task. It offers a few key advantages over previous Veranda models, including a brighter and much more colorful picture with support for Dolby Vision, as well as a full suite of Android TV features such as streaming media services, Google Assistant voice controls, and the ability to mirror your phone. Best Outdoor Party Lights Govee Lynx Dream Bluetooth & Wi-Fi Outdoor String Lights 4.0 Excellent Light strips are ideal for subtle effects, but if you want a more festive way to illuminate your patio, porch, or any other outdoor space, you're better off with smart string lights like the Govee Lynx Dream. Available in lengths of 48 or 96 feet, each string has dimmable multicolor LED bulbs that you can control with your voice or phone. They also support IFTTT applets, and you get a generous selection of preset lighting scenes and a fun Music Sync mode that's great for parties. Best Smart Door Feather River Doors Smart Glass 4.0 Excellent Smart locks and doorbell cameras might make your front door safe but don't add much to the aesthetic appeal. If you want to give your front door a real high-tech makeover, the Feather River Doors Smart Glass is a unique, expensive option. It's a door with a smart glass window that lets you flip between frosted opaque and completely transparent with the push of a button, a voice command, or an app. Feather River Doors Smart Glass review Protect Your Packages Yale Smart Delivery Box 4.0 Excellent Packages get purloined from porches pretty often, so protect those parcels with the Yale Smart Delivery Box. It's a large drop box you can secure to your porch so delivery drivers can safely set anything that will fit inside. Share an access code in the delivery details section of your orders from Amazon and other services, the driver will enter it into a keypad, the box will open, you'll get a notification, and the lid will automatically lock. Yale Smart Delivery Box review Best Smart Padlock Igloohome Smart Padlock 2 and Bridge 4.0 Excellent Smart locks are good for homes, but what about sheds and backyards? The Igloohome Smart Padlock 2 has you covered. It's a solid, waterproof padlock you can control via Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. It supports unlocking directly through the app, or you can control who can unlock it and at what times by issuing one-time or scheduled PINs and Bluetooth keys. Igloohome Smart Padlock 2 and Bridge review Best Smart Mosquito Repellent System Thermacell LIV Smart Mosquito Repellent System 4.0 Excellent Pesky mosquitoes can ruin an otherwise enjoyable evening in your backyard, but traditional bug sprays are usually unpleasant to use. The Thermacell LIV Smart Mosquito Repellent System is a high-tech alternative that relies on heat-activated repellent cartridges to create 20-foot barriers of protection. The system worked well in testing and we didn't see any vapors or smell any chemicals. You get three repellers in the basic kit, but keep in mind that the system specifically defends against mosquitoes, which means other types of bugs might continue to buzz about. Regardless, it supports both app and voice controls for maximum convenience. Best Wood-Fired Smart Grill Brisk It Origin 940 4.5 Excellent The Brisk It Origin 940 works like any other wood pellet grill, giving you the ability to roast, smoke, bake, and barbecue without having to deal with the mess of charcoal grilling or the taste of lighter fluid. Moreover, it uses generative AI to offer up countless recipes that you can send directly to the grill. In testing, its AI supplied foolproof recipes for pulled pork and whole bass and the grill delivered mouthwatering results. Brisk It Origin 940 review Best Smart Charcoal Grill and Smoker Kamado Joe Konnected Joe Digital Charcoal Grill and Smoker 4.0 Excellent The Kamado Joe Konnected Joe Digital Charcoal Grill and Smoker helps you cook charcoal-fired food to perfection every time. This tank-like kamado grill is simple to use and clean, offers precise temperature control, and works with lots of high-quality accessories. The app is intuitive and has hundreds of recipes you can follow. Kamado Joe Konnected Joe Digital Charcoal Grill and Smoker review Best Smart Gas Grill Weber Genesis EPX-335 Smart Gas Grill 4.0 Excellent The Weber Genesis EPX-335 Smart Gas Grill is built to last and has plenty of smart tech features to enhance the cooking experience. It features Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connectivity, an illuminated cooking chamber, a user-friendly mobile app, and hundreds of programmable recipes. Moreover, there’s plenty of built-in storage for utensils, cooking racks, and cleaning accessories. Weber Genesis EPX-335 Smart Gas Grill review

Credit: Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images TL;DR: Live stream Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final for free on ServusTV. Access this free streaming platform from anywhere in the world with ExpressVPN.Not many fans would have predicted that Arminia Bielefeld would be facing off against VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final, but here we are. Arminia Bielefeld are taking part in the DFB-Pokal final for the first time in their history. Could the third-division team go all the way and do something incredibly special? We've already seen Crystal Palace upset the odds this season by securing their first domestic cup, but no side from Germany's third tier has ever lifted the trophy. It seems unlikely, but Arminia Bielefeld have already knocked out holders Bayer Leverkusen at the semi-final stage. Anything is possible at this point. You May Also Like If you want to watch Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final for free from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.When is the 2025 DFB-Pokal final?Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final kicks off at 2 p.m. ET on May 24. This fixture takes place at the Olympiastadion. Mashable Top Stories Stay connected with the hottest stories of the day and the latest entertainment news. Sign up for Mashable's Top Stories newsletter By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up! How to watch the 2025 DFB-Pokal final for freeArminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final is available to live stream for free on ServusTV. ServusTV is geo-restricted to Austria, but anyone can access this free streaming platform with a VPN. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in Austria, meaning you can bypass geo-restrictions to access this free live stream on ServusTV from anywhere in the world.Unblock ServusTV by following these simple steps:Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)Open up the app and connect to a server in AustriaVisit ServusTVStream Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final for free Opens in a new window Credit: ExpressVPN ExpressVPN (2-Year Subscription + 4 Months Free) $139 only at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee) The best VPNs for streaming are not free, but they do tend to provide free-trial periods or money-back guarantees. By leveraging these offers, you can gain access to ServusTV without committing with your cash. This is not a long-term solution, but it gives you plenty of time to stream Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final before recovering your investment.What is the best VPN for ServusTV?ExpressVPN is the best choice for streaming live sport on ServusTV, for a number of reasons:Servers in 105 countries including AustriaEasy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and moreStrict no-logging policy so your data is secureFast connection speeds free from throttlingUp to eight simultaneous connections30-day money-back guaranteeA two-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for $139 and includes an extra four months for free — 61% off for a limited time. This plan also includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee.Live stream Arminia Bielefeld vs. VfB Stuttgart in the DFB-Pokal final for free with ExpressVPN. Joseph Green Global Shopping Editor Joseph Green is the Global Shopping Editor for Mashable. He covers VPNs, headphones, fitness gear, dating sites, streaming, and shopping events like Black Friday and Prime Day.Joseph is also Executive Editor of Mashable's sister site, AskMen.

Was that the end for Ethan Hunt? Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning was definitely pitched as the conclusion of Tom Cruise’s 30-year saga with Ethan Hunt, and The Final Reckoning has an ending that does feel quite definitive. There are some major character deaths and plenty of the action that fans of this franchise have come to love. Let’s break it all down. What happens in The Final Reckoning? The Final Reckoning is, more than most Mission: Impossible movies, a direct sequel to its predecessor. As a result, it follows Ethan and his team as they attempt to stop Gabriel and the AI system known as The Entity from taking over the world by controlling various nuclear stockpiles. To take down The Entity, Ethan and his team have to hack the source code from inside the sonarsphere at the bottom of the sunken Sevastopol submarine. Then, they must use Luther’s poison pill to take it down. Recommended Videos This leads to Hunt swimming down into the submarine and briefly losing consciousness before ultimately being revived by Grace. After confronting Gabriel, the team is flanked by Jim Phelps Jr. and the team from the CIA. Gabriel flees in a biplane, which leads to the most thrilling set piece of the movie as Hunt chases him down and hangs from the wing of the plane. The two battle in mid-air, with Hunt eventually emerging victorious and securing both the poison pill and the source code. How does the movie end? Paramount Pictures and Skydance Needless to say, Hunt and the team complete their mission and save the world from the Entity. Ethan’s parachute catches on fire as he attempts to put the poison pill in the podkova. He ultimately makes it to the ground intact. All those people concerned that Cruise would kill off his most well-known character turned out to be overreacting. Ethan survives this mission alive. He and the rest of the team briefly reunite in London at the end before dispersing back into the crowd, satisfied that their mission is now complete. Who lives and who dies? Paramount Pictures Although you might expect a climactic installment like this to be filled with deaths, only one major character bites the dust in The Final Reckoning. Luther, who has been with Ethan since the beginning, dies in this chapter, a signal that Ving Rhames can no longer do the required action scenes and that this franchise might truly be coming to a close. Luther’s death comes fairly early on in the movie, when a bomb planted by Gabriel and his men under the streets of London explodes. Nick Offerman’s General Sidney also bites the dust thanks to a bullet from an Entity spy, but he is a new character to the franchise in this installment. Is this the end of Mission: Impossible? Paramount Pictures / Paramount Pictures While it’s impossible to say for sure, the vibes certainly suggest that Cruise and McQuarrie are ready to walk away from this franchise following this installment. Ethan Hunt might still be around to save the day, but this movie’s ending suggests that we might not be privy to the rest of his adventures. He averted nuclear apocalypse, and he’s earned a long break. Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning is now in theaters.

Venture capitalists have always focused on investing in companies that leverage technology to either disrupt established industries or create entirely new business categories. But some VCs are starting to flip the script on their investing styles. Rather than funding startups, they are acquiring mature businesses –such as call centers, accounting firms, and other professional service firms—and optimizing them with artificial intelligence to serve more customers through automation. This strategy, often likened to private equity roll-ups, is being employed by firms such as General Catalyst, Thrive Capital, and solo VC Elad Gil. General Catalyst, touting this as a new asset class, has already backed seven such companies, including Long Lake, a startup that scoops up homeowners’ associations in an effort to make the management of communities more streamlined. Since its founding less than two years ago, Long Lake has secured $670 million in funding, according to PitchBook data. While the strategy is still new, a few other venture outfits have told TechCrunch that they are also considering trying out the investment model. Among them is Khosla Ventures, a firm known for making early bets on risky, unproven technologies with long development timelines. “I think we’ll look at a few of these types of opportunities,” Samir Kaul, general partner at Khosla Ventures, told TechCrunch. Interestingly, this PE-flavored approach could be a surprising benefit to the multitudes of AI startups VCs are backing. If a VC marries old businesses with new technology, AI startups wanting to serve these industries would essentially gain instant access to large, established clients. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW According to Kaul, such access would be helpful when new startups have difficulties securing customers on their own. With the rapid rate of change in AI, the number of startups pouring into the market, and the historically long sales cycles involved in selling to enterprises, such difficulties apply to many AI startups.  But Khosla Ventures wants to proceed with caution. “The companies we’re looking at are very unlikely to lose money,” Kaul said, but he doesn’t want the strategy to ruin the firm’s strong return track record. “My biggest stress in life is I’m managing other people’s money, and I want to make sure that I continue to be a good steward of it.” While Khosla Ventures is starting to “dabble” in AI roll-up investments, Kaul explained that the firm wants to do a few deals to assess if such investments deliver strong returns for the firm before possibly raising money for some kind of vehicle specifically aimed at this investment strategy. If early bets pan out, Khosla would likely partner with a PE-style firm to help it with acquisitions rather than hire a team. “We wouldn’t do it alone, we don’t have that expertise,” he said.

Venture capitalists have always focused on investing in companies that leverage technology to either disrupt established industries or create entirely new business categories. But some VCs are starting to flip the script on their investing styles. Rather than funding startups, they are acquiring mature businesses –such as call centers, accounting firms, and other professional service firms—and optimizing them with artificial intelligence to serve more customers through automation. This strategy, often likened to private equity roll-ups, is being employed by firms such as General Catalyst, Thrive Capital, and solo VC Elad Gil. General Catalyst, touting this as a new asset class, has already backed seven such companies, including Long Lake, a startup that scoops up homeowners’ associations in an effort to make the management of communities more streamlined. Since its founding less than two years ago, Long Lake has secured $670 million in funding, according to PitchBook data. While the strategy is still new, a few other venture outfits have told TechCrunch that they are also considering trying out the investment model. Among them is Khosla Ventures, a firm known for making early bets on risky, unproven technologies with long development timelines. “I think we’ll look at a few of these types of opportunities,” Samir Kaul, general partner at Khosla Ventures, told TechCrunch. Interestingly, this PE-flavored approach could be a surprising benefit to the multitudes of AI startups VCs are backing. If a VC marries old businesses with new technology, AI startups wanting to serve these industries would essentially gain instant access to large, established clients. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW According to Kaul, such access would be helpful when new startups have difficulties securing customers on their own. With the rapid rate of change in AI, the number of startups pouring into the market, and the historically long sales cycles involved in selling to enterprises, such difficulties apply to many AI startups.  But Khosla Ventures wants to proceed with caution. “The companies we’re looking at are very unlikely to lose money,” Kaul said, but he doesn’t want the strategy to ruin the firm’s strong return track record. “My biggest stress in life is I’m managing other people’s money, and I want to make sure that I continue to be a good steward of it.” While Khosla Ventures is starting to “dabble” in AI roll-up investments, Kaul explained that the firm wants to do a few deals to assess if such investments deliver strong returns for the firm before possibly raising money for some kind of vehicle specifically aimed at this investment strategy. If early bets pan out, Khosla would likely partner with a PE-style firm to help it with acquisitions rather than hire a team. “We wouldn’t do it alone, we don’t have that expertise,” he said.

Saudi Arabia’s (KSA’s) attempt to turn from one of the least to most developed data markets in the world has advanced with measures it and the US have taken to encourage investors to build artificial intelligence (AI) datacentres in the country. KSA came closer to finalising plans to treat foreign computer systems as “data embassies”, reassuring firms their customer data would be safely stored in the authoritarian Gulf monarchy. Meanwhile, the US scrapped export controls on its most advanced AI chips, which had threatened to stop KSA from ever realising its plan to become a global leader in AI. Those legal preparations bore fruit this week before either was actually enacted, when Nvidia, whose advanced AI chips are the subject of US export controls, said it had done a deal to ship 18,000 of them to the Saudi state-owned Public Investment Fund. The chips were the first stage in a plan to install “several hundred thousand” Nvidia Grace Blackwell AI chips in five years, consuming 500MW of energy. Political analysts and industry insiders said, before KSA’s plans unfurled this week, that its proposed Global AI Hub Law would allow KSA to get banned AI chips that both it and foreign firms would need to build AI systems in the country. The draft law offers to give foreign computer systems embassy status, so their operators answered only to the laws of their home nations. It would forbid the Saudi state from intruding. KSA concluded a public consultation on the law the day after an Investment Summit, at which US president Donald Trump and Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud signed a broad economic partnership and presided over $600bn of trade deals, the White House said in a statement. They had done $300bn of deals when the conference opened, and aspired to $1tn, the prince told the conference on Tuesday. The deals encompassed defence, energy, tech and health. The audacity of KSA’s ambition was made apparent by data that in February, according to Computer Weekly analysis, showed how among 20 of the most notable data markets in Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA), Saudi capital Riyadh had the second-least of all operational, planned and unfinished datacentres, above only Athens. With 125MW of computing capacity then planned in Riyadh, it was barely 5% of the forecast size of EMEA market leader London, and not 15% of the size of its rival and neighbour, the United Arab Emirates, according to numbers published by commercial estate agent Cushman & Wakefield. The largest datacentre investment deal apparent, among those announced at the Forum, was Saudi firm DataVolt, investing $20bn in the US. Read more about US and Saudi agreements On Monday, the US scrapped the AI Diffusion Rule, by which former president Joe Biden had blocked exports of powerful AI chips to all but a handful of countries because, US AI tzar David Sacks told the conference, it stopped US technology proliferating around the world and stifled strategic partners such as KSA, when it was supposed to hinder AI development in only a few countries. The US had decided instead to model AI policy on Silicon Valley’s software ecosystems, where firms became dominant by publishing application programming interfaces (APIs) that others could use to build on their technology. “They’re able to build these ecosystems without even having any lawyers involved,” said Sacks. “There’s no need for a contract. You just publish an API. In a similar way, the US needs to encourage the world to build on our tech stack. “President Trump said ‘the US has to win the AI race’. How do we win the AI race? We have to build the biggest partner ecosystem. We need our friends like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and other strategic partners and allies, to build on our tech. “We want our technology to spread,” he said. “We want people to use it. We want to become the standard.” KSA’s attempt, meanwhile, to encourage foreign firms to build AI datacentres in the country by allowing their home nations to retain sovereignty over their data was widely commended as a strategic masterstroke. “It’s still an immature market, but the opportunity is huge,” said Stephen Beard, a real estate deal-maker for Knight Frank in Dubai. KSA could be a top-seven datacentre market in a decade. His firm estimated US cloud computing firms had recently committed to $9bn of investment there by 2027. Knight Frank alone was handling $7bn of datacentre deals for firms attracted by the local market opportunity, in a country with 20% lower power costs than the UK, a large, growing population and a non-democratic government able to digitise rapidly without the inconvenience of parliamentary process. President Trump commended KSA’s ruling family for that in a speech in Riyadh this week. “The AI Hub law is optically a fantastic move,” said Beard. “It should go some way to appeasing investors’ concerns. But we are talking about Saudi Arabia. Who decides the law in Saudi Arabia? Any developer looks for a higher return because of the macro risks.” But computer firms would invest there to serve KSA. The idea of KSA becoming a “super-hub” was flawed. Munir Suboh, a lawyer at Taylor Wessing in Riyadh, said the law would give KSA an “unprecedented advantage” over other countries which hesitate to cede sovereignty over foreign facilities. Contrast Saudi Arabia's attempt to make life easier for foreign investors with Europe’s regulatory preoccupation with imposing safety standards. “Traditionally, cross-border data transfers require compliance with multiple data localisation regulations, especially in data-heavy industries,” said Oliver Subhedar, a commercial dispute lawyer with Burlingtons. KSA is seeking a comparative advantage over other states by regulating datacentres themselves.” KSA would slash the cost of risk and compliance for multinationals that ordinarily had to accommodate a host of different regulations around the world, said Jade Masri, managing director of investment advisory R Consultancy in Dubai. That would cut capital costs for investors. “Hyperscalers need this law to import data into KSA to run large language models and generate meaningful AI,” said Amrik Sangha, a consultant with Gateley in Dubai. But KSA needed to address the question of “grey” fibre optic cables that would carry foreign data transfers “without monitoring”, he said. Grey, or “dark”, cables are private, point-to-point communications lines not reliant on local connections. Notwithstanding the unexpected US U-turn, Juliana Rordorf, Middle East director for political consultancy Albright Stonebridge Group, said the law might influence the global debate about data localisation, as well as AI export controls. Neighbouring Bahrain has had a data embassy law since 2018, while UAE, whose datacentre market and planned construction dwarfs that of KSA, recently made bilateral data embassy agreements with France and Italy. Such a law has even been mooted as a way to encourage investors deterred by Europe’s onerous data protection rules, having been pioneered in Estonia, and aped in Monaco, as a means of securing government backup datacentres in Luxembourg, because they otherwise had nowhere to put them safely.

Essex Police has not properly considered the potentially discriminatory impacts of its live facial recognition (LFR) use, according to documents obtained by Big Brother Watch and shared with Computer Weekly. While the force claims in an equality impact assessment (EIA) that “Essex Police has carefully considered issues regarding bias and algorithmic injustice”, privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch said the document – obtained under Freedom of Information (FoI) rules – shows it has likely failed to fulfil its public sector equality duty (PSED) to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The campaigners highlighted how the force is relying on false comparisons to other algorithms and “parroting misleading claims” from the supplier about the LFR system’s lack of bias. For example, Essex Police said that when deploying LFR, it will set the system threshold “at 0.6 or above, as this is the level whereby equitability of the rate of false positive identification across all demographics is achieved”. However, this figure is based on the National Physical Laboratory’s (NPL) testing of NEC’s Neoface V4 LFR algorithm deployed by the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, which Essex Police does not use. Instead, Essex Police has opted to use an algorithm developed by Israeli biometrics firm Corsight, whose chief privacy officer, Tony Porter, was formerly the UK’s surveillance camera commissioner until January 2021. Highlighting testing of the Corsight_003 algorithm conducted in June 2022 by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the EIA also claims it has “a bias differential FMR [False Match Rate] of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing, according to the supplier”. However, looking at the NIST website, where all of the testing data is publicly shared, there is no information to support the figure cited by Corsight, or its claim to essentially have the least biased algorithm available. A separate FoI response to Big Brother Watch confirmed that, as of 16 January 2025, Essex Police had not conducted any “formal or detailed” testing of the system itself, or otherwise commissioned a third party to do so. Essex Police's lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk Jake Hurfurt, Big Brother Watch “Looking at Essex Police’s EIA, we are concerned about the force’s compliance with its duties under equality law, as the reliance on shaky evidence seriously undermines the force’s claims about how the public will be protected against algorithmic bias,” said Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch. “Essex Police’s lax approach to assessing the dangers of a controversial and dangerous new form of surveillance has put the rights of thousands at risk. This slapdash scrutiny of their intrusive facial recognition system sets a worrying precedent. “Facial recognition is notorious for misidentifying women and people of colour, and Essex Police’s willingness to deploy the technology without testing it themselves raises serious questions about the force’s compliance with equalities law. Essex Police should immediately stop their use of facial recognition surveillance.” The need for UK police forces deploying facial recognition to consider how their use of the technology could be discriminatory was highlighted by a legal challenge brought against South Wales Police by Cardiff resident Ed Bridges. In August 2020, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the use of LFR by the force was unlawful because the privacy violations it entailed were “not in accordance” with legally permissible restrictions on Bridges’ Article 8 privacy rights; it did not conduct an appropriate data protection impact assessment (DPIA); and it did not comply with its PSED to consider how its policies and practices could be discriminatory. The judgment specifically found that the PSED is a “duty of process and not outcome”, and requires public bodies to take reasonable steps “to make enquiries about what may not yet be known to a public authority about the potential impact of a proposed decision or policy on people with the relevant characteristics, in particular for present purposes race and sex”. Big Brother Watch said equality assessments must rely on “sufficient quality evidence” to back up the claims being made and ultimately satisfy the PSED, but that the documents obtained do not demonstrate the force has had “due regard” for equalities. Academic Karen Yeung, an interdisciplinary professor at Birmingham Law School and School of Computer Science, told Computer Weekly that, in her view, the EIA is “clearly inadequate”. She also criticised the document for being “incoherent”, failing to look at the systemic equalities impacts of the technology, and relying exclusively on testing of entirely different software algorithms used by other police forces trained on different populations: “This does not, in my view, fulfil the requirements of the public sector equality duty. It is a document produced from a cut-and-paste exercise from the largely irrelevant material produced by others.” Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about every aspect of the story. “We take our responsibility to meet our public sector equality duty very seriously, and there is a contractual requirement on our LFR partner to ensure sufficient testing has taken place to ensure the software meets the specification and performance outlined in the tender process,” said a spokesperson. “There have been more than 50 deployments of our LFR vans, scanning 1.7 million faces, which have led to more than 200 positive alerts, and nearly 70 arrests. “To date, there has been one false positive, which, when reviewed, was established to be as a result of a low-quality photo uploaded onto the watchlist and not the result of bias issues with the technology. This did not lead to an arrest or any other unlawful action because of the procedures in place to verify all alerts. This issue has been resolved to ensure it does not occur again.” The spokesperson added that the force is also committed to carrying out further assessment of the software and algorithms, with the evaluation of deployments and results being subject to an independent academic review. “As part of this, we have carried out, and continue to do so, testing and evaluation activity in conjunction with the University of Cambridge. The NPL have recently agreed to carry out further independent testing, which will take place over the summer. The company have also achieved an ISO 42001 certification,” said the spokesperson. “We are also liaising with other technical specialists regarding further testing and evaluation activity.” However, the force did not comment on why it was relying on the testing of a completely different algorithm in its EIA, or why it had not conducted or otherwise commissioned its own testing before operationally deploying the technology in the field. Computer Weekly followed up Essex Police for clarification on when the testing with Cambridge began, as this is not mentioned in the EIA, but received no response by time of publication. Although Essex Police and Corsight claim the facial recognition algorithm in use has “a bias differential FMR of 0.0006 overall, the lowest of any tested within NIST at the time of writing”, there is no publicly available data on NIST’s website to support this claim. Drilling down into the demographic split of false positive rates shows, for example, that there is a factor of 100 more false positives in West African women than for Eastern European men. While this is an improvement on the previous two algorithms submitted for testing by Corsight, other publicly available data held by NIST undermines Essex Police’s claim in the EIA that the “algorithm is identified by NIST as having the lowest bias variance between demographics”. Looking at another metric held by NIST – FMR Max/Min, which refers to the ratio between demographic groups that give the most and least false positives – it essentially represents how inequitable the error rates are across different age groups, sexes and ethnicities. In this instance, smaller values represent better performance, with the ratio being an estimate of how many times more false positives can be expected in one group over another. According to the NIST webpage for “demographic effects” in facial recognition algorithms, the Corsight algorithm has an FMR Max/Min of 113(22), meaning there are at least 21 algorithms that display less bias. For comparison, the least biased algorithm according to NIST results belongs to a firm called Idemia, which has an FMR Max/Min of 5(1). However, like Corsight, the highest false match rate for Idemia’s algorithm was for older West African women. Computer Weekly understands this is a common problem with many of the facial recognition algorithms NIST tests because this group is not typically well-represented in the underlying training data of most firms. Computer Weekly also confirmed with NIST that the FMR metric cited by Corsight relates to one-to-one verification, rather than the one-to-many situation police forces would be using it in. This is a key distinction, because if 1,000 people are enrolled in a facial recognition system that was built on one-to-one verification, then the false positive rate will be 1,000 times larger than the metrics held by NIST for FMR testing. “If a developer implements 1:N (one-to-many) search as N 1:1 comparisons, then the likelihood of a false positive from a search is expected to be proportional to the false match for the 1:1 comparison algorithm,” said NIST scientist Patrick Grother. “Some developers do not implement 1:N search that way.” Commenting on the contrast between this testing methodology and the practical scenarios the tech will be deployed in, Birmingham Law School’s Yeung said one-to-one is for use in stable environments to provide admission to spaces with limited access, such as airport passport gates, where only one person’s biometric data is scrutinised at a time. “One-to-many is entirely different – it’s an entirely different process, an entirely different technical challenge, and therefore cannot typically achieve equivalent levels of accuracy,” she said. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about every aspect of the story related to its algorithmic testing, including where the “0.0006” figure is drawn from and its various claims to have the “least biased” algorithm. “The facts presented in your article are partial, manipulated and misleading,” said a company spokesperson. “Corsight AI’s algorithms have been tested by numerous entities, including NIST, and have been proven to be the least biased in the industry in terms of gender and ethnicity. This is a major factor for our commercial and government clients.” However, Corsight was either unable or unwilling to specify which facts are “partial, manipulated or misleading” in response to Computer Weekly’s request for clarification. Computer Weekly also contacted Corsight about whether it has done any further testing by running N one-to-one comparisons, and whether it has changed the system’s threshold settings for detecting a match to suppress the false positive rate, but received no response on these points. While most facial recognition developers submit their algorithms to NIST for testing on an annual or bi-annual basis, Corsight last submitted an algorithm in mid-2022. Computer Weekly contacted Corsight about why this was the case, given that most algorithms in NIST testing show continuous improvement with each submission, but again received no response on this point. The Essex Police EIA also highlights testing of the Corsight algorithm conducted in 2022 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), claiming it demonstrated “Corsight’s capability to perform equally across all demographics”. However, Big Brother Watch’s Hurfurt highlighted that the DHS study focused on bias in the context of true positives, and did not assess the algorithm for inequality in false positives. This is a key distinction for the testing of LFR systems, as false negatives where the system fails to recognise someone will likely not lead to incorrect stops or other adverse effects, whereas a false positive where the system confuses two people could have more severe consequences for an individual. The DHS itself also publicly came out against Corsight’s representation of the test results, after the firm claimed in subsequent marketing materials that “no matter how you look at it, Corsight is ranked #1. #1 in overall recognition, #1 in dark skin, #1 in Asian, #1 in female”. Speaking with IVPM in August 2023, DHS said: “We do not know what this claim, being ‘#1’ is referring to.” The department added that the rules of the testing required companies to get their claims cleared through DHS to ensure they do not misrepresent their performance. In its breakdown of the test results, IVPM noted that systems of multiple other manufacturers achieved similar results to Corsight. The company did not respond to a request for comment about the DHS testing. Computer Weekly contacted Essex Police about all the issues raised around Corsight testing, but received no direct response to these points from the force. While Essex Police claimed in its EIA that it “also sought advice from their own independent Data and Digital Ethics Committee in relation to their use of LFR generally”, meeting minutes obtained via FoI rules show that key impacts had not been considered. For example, when one panel member questioned how LFR deployments could affect community events or protests, and how the force could avoid the technology having a “chilling presence”, the officer present (whose name has been redacted from the document) said “that’s a pretty good point, actually”, adding that he had “made a note” to consider this going forward. The EIA itself also makes no mention of community events or protests, and does not specify how different groups could be affected by these different deployment scenarios. Elsewhere in the EIA, Essex Police claims that the system is likely to have minimal impact across age, gender and race, citing the 0.6 threshold setting, as well as NIST and DHS testing, as ways of achieving “equitability” across different demographics. Again, this threshold setting relates to a completely different system used by the Met and South Wales Police. For each protected characteristic, the EIA has a section on “mitigating” actions that can be taken to reduce adverse impacts. While the “ethnicity” section again highlights the National Physical Laboratory’s testing of a completely different algorithm, most other sections note that “any watchlist created will be done so as close to the deployment as possible, therefore hoping to ensure the most accurate and up-to-date images of persons being added are uploaded”. However, Yeung noted that the EIA makes no mention of the specific watchlist creation criteria beyond high-level “categories of images” that can be included, and the claimed equality impacts of that process. For example, it does not consider how people from certain ethnic minority or religious backgrounds could be disproportionally impacted as a result of their over-representation in police databases, or the issue of unlawful custody image retention whereby the Home Office is continuing to hold millions of custody images illegally in the Police National Database (PND). While the ethics panel meeting minutes offer greater insight into how Essex Police is approaching watchlist creation, the custody image retention issue was also not mentioned. Responding to Computer Weekly’s questions about the meeting minutes and the lack of scrutiny of key issues related to UK police LFR deployments, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “Our polices and processes around the use of live facial recognition have been carefully scrutinised through a thorough ethics panel.” Instead, the officer present explained how watchlists and deployments are decided based on the “intelligence case”, which then has to be justified as both proportionate and necessary. On the “Southend intelligence case”, the officer said deploying in the town centre would be permissible because “that’s where the most footfall is, the most opportunity to locate outstanding suspects”. They added: “The watchlist [then] has to be justified by the key elements, the policing purpose. Everything has to be proportionate and strictly necessary to be able to deploy… If the commander in Southend said, ‘I want to put everyone that’s wanted for shoplifting across Essex on the watchlist for Southend’, the answer would be no, because is it necessary? Probably not. Is it proportionate? I don’t think it is. Would it be proportionate to have individuals who are outstanding for shoplifting from the Southend area? Yes, because it’s local.” However, the officer also said that, on most occasions, the systems would be deployed to catch “our most serious offenders”, as this would be easier to justify from a public perception point of view. They added that, during the summer, it would be easier to justify deployments because of the seasonal population increase in Southend. “We know that there is a general increase in violence during those months. So, we don’t need to go down to the weeds to specifically look at grievous bodily harm [GBH] or murder or rape, because they’re not necessarily fuelled by a spike in terms of seasonality, for example,” they said. “However, we know that because the general population increases significantly, the level of violence increases significantly, which would justify that I could put those serious crimes on that watchlist.” Commenting on the responses given to the ethics panel, Yeung said they “failed entirely to provide me with confidence that their proposed deployments will have the required legal safeguards in place”. According to the Court of Appeal judgment against South Wales Police in the Bridges case, the force’s facial recognition policy contained “fundamental deficiencies” in relation to the “who” and “where” question of LFR. “In relation to both of those questions, too much discretion is currently left to individual police officers,” it said. “It is not clear who can be placed on the watchlist, nor is it clear that there are any criteria for determining where AFR [automated facial recognition] can be deployed.” Yeung added: “The same applies to these responses of Essex Police force, failing to adequately answer the ‘who’ and ‘where’ questions concerning their proposed facial recognition deployments. “Worse still, the court stated that a police force’s local policies can only satisfy the requirements that the privacy interventions arising from use of LFR are ‘prescribed by law’ if they are published. The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch through freedom of information requests, strongly suggesting that these even these basic legal safeguards are not being met.” Yeung added that South Wales Police’s use of the technology was found to be unlawful in the Bridges case because there was excessive discretion left in the hands of individual police officers, allowing undue opportunities for arbitrary decision-making and abuses of power. Every decision ... must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity. I don’t see any of that happening Karen Yeung, Birmingham Law School “Every decision – where you will deploy, whose face is placed on the watchlist and why, and the duration of deployment – must be specified in advance, documented and justified in accordance with the tests of proportionality and necessity,” she said. “I don’t see any of that happening. There are simply vague claims that ‘we’ll make sure we apply the legal test’, but how? They just offer unsubstantiated promises that ‘we will abide by the law’ without specifying how they will do so by meeting specific legal requirements.” Yeung further added these documents indicate that the police force is not looking for specific people wanted for serious crimes, but setting up dragnets for a wide variety of ‘wanted’ individuals, including those wanted for non-serious crimes such as shoplifting. “There are many platitudes about being ethical, but there’s nothing concrete indicating how they propose to meet the legal tests of necessity and proportionality,” she said. “In liberal democratic societies, every single decision about an individual by the police made without their consent must be justified in accordance with law. That means that the police must be able to justify and defend the reasons why every single person whose face is uploaded to the facial recognition watchlist meets the legal test, based on their specific operational purpose.” Yeung concluded that, assuming they can do this, police must also consider the equality impacts of their actions, and how different groups are likely to be affected by their practical deployments: “I don’t see any of that.” In response to the concerns raised around watchlist creation, proportionality and necessity, an Essex Police spokesperson said: “The watchlists for each deployment are created to identify specific people wanted for specific crimes and to enforce orders. To date, we have focused on the types of offences which cause the most harm to our communities, including our hardworking businesses. “This includes violent crime, drugs, sexual offences and thefts from shops. As a result of our deployments, we have arrested people wanted in connection with attempted murder investigations, high-risk domestic abuse cases, GBH, sexual assault, drug supply and aggravated burglary offences. We have also been able to progress investigations and move closer to securing justice for victims.” Read more about police data and technology Metropolitan Police to deploy permanent facial recognition tech in Croydon: The Met is set to deploy permanent live facial recognition cameras on street furniture in Croydon from summer 2025, but local councillors say the decision – which has taken place with no community input – will further contribute the over-policing of Black communities. UK MoJ crime prediction algorithms raise serious concerns: The Ministry of Justice is using one algorithm to predict people’s risk of reoffending and another to predict who will commit murder, but critics say the profiling in these systems raises ‘serious concerns’ over racism, classism and data inaccuracies. UK law enforcement data adequacy at risk: The UK government says reforms to police data protection rules will help to simplify law enforcement data processing, but critics argue the changes will lower protection to the point where the UK risks losing its European data adequacy.

Sabrina Ortiz/ZDNETA thief who steals your smartphone can try to crack it themselves, sell it locally, or use it to commit fraud. But your stolen phone could also travel as far away as China. A recent investigation by The Financial Times (paywall) found that a particular building in Shenzhen's Huaqiangbei district is home to a treasure trove of second-hand iPhones, including stolen devices.Though several locations in and around the Huaqiangbei district are hot spots for trading used phones, FT's investigation focused mostly on the Feiyang Times building. Much of the buying and selling here is for phones that were legitimately traded in by their owners, according to the reporter who covered the action. But at least some of the activity involves stolen phones, leading the Feiyang Times to be known as China's "stolen iPhone building." Also: 5 warning signs that your phone's been hacked - and how to fight backThe Times relates one unfortunate individual whose iPhone 15 Pro was stolen by thieves in London. Using tracking technology, the victim followed the phone to its final destination in the Huaqiangbei district. After sharing his experience on LinkedIn, he discovered that many other people had encountered similar situations. A woman in North Carolina whose phone was stolen tracked it on its journey from Charlotte to Miami and then finally to Shenzhen, according to WRAL News. In this case, the thieves compounded the crime with a spin on the usual ransomware ploy. In texts sent to the woman, they told her that unless she deactivated the stolen phone, they would sell her private information on the black market, meaning the dark web. Phone theft is on the rise, especially in major cities like London, Paris, and New York. In February, the UK's Metropolitan Police said that phone theft in London is a business that generates £50 million ($67 million) per year. In one week, UK police officials captured 1,000 stolen devices and made 230 arrests, FT reported. A phone that can be cracked easily due to a weak passcode is more lucrative to thieves. In that case, they can steal any personal information and then wipe the phone to sell it as fully functional. However, even a locked and protected phone is valuable. Thieves can simply strip it and sell the used components -- sort of a chop shop for mobile devices.Also: Rebooting your phone daily is your best defense against zero-click attacks - here's whyOne phone seller who spoke to the FT reporter revealed that phones with security measures such as IDs generally sell for about 70% less than unlocked ones. Such phones are then broken down into parts and sold in Shenzhen at a small profit.OK, now that you're sufficiently worried about carrying around your phone, how can you protect it from thieves? Miguel Fornés, a cybersecurity expert at VPN and security service Surfshark, shares his thoughts on phone snatching and offers tips on securing your phone. 1. Take advantage of anti-theft settings iPhones and Android devices both offer theft protection features that can help you better secure your phone. On an iPhone, go to Settings and select Face ID & Passcode. Swipe down the screen, tap the setting for Stolen Device Protection, and turn on its switch.Also: 7 ways to lock down your phone's security - before it's too lateOn an Android device, head to Settings and select Google or Google services. Swipe down the screen for All Services and select Theft Protection. You can now turn on options such as Identity Check, Theft Detection Lock, Offline Device Lock, and Remote Lock. 2. Use the Find my feature iPhones and Android devices also both provide a Find My tool to help you locate a stolen or lost phone. On an iPhone, go to Settings, tap your account name at the top, select Find My, and tap Find My iPhone. Turn on the switches for Find My iPhone, Find My network, and Send Last Location. You can then sign in to another Apple device or the iCloud Find website if you need to track your device. On an Android device, go to Settings, select Security & privacy, and then tap Device finders. Select Find My Device and turn on its switch. To track your phone, you can use Google's Find Hub app on another device or sign in to the Find My Hub website.3. Save your phone's IMEI number If your phone is ever stolen, your provider or even the police can use the IMEI number to try to track it down and even disable it. To find your IMEI number on an iPhone or Android phone, launch the dial pad in the Phone app and dial *#06#. You can then take a screenshot of the IMEI number and the other numbers on display and store the information in a safe and secure place. 4. Use a strong passcode Do you use a simple four-digit number for your passcode, maybe something like 1234? That's just asking for trouble. As with any PIN or password, you need to use one that's strong and secure to prevent a thief from accessing your phone. On an iPhone, you can create a custom numeric or alphanumeric code. On an Android device, you can create a numeric code with up to 16 digits. Though it may be tempting to stick with a four-digit code, consider one with at least six digits for added security. And don't use the same PIN everywhere. "Let's be honest, using the same login everywhere is basically leaving your digital front door wide open," Fornés says. "Avoid simple PINs, like 1234 or birth dates. This makes it harder for thieves to access your phone, even if they watch you type it in. Never use the same passcode for your phone and apps, especially banking. If a thief unlocks your phone, reused PINs could grant full access to sensitive data." 5. Turn off access to Control Center on an iPhone Control Center on an iPhone provides easy entry to key features and controls. For this reason, you should prevent access to this screen when your device is locked. On your iPhone, go to Settings and select Face ID & Passcode. Also: How to open Control Center on your iPhone without swiping from top: 4 easier waysSwipe down the screen to the section on "Allow Access When Locked" and turn off the switch for Control Center.6. Back up your device You can always replace a stolen phone with a new device. But you can't replace the photos, files, or other important information on it unless you have a backup. For that reason, make sure you back up your phone and all its content on a regular basis. You can easily back up and sync your iPhone or Android phone with all its data and then recover it if necessary. "Your more cherished memories might be easily recovered in case of a stolen phone," Fornés says. "After all, nowadays the device is just a 'container' of our data. Be sure your images, documents, etc., are properly backed up."7. Protect your physical space Finally, you naturally want to avoid having your phone stolen in the first place. That means you need to safeguard it when you're in public areas, especially in crowded places. "Always stay vigilant in public, especially in crowded or high-risk areas," Fornés says. "Keep your phone out of sight when not in use. Use an anti-spying screen so people around you can't easily see what you're doing. Also, consider using an anti-theft case with a chain or metallic lanyard to deter quick snatching."Get the morning's top stories in your inbox each day with our Tech Today newsletter.Featured

Meta signed another big solar deal on Thursday, securing 650 megawatts across projects in Kansas and Texas. American utility and power generation company AES is currently developing the solar-only projects, with 400 megawatts to be deployed in Texas and 250 megawatts in Kansas, the company told TechCrunch. Meta said it signed the deal to power its data centers, which have been expanding to support its growing AI operations. The company already has more than 12 gigawatts of capacity in its renewable power portfolio. AES typically signs new power purchase agreements two to three years before they begin commercial operations, and the average term for such deals is 15 to 20 years, spokesperson Katie Lau said. This is the fourth solar deal that Meta has announced this year. All are in Texas, with one clocking in at 595 megawatts, another at 505 megawatts, and the final two hitting 200 megawatts each. Texas has become a hotbed of solar development recently, leading the nation in new solar capacity installed in 2023 and 2024, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. The state has ample sunshine, quick permitting, and speedy grid connections. The latter two are particularly helpful when deploying a new solar capacity. With permitting and grid connections in place, a solar farm can be built in months rather than years. It doesn’t hurt that new solar is one of the cheapest forms of new generating capacity, even before subsidies are considered. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW Plus, data centers needn’t wait for construction to finish since solar farms can be phased in, with electricity flowing before project completion. Indeed, in a press release, AES CEO Andrés Gluski called out solar’s “fast time-to-power and low-cost electricity” as key attributes that have attracted hyperscalers like Meta.

Meta signed another big solar deal on Thursday, securing 650 megawatts across projects in Kansas and Texas. American utility and power generation company AES is currently developing the solar-only projects, with 400 megawatts to be deployed in Texas and 250 megawatts in Kansas, the company told TechCrunch. Meta said it signed the deal to power its data centers, which have been expanding to support its growing AI operations. The company already has more than 12 gigawatts of capacity in its renewable power portfolio. AES typically signs new power purchase agreements two to three years before they begin commercial operations, and the average term for such deals is 15 to 20 years, spokesperson Katie Lau said. This is the fourth solar deal that Meta has announced this year. All are in Texas, with one clocking in at 595 megawatts, another at 505 megawatts, and the final two hitting 200 megawatts each. Texas has become a hotbed of solar development recently, leading the nation in new solar capacity installed in 2023 and 2024, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. The state has ample sunshine, quick permitting, and speedy grid connections. The latter two are particularly helpful when deploying a new solar capacity. With permitting and grid connections in place, a solar farm can be built in months rather than years. It doesn’t hurt that new solar is one of the cheapest forms of new generating capacity, even before subsidies are considered. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW Plus, data centers needn’t want for construction to finish since solar farms can be phased in, with electricity flowing before project completion. Indeed, in a press release, AES CEO Andrés Gluski called out solar’s “fast time-to-power and low-cost electricity” as key attributes that have attracted hyperscalers like Meta.