Feed aggregator

GMKtec has just launched the Evo-X1 Pro, a premium AI-focused mini PC built around AMD's new Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 chip, 64GB LPDDR5 RAM, with an OCuLink port that lets you bolt on a full desktop GPU when you need more graphics power. To mark the new release, readers in the US and the UK can save on the launch price with this Early Bird discount.

The 1TB Evo-X1 Pro is now $1580 (was $1600), while the 2TB model is $1750 (was $1770). Meanwhile, in the UK, the GMKtec Evo X1-Pro 1TB drops to £1230 (was £1250), with the 2TB config running to £1360 (was £1380).

I'm particularly excited because the previous model proved to be an incredible powerhouse that scored 4.5 stars in our review - and I reckon this upgrade is going to be an even bigger beast.

Today's top GMKtec mini PC deal

Built around AMD's Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (12 cores, 24 threads, boosting to 5.2GHz) with Radeon 890M integrated graphics and a dedicated NPU rated up to 55 TOPS. This configuration comes with 64GB of LPDDR5X-6400 memory and a 1TB PCIe 4.0 SSD, with a second M.2 slot free for expansion. A 2TB config is also on sale.

In the UK: now £1230 (was £1250)

Offer ends August 15View Deal

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 is a Zen 5-based chip with 12 cores and 24 threads, 24MB of L3 cache, and boost speeds up to 5.2GHz — a step up from the mid-range mini PCs we usually see in this category.

It pairs that with AMD's XDNA 2 NPU, which GMKtec rates at up to 55 TOPS on its own, or up to 86 TOPS when combined with the rest of the system, aimed at running local AI models and LLM workloads directly on the machine rather than in the cloud.

Graphics come from AMD's Radeon 890M, based on RDNA 3.5 with 16 compute units — enough for mainstream AAA gaming at moderate settings without a discrete card.

The standout feature here is the OCuLink port, a PCIe 4.0 x4 connection that lets you attach an external desktop GPU when you want considerably more graphics performance for gaming or GPU-accelerated AI and creative work. GMKtec notes OCuLink doesn't support hot-swapping, so any external GPU needs to be connected or disconnected with the system powered off.

Memory tops out at 64GB of LPDDR5X-6400, and storage is handled by dual M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 slots supporting up to 8TB combined, so there's real room to grow beyond the 1TB or 2TB the machine ships with.

GMKtec is pairing this hardware with what it calls an Arctic Cooling System — a dual-fan setup with a dedicated CPU cooler, a separate system fan, dual air intakes, and dust-resistant construction, designed to keep the machine both cool and quiet during sustained AI or gaming workloads.

Connectivity is generous for the category: up front you get USB4, two USB-A 3.2 Gen2 ports, the OCuLink port, and a 3.5mm audio jack, while the rear adds HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.1, and two more USB-A 3.2 Gen2 ports. Triple-display output is supported at up to 8K resolution. Networking covers dual 2.5GbE LAN and Wi-Fi 7, which should comfortably outpace most home and small-office setups.

Worth flagging before you buy: this is a brand-new launch, so there are no independent reviews yet to verify GMKtec's performance and AI TOPS figures - although the previous model impressed us throughout our testing (you can read the review here).

And while the Radeon 890M handles mainstream gaming reasonably well, you'll need to add an external GPU over OCuLink for serious 1440p or 4K gaming performance.

For anyone wanting a compact desktop that can run local AI workloads today and take a discrete GPU down the line, the Evo-X1 Pro is a genuinely interesting new option.

• US: See all mini PC deals at GMKtec
• UK: See all Evo mini PCs at GMKtec

Taiwan Travelogue, which received the International Booker Prize this year, are seen at a bookstore in Taipei on May 21, 2026.'/>

The author and translator of Taiwan Travelogue, the winner of the 2026 International Booker Prize, discuss identity and history amid the debate over Taiwan's colonial ties to Japan and escalating geopolitical pressure from China.

(Image credit: I-HWA CHENG)

The Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus is a speaker that requires no introduction. It’s a truly iconic model, and there really is nothing else on the market that looks quite like it.

With its mollusk-like build, tapered damping tubes and exceptional sound, it's no wonder that Bowers & Wilkins proudly announces it as “the last wish” of co-founder John Bowers. And even though the Nautilus launched all the way back in 1993, it's still being produced to this day.

During my time at the High End Vienna show earlier this year, I got a chance to check out the B&W Nautilus for myself, and got to learn more about its weird and wonderful design. I even had the chance to speak with Bowers & Wilkins’ Product Marketing Director, Andy Kerr, about why people keep coming back to the speaker, even 33 years down the line — and you may be surprised by just how popular it still is…

Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus: an introduction

(Image credit: Future)

For the uninitiated, the Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus is a floor-standing loudspeaker that boasts a striking spiral design and tapered tubes, resulting in one of the most unique looking models that money can buy. But despite its off-the-wall appearance, its design is very much rooted in utility.

Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus specs at a glance

Price: $110,000 / £100,000 (per pair) in standard colorways
Dimensions: 47.6 x 16.9 x 43.5 inches / 1210 x 430 x 1105mm
Weight: 190.7lbs / 86.5kg
Design philosophy: 4-way tube-loaded loudspeaker
Speaker drivers: 1x 300mm (12 inch) aluminum cone bass; 1x 100mm (4 inch) aluminum/polymer sandwich cone lower midrange; 1x 50mm (2 inch) aluminum dome upper midrange; 1x 25mm (1 inch) aluminum dome high-frequency
Frequency range: -6dB at 10Hz and 25kHz

Kerr explained to me that, in essence, the speaker attempts to create the impression of drive units “hanging in free air,” operating without the typical restrictions of a traditional cabinet or enclosure.

While B&W still decided to harness the “pressurization benefits of some form of an enclosure,” he said, there was an active effort to remove the audibility of the box — something that was achieved by using the tapered tubes that the Nautilus is still known for.

“Each tube increases in length relative to the size of the drive unit,” said Kerr. “So you've got a relatively small one for the upper tweeter, slightly longer still for the lower mid, and then this [tube for the bass section] is three meters long but kind of swirled up”.

As the driver operates, pressure dissipates into the Nautilus' tubes — which are also padded with “an absorbent wadding material” — eliminating rearward reflections and drastically reducing distortion while capturing that sense of the driver operating in free space. “It's one of the best loudspeakers you'd hear at disappearing.”

And while he accepts that the Nautilus may not be suited for a studio environment in the same way that the Bowers & Wilkins 801 D5 are, Kerr states, “As an experiment for reducing the audibility of a loudspeaker, it’s perfect”.

The legacy lives on

(Image credit: Future)So what's with the name?

What does Nautilus even mean? Well, it’s a cephalopod (meaning it's related to octopuses and squid, for instance), with a spiral-shaped shell. It uses jet propulsion to traverse the ocean depths, and its name (from Greek nautilos) means ‘sailor’. The more you know, eh?

The ingenious design and sound of the Nautilus has remained, and Kerr notes that many people still purchase the speaker to this day. In fact, so many people are interested in having a Nautilus of their own that there are years' worth of backorders.

I was told that B&W is still producing approximately 50 pairs a year for sale — pretty impressive given that each individual pair takes around 31 days to make, all meticulously done by hand.

Did you know TechRadar now has membership?

(Image credit: Future)

Become a TechRadar Insider by simply clicking 'Join Now' at the top of this page. Have a question? Please email membership@techradar.com

Audio enthusiasts can grab a pair of Nautilus speakers in the standard colorways — Black, Midnight Blue, and Silver — for a sum typically in the $110,000 or £100,000 ballpark. But there’s a slightly more expensive alternative, one that’s proved very popular with buyers: a custom option.

That’s right, for around £120,000 (US pricing was not shared), you can order the Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus with special paint, and get the speaker in just about any color imaginable. I was shown a handful of customer photos, and there were some exceptional finishes to behold, including McLaren Orange, Ferrari Red, and Minty Green variants, only adding to the unique nature of the Nautilus.

As things stand, there are three years — yes, three years — of backorders. Even though the Nautilus is a speaker like no other, the sheer volume of interest is seriously impressive all of these years later.

There are few games as eagerly anticipated as Control Resonant, Remedy Entertainment's upcoming action-adventure RPG. After all, we've endured a long wait since 2019's Control introduced us to the Lynchian world of the red-hued Hiss and the Federal Bureau of Control.

The good news is that the wait is nearly over — because Resonant arrives in less than two months. And the really good news is that it looks great; so great, in fact, that we gave it one of our Best of Summer Games Fest awards.

So, what will the sequel bring to the table to stand out from its predecessor in a notable way? After playing a lengthy two-hour preview of Control Resonant recently, I had a chance to speak with the lead gameplay designer, Sergey Mohov, and put that question to him, among others.

Melee masterpiece

(Image credit: Remedy Entertainment)

Unsurprisingly, combat is the centerpiece in Resonant, just as it was in the original. In that game, you played as Jesse Faden, equipped with a trusty shapeshifting handgun and tasked with finding her brother, Dylan — who is now the main character in Resonant.

You could unlock several different ammo types that would essentially act as different gun types: shotgun, automatic machine gun, grenade launcher, and so on. Those were joined by various powers, some of which allowed players to levitate or hurl objects at enemies.

In Resonant, Remedy seeks to double down on that combat-heavy gamplay, but specifically with melee, using a shapeshifting weapon, the Aberrant, and other supernatural abilities. The result reminds me of the best hack-and-slash games, such as Capcom's Devil May Cry 5.

Despite my hack-and-slash comparisons, though, Resonant's combat was developed mostly with its predecessor in mind, and that's what both the preview build and Mohov's answers make clear right away.

"We actually have a pretty long and eclectic list of references, and they're not all video games," Mohov says. "If I had to name one game that this game [Resonant] is trying to be like, it would be the original Control. That's our number one reference for everything.

"With our creative director, we started figuring out what makes Control, Control? That was a big question, because we wanted to make a sequel that is spiritually and experientially similar to the first game, so it still feels like a Control game. But we also wanted to have more of this melee-focused, in-your-face, aggressive gameplay at the same time."

(Image credit: Remedy Entertainment)

While Resonant's structure and identity draw primarily from Control, Mohov stresses that the Remedy team also wasn't shy about incorporating elements from other games as well.

"We use references for the individual parts of the experience. I'm a big fan of DMC 2 and DMC 3, and PlatinumGames' titles. It's really hard to name one single reference, but I think if you play the game more, you'll notice that there are things that have been done in other games, but I don't think you can directly say Resonant is 'exactly like this other thing.'

"We learn lessons from all of these other projects to see what works and what doesn't, but I think you probably haven't played anything that is exactly like this."

Admittedly, the first Control was a game that I couldn't stick with throughout its runtime, mostly due to its somewhat convoluted storyline and combat being limited to Jesse Faden's shapeshifting gun.

(Image credit: Remedy Entertainment)

Mohov confirms that the "core experience" in Resonant should be around "30 hours", while the completionist experience is expected to be within the "50 hours" ballpark.

That means it'll be longer than the first game, but with the impressive RPG elements on display, and with numerous weapon and skill types to choose from, it's an even more appealing experience than before — and one that doesn't require a full playthrough of the first entry.

"I don't think you have to play the first Control game to play Resonant," says Mohov, "but if you do, it will enrich your experience, especially narratively. We put in a Control recap, right at the top of the main menu, though, so you don't need to [play it]."

Walking away from my two-hour playtest and conversation with Mohov, I'm more convinced than ever that Remedy's step into a full melee-focused Control experience is going to pay off, and I can't wait to get my hands on it when it launches on September 24, on PS5, Xbox Series X, Xbox Series S, and PC.

It's no secret that AI technology is advancing faster than it can be regulated, with some execs now even saying so themselves. But it seems anything which threatens the advancement of AI must be avoided, in fear of that always present and ever dangerous ‘other’.

The latest installment of ‘please, dear God, slow down before it gets too dangerous’ comes in the form of Pacing the Frontier. Thousands of staff from frontier AI companies once again pleading for a halt in the development of AI technology.

It's all too predictable that the reason from the top for continuing development will be that China ‘threatens’ to catch up. China deploying advanced AI in the military, or in the police, or using it for spying are the threats most often cited, as if these same things aren’t happening at home and around the rest of the world.

So now that China is distilling US AI models to produce rivals at a cheaper cost, I play my tiny violin - the hypocrisy of intellectual property rights suddenly becoming important to AI companies because they could lose money is comical.

Respect my rights

The rights AI companies are citing are the same rights AI companies may have inadvertently violated in hoovering up public data to train their models in the first place, but that's still up for debate.

But AI companies can claim that this trove of public data is a trade secret as a way to prevent human creators from accessing AI training data to see (and possibly prove) that their content has been stolen. Rights for me but not for thee.

What I find funny is that the average American has more in common with the average Chinese person than they do with an AI company. Does an AI company enjoy cooking? Drawing or reading? Can it go out after work for a hot drink or a cold beer? Does it worry that if it doesn’t make any money this month everything might come crashing down? Possibly the last one.

Somehow the bond of national identity tied between a person and a corporate entity is expected to be more powerful than shared human experience. It’s also the bond that AI companies and those in power use to press the accelerator on the machine, just so long as we, the ‘good guys’, are ‘winning’.

Beware the ‘bad guys’

This myth of the external ‘other’, or the ‘bad guys’, is a powerful propaganda tool. But it only works in a vacuum. If you can directly engage with those you are told are your enemy and you find they are not so different from yourself, the myth of the ‘other’ evaporates. (Social media and the internet is a double edged sword in this regard, but that's a discussion for another time).

So if Chinese companies can produce a rival product that doesn’t annihilate a monthly token budget in a matter of days, I say let them. If you are worried about China having your data, are you not worried about who is currently collecting it? If you are worried about China deploying AI systems in the military, police, surveillance, and cybersecurity, are you not worried about it happening closer to home?

The warning that using Chinese AI models is dangerous because they can steal your business secrets is especially weak, especially when you consider Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella’s warning that US AI companies are already doing exactly that, and selling it to your competition.

So the next time an AI company complains about their intellectual property being stolen, remember that it is just the great, ever-turning wheel of innovation. Or if you are warned about the data collection policies of a foreign AI model, check the policies of the tech closer to home. You’d be surprised at just how much they already know about you.

a critical review of Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey in the London Review of Books. Wilson has loved Greek myths since childhood and has translated both the Iliad and Odyssey. She has tattoos of a spear on one leg and a bow on the other — she says they represent Achilles and Odysseus.'/>

The renowned classics scholar caused a stir when her critical review of Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey went viral. Wilson explains her reaction to the film and why she's translating the poem again.

Microsoft is retiring its legacy Threat Intelligence portal on August 1. Security teams should verify licenses, permissions, investigation projects, APIs, and automated workflows before the cutoff.

The post Microsoft Threat Intelligence Portal Retires August 1: 4 Checks Before the Cutoff appeared first on TechRepublic.

Trust your VPN software updates keep you safe? Believe that downloading the latest release protects you from most known threats?

You might be surprised to learn that there could be a set of invisible vulnerabilities lurking inside your state-of-the-art VPN. That's because more than half of Windows VPNs we analyzed include OpenVPN code that hasn’t been updated in over a year — potentially leaving you exposed to a wide range of security and performance threats.

OpenVPN is a protocol that determines how data is encrypted and routed between a user's device and a VPN server. Thanks to its open-source status, it became the industry's de facto standard, serving as the foundation for many commercial VPN services.

Because OpenVPN is developed as a separate open-source project, however, VPN providers often update their apps while leaving the bundled OpenVPN component unchanged. New interfaces, bug fixes, and major features may arrive regularly, but the code responsible for the fundamental VPN connection may be severely out of date.

Cracking the kernel

This July, we audited 32 Windows VPN clients ranging from established, multinational companies to smaller, older and free apps, to check the OpenVPN version included in their latest release.

The results were shocking. A massive 56% (18 of 32) use an OpenVPN version that is more than a year old, 41% (14) use configurations that are over two years old, 22% (7) rely on code more than four years old. And a terrifying 12.5% (4) use code that is at least five years old.

Not all providers were equal. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many of the best VPNs — including NordVPN, Windscribe and Proton VPN — use OpenVPN releases as recent as April 2026. At the other end of the scale, Turbo VPN and VyprVPN continue to use OpenVPN 2.4.7 from April 2019.

It might seem logical that companies with greater commercial resources are the ones investing more into keeping the app's codebase up to date. But having significantly older versions of the OpenVPN protocol raises significant privacy and security concerns regardless.

A variety of hidden risks

So is this really a big deal?

Marijus Briedis, CTO at NordVPN, tells TechRadar: “Because OpenVPN — like any project — regularly patches vulnerabilities, hardens its codebase, and improves performance, running a version that’s years behind might miss security components that current up-to-date versions offer.”

Jason Xu, senior app developer at Windscribe, argues that previously disclosed vulnerabilities could actually be more serious, precisely because they have been documented. “An attacker doesn’t even need to find a new bug; they can just read the changelog,” he notes.

Indeed, OpenVPN regularly releases Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs): six vulnerabilities were registered in 2025, six in 2024, one in 2023, and one in 2022. This means providers with older versions likely did not adopt the upstream releases containing those fixes.

Of course, the risks have nuances. Running an older version does not necessarily mean an application is vulnerable to every newly discovered flaw. For example, if an older build does not include a feature which later caused a vulnerability, it is unaffected.

Briedis stressed that security can be maintained through other means, including backported patches, vendor fixes, configuration mitigations and/or removing vulnerable functions. However, he said the real concern is when none of those measures are in place and when there’s no visibility into whether they are.

The issues involved can be broad and numerous. Outdated dependencies, like running an older version of OpenSSL, are just some of the potential issues.

There is also a broader maintenance cost. According to Dr. Peter Membrey, Chief Research Officer at ExpressVPN, older versions can become increasingly difficult to integrate with current operating systems and cryptographic libraries. “Being several years behind can indicate a growing body of security, compatibility, and operational debt,” he says.

Ultimately, “the further behind you fall, the harder each upgrade gets,” Xu adds. “That’s the trap. Nobody decides to be five years behind; they just keep saying ‘next quarter’”.

A question of stack

Adopting a new OpenVPN release is a fundamental change requiring compatibility testing across platforms, regression checks, staged rollouts, and validation that nothing breaks in the software stack — a process which often takes months to complete.

Because of that, VPN providers say they are not obliged to adopt every upstream release.

NortonVPN, which is in the process of moving to the cutting-edge OpenVPN version at the moment, explains that each update needs to be assessed and tested carefully to make sure it delivers clear benefits without introducing stability, performance, or compatibility issues for customers.

Indeed, Karolis Kaciulis, Leading System Engineer at Surfshark, agrees that a six-to-18-month delay can be reasonable provided critical vulnerabilities are addressed promptly.

Some VPN providers whose updates date back more than two years have cited specific reasons to justify the delay.

StrongVPN, for example, states that work on its proprietary internal protocol has postponed the planned update to OpenVPN 2.7. Meanwhile, ClearVPN claims to ensure security by applying its own security patches.

Finally, PureVPN states that it is staying with OpenVPN 2.6.12 because it has developed custom technologies based on that version and because OpenVPN 2.7 removes support for the Wintun driver.

Time to DIY

So what can you do? Is it time to shun anyone not using the most recent version of OpenVPN?

Not necessarily. Many providers now use newer protocols like WireGuard by default, which generally benefit from more active maintenance.

In fact, several providers are in the process of phasing out OpenVPN support for faster, more agile protocols.

Proton VPN is one of the providers keeping pace, running one of the most recent OpenVPN builds on its Windows app. However, a spokesperson said that over time, the company "will start to phase out OpenVPN support in our client apps" while retaining the protocol on servers for legacy routers and older devices.

The spokesperson also noted that the protocol is "slow and bloated" in comparison to Proton VPN's Stealth and WireGuard protocols, though OpenVPN remains "robustly secure."

So whether you're using an app with the latest OpenVPN configuration or not, it might be worth switching protocols anyway.

But if you really want to know, you can audit your VPN by checking the client settings, diagnostic logs, or official release notes to confirm which version of OpenVPN your provider is using and when it was last updated.

A key red flag is protocol dependencies that are more than 12 to 18 months old without a documented security or compatibility reason as it may suggest that critical security updates have been delayed.

If you're still unsure, you can always contact your VPN provider's support team to receive more transparent info about timelines for protocol updates and security patches.

Ultimately, the risk to your security may well be limited. However, in the world of VPNs — where attention to detail in regards to security is the currency of providers — one might well ask: “Why not simply support the latest and most secure option?”

Why not indeed…

Google’s pushing a more hands-off experience with its latest Gemini for Mac release.

Though attack vectors and threat environments have changed since the advent of the internet, one thing has remained a constant – humans use software, and software has predefined parameters.

That distinction is exactly why social engineering remains so effective. Cybercriminals exploit predictable weaknesses in human behavior, granting them accesss to accounts and other sensitive information.

For the first time ever, that long-standing assumption is being turned on its head. In today's increasingly autonomous world, AI agents can take action on behalf of humans, creating an entirely new class of attack vectors that target machine autonomy rather than human weaknesses.

The boundary between software and user is getting really, really blurry

The purpose of an agent isn't just to retrieve information or wait for a human's approval – its responsibilities can include interpreting objectives, developing plans, choosing tools, accessing data autonomously and taking actions. In short, agentic AI bridges both software and user.

This doesn't make everything we know about software and SaaS security obsolete, but it does mean that many of the assumptions underpinning today's controls are no longer sufficient. Humans will continue to use conventional software, but alongside agentic workflows, leaving organizations responsible for security both types of environment.

Thankfully, the fundamentals remain – least privilege, strong authentication and separation of duties will all be central to the next wave of cybersecurity. What will change, though, is how those principles will be applied to agents, which don't behave as software or human users.

AI agents need identities of their own

The first requirement is to stop treating agents like features hidden inside applications, or software in their own right. An enterprise agent should actually have a first-class identity just like any other human colleague.

This means AI agents should have unique identities, named owners (line managers), clearly defined purposes and specific permissions. But they should also have their own lifecycles akin to software, such as creation dates, review points and expiry dates.

"Expiry dates or periodic recertification are important because agents can otherwise become long-lived access paths that are harder to govern than human users," Zendesk Chief Security Officer Vinay Patel explained to me in an exclusive interview.

At the end of the day, these are the sorts of controls that already exist for human users because organizations already understand the risks of unmanaged access, due to role changes or company departures, for example.

Without treating AI agents as users in their own right, companies risk accumulating abandoned agents, stored credentials and even data access paths whose original business purposes may have disappeared – an unthinkable consequence for humans, so one that should be treated just as severely for AI agents.

Human-in-the-loop automation is the future

Importantly, AI agents don't just occupy one space. They can act autonomously, be commissioned on a task-by-task basis by a human user, or operate somewhere between the two. Patel told me that an "audit trail should preserve both identities: the human who initiated or authorized the action and the agent that executed it."

For fully autonomous agents, a log tying them back to their "owner, purpose, and approved policy" is still just as important.

But of course, it all boils down to flawless visibility and effective management. "Companies need inventory and discovery across the places agents can be created or embedded, including SaaS platforms, internal automation tools, development environments, and third-party integrations," Patel added.

Organizations must monitor not only which agents are deployed, but whether their permissions and behavior remain aligned with their original business purposes.

Recent NIST research raises many of the same priorities, including verifiable records of agent actions, intent, data sources and generated output. But while NIST is developing guidance around agent adoption, visibility, control and accountability, agents are already being deployed, and often without the necessary safeguards.

Traditional IAM falls short

A separate Cloud Security Alliance paper concluded, "traditional identity and access management (IAM) protocols, designed for static applications and human users, can’t keep up."

The researchers argue that credentials and permissions should be task-specific, short-lived and easily revokable, unlike human identities which are generally set for the duration of their employment contracts.

The CSA also recommends applying zero-trust principles by treating agent compromise as a credible possibility. By enforcing least privilege, isolating systems and continuously verifying access, organizations can limit the potential consequences of an attack or misconfiguration as they adapt to this new security environment.

Accountability starts before deployment

Patel says that, "accountability should not collapse onto a single party by default." It's as much the responsibility of adopters as it is lawmakers, and even end users.

Key to understanding vulnerabilities and potential risks is identifying where the failure occurred: "user’s instruction, the agent owner’s governance, the developer’s design, the platform provider’s controls, or the enterprise’s deployment model."

Above all else, Zendesk's Chief Security Officer argues that "accountability must be defined before deployment, not reconstructed after an incident."

In the short term, this work could slow AI adoption as companies address controls that might've been overlooked during early, informal experimentation. The danger arises when a successful pilot actual progresses into production without pausing to define ownership, permissions and other policies.

Before scaling agent deployments, organizations should pause other ensure the right foundations are in place. Governance becomes much harder to retrofit once an agent has actually been embedded.

Preparing for the autonomous workforce

The question is no longer how, or even whether, AI agents will become part of the enterprise – it's about how employers can establish the necessary controls before they're more common than human workers.

The most valuable security investments today focus on visibility, control, accountability and governance, not forgetting over investments tech admins are making across data foundations and interoperability.

But thankfully, none of this requires a business to abandon the security principles it's spent decades developing. All it requires is for leaders to extend and reframe these for the agentic world.

The future enterprise will combine the human-software environment we already know with a new end-to-end agentic layer – neither one of these will replace the other. Companies preparing for this new hybrid will see the greatest returns.

Light spoilers follow for Spider-Man: Brand New Day.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day was meant to signal a fresh era for Tom Holland’s Peter Parker. With 2021’s Spider-Man: No Way Home effectively clearing the narrative slate and stripping away his safety net, this latest chapter had a golden opportunity to chart a bold, unburdened new course for a character whose cinematic journey now enters its 24th year.

And yet, tripped up by familiar Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) shortcomings and weighed down by my own sky-high expectations, Brand New Day yields a final product that is undeniably fun, but ultimately falls short of greatness.

Web of lies

"What's going on with you, Spider-Man?" (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Four years have passed in-universe since No Way Home, whose ending saw Doctor Strange cast a multiverse-saving spell to make everyone, including Parker's girlfriend M.J. (Zendaya) and best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon), forget that he was Spider-Man.

Since then, our friendly neighborhood hero has fully committed to cleaning up the streets of New York City. While that mission has been incredibly successful, it's come at a cost — that being said, the webslinger is practically shedding his civilian identity and becoming a social recluse.

Brand New Day yields a final product that is undeniable fun, but ultimately falls short of greatness

That long-term, self-imposed isolation has seemingly dire consequences for Spider-Man, whose world is not only upended after he sees M.J. with a new man, but also by a sudden metamorphosis — one that super-charges his arachnid-like abilities — that he struggles to control.

Throw in the emergence of a powerful and invisible new threat that only Spidey can apparently stop, and the Marvel icon must turn detective, determine if this new superpowered being is as bad as he's been led to believe, and once again realize that with great power comes great responsibility.

Brand New Day's action is well worth the entry fee (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

That infamous slogan is one that Holland and director Destin Daniel Cretton hung their proverbial hats on throughout development.

The pair have spoken at length about making a Spider-Man movie unlike anything we've seen before, and that's especially true from an action spectacle standpoint. Whether it's the fights that Spidey's involved in — the Hulk and The Hand battles deserve special mention for being intense and imaginative — or simply giving us a first-person view of him swinging through his hometown, Spider-Man 4 is the webslinger at his acrobatic, wily, and inventive best. Full credit to Cretton, stunt co-ordinator and second unit director Peng Zhang, and his team for delivering some of the best action in a Spider-Man film to date.

I was disappointed that Spider-Man 4 didn't examine Parker's hermit lifestyle more thoroughly

Brand New Day isn't as adept at depicting loneliness and other mental health issues, mind you. Indeed, for all of the talk that Brand New Day puts Peter Parker in a mental and emotional echo chamber, that's not entirely accurate.

Sure, Parker spends much of the first two acts lying to himself about why he has to maintain his lone wolf status, a storytelling quirk that allows Holland to further tap into Parker's guilt complex and the volitional burden of responsibility he carries. Even so, he still interacts — and characteristically quips — with everyone who appears in the Marvel Phase 6 flick, and, while it would be a puzzlingly dialog-light film for a usually extroverted character if he didn't, I was disappointed that Spider-Man 4 didn't examine Parker's hermit lifestyle more thoroughly throughout its 142-minute runtime.

M.J. and Ned have slightly smaller rolls in Spider-Man 4 compared to their previous MCU film outings (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

In fact, the movie's broader emotional impact didn't hit me as hard as I'd hoped.

Yes, there are myriad moving moments — particularly in the third act — where Holland, Zendaya, and MCU newcomer Sadie Sink deliver emotional gravitas aplenty. Sink, whose much-discussed mystery character in Spider-Man 4 I’ll come back to shortly, gives a performance that easily leaves a lump in the throat

Nevertheless, Thunderbolts* tackles its weightier themes — particularly around mental health — with a sensitivity that Spider-Man 4 lacks. Heck, I'd even say No Way Home and another of Holland's previous MCU outings in Spider-Man: Far From Home hit me much harder emotionally than this fourth entry; a take I certainly didn't expect to have prior to my Brand New Day screening.

Lost souls

Spider-Man and The Punisher's crowd-pleasing odd-couple dynamic is a sight to behold (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Its action notwithstanding, Spider-Man: Brand New Day does a much better job at making New York feel like a city populated by more than one hero and villain at any given time.

It's no coincidence that sequences involving Bernthal and Holland are some of the funniest and most memorable

That might sound silly for a shared universe like the MCU and for a film franchise that's seen the wallcrawler mingle with other Marvel characters. Still, the fact that he shares the screen with individuals who haven't operated in his orbit before is a positive, especially when, the Avengers movies aside, Marvel appears determined to keep its heroes apart despite their situational proximity.

It's an ingredient characterized best by Spider-Man's quarrelsome, sibling-like dynamic with Jon Bernthal's Frank Castle, aka The Punisher.

Ordinarily, Bernthal's foul-mouthed, unhinged anti-hero would have no place in a family-friendly MCU flick. However, his inclusion in Brand New Day allows Bernthal and Holland's incredibly natural chemistry to shine, and it's no coincidence that sequences involving the pair are some of the funniest and most memorable that Spider-Man 4 has to offer.

Test yourself with our Tom Holland Spider-Man movie quiz!

Think of yourself as a Tom Holland Spidey super-fan? See if you have what it takes to be crowned by the best of the best by tackling our extremely tough Tom Holland Spider-Man movie quiz!

The film’s self-contained, 'pick-up-and-read' comic book vibe further extends to Spider-Man: Brand New Day's full cast of characters.

Returning favorites like Mark Ruffalo's Bruce Banner/The Hulk alongside newcomers in Tramell Tillman's Bill Metzger and Liza Colón-Zayas' Jean DeWolff add to its narrative flavor. However, its overstuffed roster leaves a slight aftertaste as few of them get the necessary development or screentime they require.

Who are you under the hood, Ms. Sink? (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Among the supporting cast, Sink gets the most substantial character arc. Brand New Day waits until the 70-minute mark to finally confirm who she's playing, but it compensates for the inevitable reveal by soon putting the Stranger Things alumnus at the heart of its tale, albeit with mixed results.

On the upside, Spider-Man 4 thoughtfully draws parallels between Holland and Sink's characters. Driven by opposing worldviews rooted in personal tragedy, their dichotomous dynamic fuels the second act, and I'll readily admit I was completely engrossed by their superhuman tango.

I was completely engrossed by Holland and Sink's superhuman tango

The problem that Brand New Day runs into is that, by placing Sink at its narrative center, it quickly succumbs to the classic MCU pitfall: setting up future storylines instead of concentrating on its actual protagonist.

Indeed, by act three, Spidey becomes something of a passenger in his own film, and it isn't until its admittedly poignant climax that the focus shifts back to the wallcrawler. That's no slight on the talented Sink's performance, but, not for the first time, it's hard to watch another Spider-Man solo movie and not think that the titular hero has, at times, been overshadowed in his own story.

My verdict

From a recency bias viewpoint, it would be easy — and arguably lazy — to label Brand New Day as the best Spider-Man movie of all-time.

In some ways, you can argue that's true. This is the most relatable Peter Parker has ever felt in a live-action capacity; it ditches the weary multiversal shenanigans in favor of returning to the character's classic street-level roots, and is Holland's most mature outing yet as the legendary webslinger.

That said, while its ending strikes an optimistic note for an all-but-confirmed fifth solo film, Brand New Day is an ironic title for a movie that — much like its protagonist for large parts of this flick — refuses to move on from the past. Its sentimental attachment to legacy characters like Ned and M.J., paired with obstructive MCU world-building, reveals a franchise that hesitates to be as progressive as it could and should be. It’s an endlessly entertaining, ground-level Spider-Man story — it just can’t quite bring itself to let that brand new day truly dawn.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day is out now in the UK, and hits theaters in the US and other regions on Friday, July 31.

Light spoilers follow for Spider-Man: Brand New Day.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day was meant to signal a fresh era for Tom Holland’s Peter Parker. With 2021’s Spider-Man: No Way Home effectively clearing the narrative slate and stripping away his safety net, this latest chapter had a golden opportunity to chart a bold, unburdened new course for a character whose cinematic journey now enters its 24th year.

And yet, tripped up by familiar Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) shortcomings and weighed down by my own sky-high expectations, Brand New Day yields a final product that is undeniably fun, but ultimately falls short of greatness.

Web of lies

"What's going on with you, Spider-Man?" (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Four years have passed in-universe since No Way Home, whose ending saw Doctor Strange cast a multiverse-saving spell to make everyone, including Parker's girlfriend M.J. (Zendaya) and best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon), forget that he was Spider-Man.

Since then, our friendly neighborhood hero has fully committed to cleaning up the streets of New York City. While that mission has been incredibly successful, it's come at a cost — that being said, the webslinger is practically shedding his civilian identity and becoming a social recluse.

Brand New Day yields a final product that is undeniable fun, but ultimately falls short of greatness

That long-term, self-imposed isolation has seemingly dire consequences for Spider-Man, whose world is not only upended after he sees M.J. with a new man, but also by a sudden metamorphosis — one that super-charges his arachnid-like abilities — that he struggles to control.

Throw in the emergence of a powerful and invisible new threat that only Spidey can apparently stop, and the Marvel icon must turn detective, determine if this new superpowered being is as bad as he's been led to believe, and once again realize that with great power comes great responsibility.

Brand New Day's action is well worth the entry fee (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

That infamous slogan is one that Holland and director Destin Daniel Cretton hung their proverbial hats on throughout development.

The pair have spoken at length about making a Spider-Man movie unlike anything we've seen before, and that's especially true from an action spectacle standpoint. Whether it's the fights that Spidey's involved in — the Hulk and The Hand battles deserve special mention for being intense and imaginative — or simply giving us a first-person view of him swinging through his hometown, Spider-Man 4 is the webslinger at his acrobatic, wily, and inventive best. Full credit to Cretton, stunt co-ordinator and second unit director Peng Zhang, and his team for delivering some of the best action in a Spider-Man film to date.

I was disappointed that Spider-Man 4 didn't examine Parker's hermit lifestyle more thoroughly

Brand New Day isn't as adept at depicting loneliness and other mental health issues, mind you. Indeed, for all of the talk that Brand New Day puts Peter Parker in a mental and emotional echo chamber, that's not entirely accurate.

Sure, Parker spends much of the first two acts lying to himself about why he has to maintain his lone wolf status, a storytelling quirk that allows Holland to further tap into Parker's guilt complex and the volitional burden of responsibility he carries. Even so, he still interacts — and characteristically quips — with everyone who appears in the Marvel Phase 6 flick, and, while it would be a puzzlingly dialog-light film for a usually extroverted character if he didn't, I was disappointed that Spider-Man 4 didn't examine Parker's hermit lifestyle more thoroughly throughout its 142-minute runtime.

M.J. and Ned have slightly smaller rolls in Spider-Man 4 compared to their previous MCU film outings (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

In fact, the movie's broader emotional impact didn't hit me as hard as I'd hoped.

Yes, there are myriad moving moments — particularly in the third act — where Holland, Zendaya, and MCU newcomer Sadie Sink deliver emotional gravitas aplenty. Sink, whose much-discussed mystery character in Spider-Man 4 I’ll come back to shortly, gives a performance that easily leaves a lump in the throat

Nevertheless, Thunderbolts* tackles its weightier themes — particularly around mental health — with a sensitivity that Spider-Man 4 lacks. Heck, I'd even say No Way Home and another of Holland's previous MCU outings in Spider-Man: Far From Home hit me much harder emotionally than this fourth entry; a take I certainly didn't expect to have prior to my Brand New Day screening.

Lost souls

Spider-Man and The Punisher's crowd-pleasing odd-couple dynamic is a sight to behold (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Its action notwithstanding, Spider-Man: Brand New Day does a much better job at making New York feel like a city populated by more than one hero and villain at any given time.

It's no coincidence that sequences involving Bernthal and Holland are some of the funniest and most memorable

That might sound silly for a shared universe like the MCU and for a film franchise that's seen the wallcrawler mingle with other Marvel characters. Still, the fact that he shares the screen with individuals who haven't operated in his orbit before is a positive, especially when, the Avengers movies aside, Marvel appears determined to keep its heroes apart despite their situational proximity.

It's an ingredient characterized best by Spider-Man's quarrelsome, sibling-like dynamic with Jon Bernthal's Frank Castle, aka The Punisher.

Ordinarily, Bernthal's foul-mouthed, unhinged anti-hero would have no place in a family-friendly MCU flick. However, his inclusion in Brand New Day allows Bernthal and Holland's incredibly natural chemistry to shine, and it's no coincidence that sequences involving the pair are some of the funniest and most memorable that Spider-Man 4 has to offer.

Test yourself with our Tom Holland Spider-Man movie quiz!

Think of yourself as a Tom Holland Spidey super-fan? See if you have what it takes to be crowned by the best of the best by tackling our extremely tough Tom Holland Spider-Man movie quiz!

The film’s self-contained, 'pick-up-and-read' comic book vibe further extends to Spider-Man: Brand New Day's full cast of characters.

Returning favorites like Mark Ruffalo's Bruce Banner/The Hulk alongside newcomers in Tramell Tillman's Bill Metzger and Liza Colón-Zayas' Jean DeWolff add to its narrative flavor. However, its overstuffed roster leaves a slight aftertaste as few of them get the necessary development or screentime they require.

Who are you under the hood, Ms. Sink? (Image credit: Sony Pictures/Marvel Entertainment)

Among the supporting cast, Sink gets the most substantial character arc. Brand New Day waits until the 70-minute mark to finally confirm who she's playing, but it compensates for the inevitable reveal by soon putting the Stranger Things alumnus at the heart of its tale, albeit with mixed results.

On the upside, Spider-Man 4 thoughtfully draws parallels between Holland and Sink's characters. Driven by opposing worldviews rooted in personal tragedy, their dichotomous dynamic fuels the second act, and I'll readily admit I was completely engrossed by their superhuman tango.

I was completely engrossed by Holland and Sink's superhuman tango

The problem that Brand New Day runs into is that, by placing Sink at its narrative center, it quickly succumbs to the classic MCU pitfall: setting up future storylines instead of concentrating on its actual protagonist.

Indeed, by act three, Spidey becomes something of a passenger in his own film, and it isn't until its admittedly poignant climax that the focus shifts back to the wallcrawler. That's no slight on the talented Sink's performance, but, not for the first time, it's hard to watch another Spider-Man solo movie and not think that the titular hero has, at times, been overshadowed in his own story.

My verdict

From a recency bias viewpoint, it would be easy — and arguably lazy — to label Brand New Day as the best Spider-Man movie of all-time.

In some ways, you can argue that's true. This is the most relatable Peter Parker has ever felt in a live-action capacity; it ditches the weary multiversal shenanigans in favor of returning to the character's classic street-level roots, and is Holland's most mature outing yet as the legendary webslinger.

That said, while its ending strikes an optimistic note for an all-but-confirmed fifth solo film, Brand New Day is an ironic title for a movie that — much like its protagonist for large parts of this flick — refuses to move on from the past. Its sentimental attachment to legacy characters like Ned and M.J., paired with obstructive MCU world-building, reveals a franchise that hesitates to be as progressive as it could and should be. It’s an endlessly entertaining, ground-level Spider-Man story — it just can’t quite bring itself to let that brand new day truly dawn.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day is out now in the UK, and hits theaters in the US and other regions on Friday, July 31.

Samsung may give the Galaxy Watch 9 and Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 five major OS upgrades, but IT teams should wait for model-specific support terms before changing refresh plans.

The post Samsung Reportedly Extends Galaxy Watch 9 Support to Five OS Upgrades appeared first on TechRepublic.

Everything seems to cost more in 2026, and website builders are no exception.

In the past five years, we have seen the likes of Wix, Squarespace, and Shopify shift from simple building and hosting tools into full-blown hubs for launching and growing your business. We've seen new tools, features, and AI integrations hitting the market in a bid to win the battle of the best website builders.

But with innovation comes expense, and that gets passed onto the customer.

This isn't a surprise, but at a time where everything seems to be making a bigger dent in our bank balance, large, unforeseen price rises can be hard to stomach, which is why some Squarespace customers are feeling upset – I set out to find out more.

Squarespace price increases

(Image credit: Reddit)

One Squarespace user reported an over 60% increase in their subscription fee between 2021 and 2026, taking their annual cost from $216 to $348 and posting on Reddit that they “feel like I’m paying for things I sincerely did not ask for, the biggest thing being AI.”

Of course, price increases are to be expected as the cost of providing a service also goes up. Plus, it’s common not to use each and every feature of platforms that we subscribe to.

So, what’s the problem?

Well, most of us can stomach paying a couple more dollars for features we don’t use, especially when the features we do use are great. But when those features cost anywhere from $20 to $60 a year, it's easy to start questioning whether it’s worth it.

Squarespace also had to send an apology email following a ‘pricing implementation error’ affecting certain plans, meaning some customers received a higher increase than intended. However, according to Squarespace, no customer was incorrectly charged as a result, and those impacted have been contacted.

So, to summarize. Prices are up, but not as much as Squarespace initially told us – that’s one way to soften the blow, I guess.

Is this really an issue?

A lot goes into how much website builders charge for subscriptions and, as we all know, basically everything has gotten more expensive recently. However, it seems strange to me that Squarespace doesn’t offer more transparency and certainty around upcoming price increases.

Let me be clear: I want to see platforms continue to roll out tools that help small businesses grow themselves online. But I’d also like to see them better recognize that at least a large proportion of their audience are entrepreneurs, solopreneurs, and hobbyists who find it difficult to absorb hefty price rises.

In fact, Squarespace started life targeting creatives such as photographers and artists, giving them the tools they need to create high-impact portfolios online. Many long-term customers likely still fit into this category, although as Squarespace has evolved, they may feel forgotten about.

I am confident that an increase in subscription costs is primarily rooted in increased operational costs. However, increasing prices so much beyond inflation and failing to properly communicate additional value seems like an odd strategy in an industry that is facing more competition than ever.

In fairness, it is certainly a hard thing for website builders to balance.

• Fail to develop the platform, and users feel they are paying for a tool that is no longer relevant
• Invest in development, but charge more, and users feel the financial burden
• Change your pricing model, charging extra for every feature, and users become fatigued by piling costs.

How does Squarespace pricing compare?

I compared Squarespace's 2025 to 2026 price increase to two of its closest competitors, Wix and Shopify. You can look at the results in two ways.

Firstly, this is clearly a significant jump. Across four plans, Squarespace has increased the price of three by 18% to 25%, although existing customers may see smaller increases. In comparison, Wix has only increased the price of one plan from 2025 to 2026 by around 8%, and Shopify hasn't increased any.

This certainly seems significant.

However, if you step back and look at the bigger picture, Squarespace subscriptions are roughly comparable* with others in the same space. Its entry-level plan now costs just $7/year more than Wix’s equivalent plan.

It gives you more too, allowing you to sell online with its Basic ($19/mo) plan. You have to pay a minimum of $29/mo with both Wix and Shopify to do that.

Of course, comparing plans isn't apples to apples, with each provider offering access to different tools and features at each subscription tier.

What does Squarespace say?

We are continually investing in our platform to help customers build and grow their businesses.

Squarespace representative

I reached out to Squarespace to get some insight into why subscriptions have increased so significantly.

"We understand that cost is an important consideration for small business owners, and we don't take pricing changes lightly” a Squarespace representative told me.

“We recently added to every website plan capabilities previously available only on higher-tier plans or through third-party services, and we are continually investing in our platform to help customers build and grow their businesses."

It makes sense. Platforms like Squarespace have to invest in improving the tools and features they offer, or they get left behind. Those costs get passed onto the user.

Yet ‘we’ve added more to your plan’ is likely little reassurance to the Reddit user that already feels they are paying more for tools they don’t use. So what can they do?

What can you do about price rises?

(Image credit: Squarespace/Edited with Gemini)

I’ve fallen into this trap before, and it sucks.

You have an essential website that costs you more each year, but you aren’t getting anything more from it. Then you are left with a difficult choice. Do you stick where you are and just absorb costs? Or do you look to migrate to a different platform?

This is the dilemma I faced with my personal website in 2025. I felt like I was spending a small fortune with Wix to keep my simple one-page website live. In the end, I moved it to Hostinger; you can read about how I got on with it here.

Spoiler: it saved me $168 a year, but I had to build my site again from scratch.

Although it comes too late for the Reddit user and for me, the advice I would give someone in a similar situation is to better understand what you need from a website builder before subscribing.

All too often we opt for the likes of Wix and Squarespace for convenience, and although that shouldn’t be undervalued, it comes at the price of being locked into a platform and at the mercy of future price rises.

The likes of Wix and Squarespace have developed in recent years from true website builders (with hosting built in) into full business platforms with features ranging from invoicing and bookings to integrations with dropshippers. To get good value for money, you need to be using at least some of these additional features.

That is exactly why I use Wix to run my small martial arts gym. I use the scheduling tool, ecommerce features, AI writer, pay links, and built-in CRM on a weekly basis. This makes price rises easier to absorb, especially when compared to paying for individual platforms to achieve the same outcome.

Clients would rather pay more for something that keeps getting better than pay less for something standing still.

Miles Noble, Founder of SquareLocator

Platforms like Squarespace can offer a huge range of tools for web-building professionals too.

“For many websites, Squarespace is arguably the best platform on the market, due to its hosting, security and stability. Realistically, a platform cannot keep improving at this pace without costs rising with it,” shares Miles Noble, Founder of SquareLocator and Director of Altitude Design, “Clients would rather pay more for something that keeps getting better than pay less for something standing still.”

Yes, these website builders can be used to build simple, static websites, but you will be paying over the odds.

In this case, a smarter approach may be opting for a web hosting provider that offers a built-in website/page builder. Although you are still subject to price increases, these are generally more affordable and can make migration easier, giving you greater options if you’re ever unhappy.

You could also code your own site, or use an AI tool to code a site for you, then simply pay for hosting. This offers ultimate flexibility and affordability but can also be time-intensive, requires some technical knowledge, and lacks the support you need when things go wrong.

Do website builders charge too much?

Price rises that are so significantly above inflation are a lot for some users to stomach. Although these increases could be the result of rising costs, it would make sense for website builders to give more notice of upcoming increases and better communicate why those price increases have come about.

Website builders like Squarespace are certainly a great option for small businesses and website agencies that will make use of its generous tools and features, but they fail to serve customers looking for a simple website with predictable future costs. They also make it difficult for those customers to migrate their website should they feel the need.

*

Squarespace

Price (annual)

Wix

Price (annual)

Shopify

Price (annual)

Basic

$228

Light

$221

Core

$348

Core

$377

Basic

$348

Plus

$588

Business

$468

Grow

$948

Advanced

$1,188

Business Elite

$1,908

Advanced

$3,887

We called the Ryzen 9 9950X3D the best processor on the market when we tested AMD's flagship CPU, praising its "fantastic overall performance" and near-perfect gaming results. Now, it's hit an all-time low on Amazon.

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D drops to $569 (was $699) when you tick the on-page coupon box. That's the lowest price I've seen at any retailer, beating the previous low of $574 in April.

For creators or gamers building or upgrading an AM5 system who want the fastest all-around desktop CPU on the market, $569 is a genuinely excellent price. Grab it while the coupon's still active.

Today's top AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D deal

A 16-core, 32-thread Zen 5 desktop processor with AMD's 3D V-Cache technology, 128MB of combined cache, and boost clocks up to 5.7GHz.

Don't forget to tick the coupon box for the full savings.View Deal

Want to know how well it performed? You can read our full review here.

The 9950X3D is AMD's flagship consumer processor, built around two 8-core chiplets on the Zen 5 architecture, with 3D V-Cache stacked on one of them to boost gaming performance without giving up the multi-core muscle needed for productivity work. In our full review, we found it delivered nearly perfect gaming performance alongside reasonable power draw, making it easier to cool than you might expect from a chip in this performance class.

Sister site Tom's Hardware benchmarked the 9950X3D extensively and found it ran roughly 37% faster than Intel's flagship Core 9 285K on average in 1080p gaming, and about 26% ahead of the older Core i9-14900K. It even matched the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, long considered the go-to gaming chip, in most of their tests — impressive given the 9950X3D packs twice the cores.

Where the 9950X3D pulls ahead of the 9800X3D is multi-threaded work. With double the cores and a 170W TDP ceiling, it has real headroom for video editing, 3D rendering, and other workloads that can spread across 16 cores and 32 threads — making it a genuine all-rounder rather than a gaming-only chip.

This deal is worth acting on quickly if you've been watching the price. The 9950X3D has held close to its $699.99 launch price for most of its life, dipping to a previous low of around $574 earlier this year. At $569, this is the cheapest it has ever been at a major US retailer, and coupon-based deals like this one have a habit of disappearing without notice.

One thing worth knowing before you buy: only 8 of the 16 cores sit on the V-Cache-equipped chiplet, and Windows doesn't always schedule games onto the right cores automatically. AMD's chipset software helps manage this, but it's an extra step compared with a simpler 8-core gaming chip.

If pure gaming performance per dollar is your only priority, the cheaper Ryzen 7 9800X3D is still worth a look — but for anyone who also wants serious multi-core power for productivity or content creation, the 9950X3D is the stronger all-around buy at this price.

• See all CPUs at Amazon

Chitral borders Afghanistan and isn't easy to reach. Breathtaking views abound in this remote mountainous region — as do rockslides and avalanches.

Adding to the existing pressures that data centers face regarding energy supply and grid connections, land shortages and chip availability, many hyperscalers are now facing local opposition to project proposals.

At a congressional hearing earlier this year, US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez presented two jars of murky water, filled from homes in Morgan County, Georgia, near one of Meta’s data center campuses.

Though Meta has disputed any connection between its construction work and residents’ private wells and water sources, tensions are becoming harder to ignore as the digital world’s physical infrastructure continues to expand.

We are creating our own data center paradox

Enterprise demand for cloud compute and the mass consumer and enterprise consumption of AI have ultimately led to a surge in demand for physical data centers, but they’re now being seen in a similar vein to airports and power stations – physical infrastructure that’s used by nearly all citizens, but projects that nobody actually wants to live by.

And it’s this paradox that many are grappling with at the moment – in this case, residents with a Facebook account can hardly argue against Meta’s need for physical infrastructure, and the same logic applies to users of streaming platforms, ecommerce websites, cloud storage, AI chatbots and so much more.

While International Data Center Authority (IDCA) founder and CEO Mehdi Paryavi believes this digital hypocrisy could afford hyperscalers some justification in their actions, it’s clear that service providers and infrastructure companies are not valuing communication and public engagement enough.

With hyperscalers planning data center buildouts years in advance and chipmakers facing major backlogs, it’s no longer about whether we need extra capacity – rather, it’s about where that compute should reside and how communities are consulted and engaged.

• Should data centres be renamed as data factories instead given that they essentially process data at scale?

Data centers are just fine with their current naming. Data centers come in different sizes and types, fulfilling diverse purposes.

Some produce data and house AI as AI factories, some import and house data from the cloud and enterprise applications, some just serve as internet exchange and telecom shelter, and some just sit on your desk as USB drives and PCs that just house data with the least amenities.

Data centers are more holistic and overarching than data factories, while the latter is easier to understand for the general public. What differentiates data centers from one another is not their sheer size, but rather the type of data they house or process.

Depending on the use case, a small enterprise data center that is home to very sensitive information might prove to be more mission-critical than a large-scale AI data center that manufactures data at scale.

• You mention that if you have a Facebook account, you can’t complain about data centers. I assume that this rings true for all hyperscalers and big cloud services as well. Is there any going back and what can be done to educate users more?

Our Facebook account, Amazon shopping cart, Gmail, iMessage or WhatsApp, Netflix, online banking, Google Maps, YouTube, ChatGPT, will simply cease to exist without data centers.

We are the reason that data centers get built and expanded. Our “consumption” and demand for higher speeds and better quality of service in the utilization of AI and Cloud services and the technological amenities we receive on an ever-evolving and ever-growing basis draw data centers to our communities.

• Speaking of consumers, on the subject of it being digital hypocrisy to describe the paradoxical relationship between the user and the service provider. Can you expand on that further?

When you protest against the expansion of data centers, yet you publicize your protest on social media that are solely enabled through data centers, when you oppose the development of data centers while they offer some of the last standing jobs that can stay for the predictable future, when you push back on the data center industry, when you go home at night and use ChatGPT for your everyday needs, Google for your search, Amazon for your shopping, and Netflix for your entertainment, you are the creator of a paradox between yourself as the end-user and the ultimate beneficiary of what the service providers offer.

• The cordial relationship between data center owners and local communities has given way to something more confrontational. What can Meta and others do to solve the increasing public distrust?

First of all, what companies such as Meta do as the ultimate goal of their companies and what data centers do are two separate conversations, and providers must draw a clear line between the two. If you have issues with the morality of Facebook, or the evolution of AI and the future of tech, your problem shouldn’t be pointing at data centers.

Economically and practically, data centers must be built to keep our economy going and our e-Gov, e-Health, e-Education, and even climate-friendly developments that are results of digital transformation, flowing.

Secondly, if data centers put the grid under stress or depict a shortage of water in certain areas, all fingers should be pointed at policymakers who have failed to invest in our old and fragile infrastructure.

Third, as far as data center owners and operators are concerned, they must allocate a fraction of their revenues to creating awareness, spending time with communities, and investing in the education of the local public they aim to serve and/or live amongst.

Last but not least, communication is key. Anywhere that a provider has initiated talks with the local community and invested in sparking dialog, success was on the horizon, and defensive lines against data centers were not formed by the public.

• What is the biggest misconception - in your view - about data center water usage? And what can be done to set that right?

The biggest misconception is that modern data centers don’t really use much water. But unfortunately, our societies are driven towards assumptions made by either those who are not deeply aware of the true requirements of data centers or careless to substantiate their claims as long as they can provoke emotions and push back on data centers to replace it with some other agenda.

In reality, data centers worldwide use 0.1% of the water available for human use. Modern data centers, which are being built for both AI and cloud applications, have closed-loop cooling that uses no operational water. A brief look at IDCA’s Global Water Stress Index, from its 2026 Data Center Report, will shed some light here.

Looking at the big picture, data centers are essential to developing modern economies. The United States, for example, has by far the largest data center “footprint” in the world and an overall economy that is twice the world average in limiting greenhouse gas emissions.

Note that the global economy produces 317 metric tons of CO2 per US$1 million of nominal GDP, while the US produces 156. However, when we start throwing around big numbers, such as "millions of gallons of water per day," it's easy to forget the entire context.

The large new AI centers, as is becoming well known, have "closed-loop" cooling processes that use no operational water. But we think it's important to realize that there are always engineering problems to solve. For example, a new data center may consume electricity provided by nuclear power, which emits no greenhouse gases. But nuclear energy itself uses large amounts of water.

So, at IDCA, we stress that communities, states, regions, and entire nations need to have as many people engaged as possible to look at these issues in their complexity.

• How realistic would it be to build data centers in specific controlled areas to shield vulnerable neighbourhoods from the full frontal impact of having a gigantic data center next door?

This is an important question. We at the International Data Center Authority (IDCA) believe in master planning the future.

The future that is both feasible and beneficial to nations all over the world is where countries and states plan for well-devised and highly concentrated digital hubs that house AI and cloud workloads.

The benefits of having these hubs planed and future-proofed is that first you take the data centers to environments that are most suitable to house them, secondly you create synergy and economy of scale at these hubs, third, you reduce the cost of compute by ensuring that all the amenities that these data centers need are available on centralized locations in bulk, forth you get the close proximity to the communities that are welcoming or simply create your own community, just like Loudoun County successfully created a whole new community around its data center economy.

The benefits will continue and can be enormous, including from the aspects of national security, where securing a handful of digital hubs is much easier than thousands of random and ad hoc locations during times of tension and conflict, which has become a critical topic in our industry these days.

As it stands today, there are almost always zoning considerations to be considered, so a theoretical "gigantic" data center will not be built right "next door" to residential communities. Even when zoning is not strong in a particular area, data center developers like to acquire enough land to create proper setbacks to mitigate noise, but also to be located where sufficient power can be provided.

So the reality is that large data centers today are already being built in "specific controlled areas," as your question states.

When it comes to getting the right accessories for my home office, I'm usually focused on not only performance, but also comfort. Like many of us, my mouse and keyboard are key parts of my home working set-up, which is spread across a laptop and external monitor, and using them pretty much all day everyday means I need something that is comfortable to use.

So when I saw that Logitech had released a new keyboard and mouse specifically designed around promoting comfort, it seemed like an obvious choice. The company's Signature Comfort Plus line comes with built-in cushioning, which it says can help increase comfort (unsurprisingly) and a better overall user experience.

The MK880 keyboard and M850L mouse are available in a combo bundle, and I've been using both products for a while now - so how did I get on?

Click happy

I've been a fan of Logitech's MX Master mouse range for some time, and the MX Master 4 for Business is still my go-to for everyday use.

The selling point of the new Logitech Signature Comfort Plus M850L wireless mouse is its added cushioning, which the company described as "something we've never done before".

With a declaration like that, you might be expecting some huge extra addition - but the reality is actually quite a bit more low-key.

Like many of you, I'm guessing that when you use a mouse, your hand covers the top of it, with the base of your palm and your wrist laying flat on the tabletop, mouse mat or whatever you choose.

You might think then, that much like its K8880 keyboard, the cushioning would be at the base of the mouse - however this isn't the case, with the cushioned panel actually sitting halfway across the top, just below the scrolling wheel.

Future / Mike MooreFuture / Mike Moore

It's clear to see why Logitech has done this - locating what it calls the "palm cushion" there will help ease RSI or other repetitive finger issues, but for me, where the extra help is needed is further down, at the base, like the keyboard.

The M850L also features a smaller, more sculpted shape than the MX Master series, and has built-in side grips to help improve comfort and again boost usability.

I realize this is a personal view, and it definitely didn't hinder my usage of the mouse, but unlike with the keyboard, I felt myself drifting back towards my usual MX Master 4 mouse, which lifts the arm slightly, coupled with the basic £8 cushioned mouse mat from Amazon I've used for years (available from AU$18 on Amazon AU).

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with the M850L - as you'd expect from a top-line Logitech product, it's fast and responsive, connectivity is excellent, and its light and compact build make it excellent for taking on a work trip or commute. There are four programmable buttons which can be assigned to specific tasks or tools, and there's no need for a dongle to connect - everything is done via Bluetooth.

But at £49.99 / AU$99.99 (which some may still think is a bit much for a mouse) on its own, or £99.99 / AU$169.99 with the MK880 keyboard, maybe a bit more extra cushioning in the future, please?

Just my type

Although many of you might initially think of keyboards as dull, identikit tools that just serve a simple purpose, Logitech has been on somewhat of a crusade to disprove that over the past few years.

This is particularly true when it comes to improving ergonomics - as we all know how uncomfortable it can be slamming away at a basic Microsoft keyboard with clacking keys.

I've been using Logitech's amazing Wave Keys device for some time, with it's eye-catching raised design and built-in palm cushioning really making a difference when it comes to comfort.

(Image credit: Future / Mike Moore)

In some ways, the Signature Comfort Plus MK880 keyboard is a slightly toned-down version of the Wave Keys, offering a more refined look, but including the expected comfort.

It once again features the raised hump in the middle of the keyboard, offering what it says is a more natural typing position, but the keys themselves are far shallower than the Wave Keys, leading to a quieter typing experience.

The built-in palm rest is something we've come to expect from Logitech products over the past few years, but the MK880 really goes above and beyond - rather than just some basic spongey foam like you see in some cheaper options, the cushioning is soft and delicate, with your wrists balancing lightly on top, rather than bouncing off - all again making for a more pleasant typing experience.

Apart from the comfort features, the MK880 is also an excellent all-round keyboard - light and grippy, and easy to connect to your device via Bluetooth, so there's no dongle required.

All in all, the MK880 is a fantastic addition to my workspace, and if you're looking for that extra bit of comfort in your day-to-day work, the £99.99 / AU$169.99 price tag for the keyboard and mouse will pay for itself in the long run.

For all the attention given to sophisticated cyber threats and zero-day vulnerabilities, most organizations are overlooking a far more immediate danger: the risks they already know about – but haven’t fixed.

Recent research paints a sobering picture of enterprise security today. Across more than 800,000 IT assets analyzed, one in three lacks at least one critical security control. Nearly one in five is running end-of-life software and 17% sit entirely outside traditional vulnerability management tools.

In other words, the modern attack surface is not just expanding – it is becoming increasingly fragmented, poorly understood and difficult to control.

Breaches built on the basics

One of the most concerning recent developments is how little attackers need to innovate. Every one of the top 10 most frequently exploited vulnerabilities in recent incident response cases had already been patched by vendors – often months earlier.

At the same time, 65% of incidents involved the abuse of remote access services such as VPNs, RDP and remote management tools. These are not obscure weaknesses; they are foundational components of modern IT environments.

The takeaway is clear: attackers are not outpacing defenders technologically. They are taking advantage of execution gaps. Organizations have become adept at identifying vulnerabilities, but far less effective at prioritizing and remediating them and the gap between knowing, prioritizing and fixing is where risk accumulates. That gap is now where most breaches begin.

The visibility problem

At the heart of the issue lies a more fundamental challenge: visibility. Enterprise IT environments have evolved into highly distributed ecosystems, spanning on-premises infrastructure, cloud services, SaaS applications, remote endpoints and third-party integrations.

Each layer is typically managed by different tools, each maintaining its own inventory. None offers a complete view, and the result is predictable. Assets fall outside patch cycles. Devices are not covered by endpoint protection. Entire systems go unscanned. Almost a fifth (17%) of assets are now not covered by vulnerability management tools at all – effectively rendering them invisible from a security standpoint.

This is not simply a technical oversight. It creates what many security leaders now recognize as a structural weakness: organizations cannot secure what they cannot see.

For UK businesses, this challenge is becoming increasingly consequential. Regulatory frameworks such as the Network and Information Systems (NIS2) Regulations – and the UK’s forthcoming Cyber Security and Resilience Bill – are placing greater emphasis on demonstrable control over assets and risk. Inaccurate inventories and fragmented data make that more and more difficult to prove.

Legacy systems: The risk that won’t go away

Compounding the visibility issue is the persistence of legacy technology. 19% of IT assets are running software or hardware that has reached end-of-life, meaning it no longer receives security updates.

These systems are particularly challenging. In sectors such as healthcare, manufacturing and financial services, they are often embedded in critical processes and cannot be easily replaced. Yet they remain permanently exposed to known vulnerabilities.

The problem is not just their existence, but their opacity. It is not unusual for organizations to believe legacy systems have been decommissioned – only to discover they were still active. This creates a persistent blind spot within the attack surface, one that attackers are quick to exploit.

A growing gap between perception and reality

Perhaps most concerning is the extent to which organizations misunderstand their own security posture. Many rely on a single system of record – such as a configuration management tool as their “source of truth”. However, these systems are often incomplete.

In one example, a company believed it had full endpoint protection coverage based on internal reporting. Independent analysis revealed that a portion of its devices were not included in the system at all. This disconnect between perception and reality creates a false sense of security – one that is increasingly untenable in a climate of rising regulatory scrutiny and board-level accountability.

Across the UK and EU, frameworks such as the Digital Operational Resilience Act in financial services and NIS2 more broadly are raising expectations. Organizations are no longer judged on whether controls are in place, but whether they are effective, verifiable and consistently applied.

From vulnerability management to exposure management

Against this backdrop, there is a broader shift in how organizations approach cybersecurity. Traditional vulnerability management, focused on identifying and scoring flaws, is no longer sufficient. The challenge is not a lack of data, but a lack of clarity about what matters most.

Exposure management, by contrast, adopts a more holistic view. It combines continuous asset discovery with data from multiple sources, applying business and threat context to prioritize risk. Crucially, it also focuses on verification – ensuring that remediation actions are actually completed.

This shift is already delivering measurable results. Organizations that adopt more mature exposure management practices see reductions of more than 40% across key risk categories, including missing controls and end-of-life assets.

A new baseline for cyber resilience

The implications for UK organizations are clear. Cybersecurity is no longer just about defending against the unknown. It is about managing the known – systematically, continuously and at scale.

This is particularly relevant as cyber risk becomes more tightly linked to regulatory compliance, insurance requirements and board-level governance. The ability to demonstrate control over the attack surface – to prove what exists, how it is protected and whether risks have been reduced – is fast becoming a baseline expectation.

Attackers are now able to achieve domain-wide control in minutes once inside an environment. In that context, delays in remediation or gaps in visibility are not just operational issues – they are critical business risks.

The organizations that will succeed are those that close the gap between insight and action. Those that move beyond assumptions and develop a clear, verifiable understanding of their exposure. Ultimately in today’s threat landscape, the greatest risk is not what organizations don’t yet know – it is what they already know, but haven’t fixed.

We've featured the best firewall software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

Insta360 founder and CEO Liu Jingkang, aka 'JK', recently shared a potentially controversial post on Chinese social media platform Weibo, which translated reads:

“Our product vision is to build a ‘Cameraman’ — an intelligent photography robot capable of automatically composing shots and capturing moments like a professional photographer, allowing users to remain fully immersed in the present.

"Today, AI is rapidly evolving, we believe the Cameraman’s 'brain' is becoming increasingly capable, unlocking new possibilities for creative imaging.

"In the long term, the ideal end state for cameras is to progressively become imperceptible, even to ‘disappear,’ until recording no longer consumes effort and becomes a natural part of life.”

As a concerned photographer (and as a concerned human being) I wrote a response to that post, and asked Insta360 for comment.

JK provided me with a statement addressing my concerns and elaborating on his vision, and he and Insta360 also answered a number of specific questions I put to them about the company's potentially game-changing plans for its future cameras.

Below you'll find JK's response, followed by my interview with JK and an Insta360 spokesperson.

Insta360 makes the best tiny videos cameras ideal for POV footage, and new accessories make such inconspicuous cameras easier to operate hands-free. (Image credit: Basil Kronfli)

JK's response: I’ve always believed imaging serves three fundamental human needs: to record, to share, and to create.

AI will undoubtedly reshape parts of this industry, especially in sharing and commercial creation. But when it comes to recording our lives, I believe there is a line AI cannot cross. Technology can make tools easier to use, but it cannot replace the human qualities behind truly meaningful work — judgment, emotion, taste, and the creative energy that come from lived experience.

For me, a photo I take of my daughter’s smile is priceless not because of technical perfection, but because I was there. I felt that moment. AI can generate, enhance, and imitate, but it cannot experience life on our behalf.

Human beings are the measure of all things. You should not hand over experiences that ought to belong to you to algorithms and machines.

So when we talk about the future of the camera, we are not talking about replacing people. We are talking about building tools that help people capture life more freely, more naturally, and with less friction. The future is not about making machines more human — it is about helping humans be more present, more creative, and more themselves.

The interview

TC: What does this 'cameraman' look like? Is it one entity or multiple products?

JK: For us, the future cameraman is a product vision rather than a single device.

Insta360: The core idea is to create a camera that can automatically compose shots, capture key moments, and produce finished content for the user, so people can stay fully immersed in the moment without missing what matters.

When you’re traveling or watching a live event, you often end up holding up a phone the entire time and looking at the screen instead of the experience itself. Our long-term vision is for the camera to work more like a professional photographer: you stay present, and it helps take care of the filming for you.

We’re still exploring what the ideal form factor looks like, so in the near term there won’t be one final ultimate product. But we’re already bringing elements of that vision into existing products. For example, Luna Ultra's POV head tracker enables a more seamless, almost invisible shooting experience, and we see that as an important early form of the future cameraman.

TC: Are we to take it that the 'intelligent photography robot' will be fully automated and independent?

Insta360: First, it’s important to clarify that the future cameraman doesn’t mean a humanoid robot. It’s a product concept and a long-term vision for how cameras should evolve.

The idea is to free users from complicated operation so they can be truly present in the moment while still getting professional-looking results. In that sense, the camera starts to play more of the role of a photographer. Imagine a family outing where the system can automatically frame, capture, edit, and output content end-to-end, without someone constantly needing to manage the device.

That said, this isn’t about a camera acting independently without the user. It’s about highly intelligent operation under user direction, intent, and control. The camera should be able to automate far more of the process, including recording comprehensively when the user wants it to, but always within boundaries set by the user. Our goal is for the experience to feel effortless and natural — even to the point where the camera becomes almost imperceptible in everyday life.

In future, could Insta360 might make cameras such as the Luna Ultra (above) fully autonomous? (Image credit: Future / Tim Coleman)

TC: Can you describe the composing, shooting and editing functionalities?

Insta360: To build the future cameraman, a camera needs to do three things well: see, understand, and act.

First, it needs to see more of the world. That’s one reason 360 imaging matters so much to us. A traditional camera captures only a narrow frame, while a 360 camera captures the full scene. That gives both the user and the AI much more context, reduces the risk of missing important moments, and creates a stronger foundation for tracking, reframing, and scene understanding.

Second, it needs spatial intelligence. The camera has to understand depth, motion, orientation, and what’s happening in the environment — not just record pixels, but actually interpret the scene.

Third, it needs to act in real time. That means tracking subjects, stabilizing footage, composing shots, predicting movement, and eventually making smarter filming decisions automatically based on the user’s intent. If it can’t respond instantly, it doesn’t really behave like a cameraman.

JK: The cameraman sits at the intersection of sensing, on-device AI, and computational imaging. The goal is for the camera to stop being just a recording tool and start becoming an active creative partner.

TC: Could you unpack a specific future feature being explored that leads Insta360's camera to being an 'active creative partner'?

Insta360: When we talk about an ‘active creative partner,’ we mean an intelligent imaging solution that better understands the scene and helps users capture it more intelligently. In dynamic environments, it can keep up with subjects with less user intervention, so people can stay focused on the moment while the camera handles more of the technical work.

To support that vision, we’ve already built a strong technical foundation, including panoramic generation and a panoramic metric depth model. We’ve already open-sourced these technologies for the industry, and they have potential applications not only in 360 cameras, but in other products and fields as well.

TC: How is the 'cameraman' different from existing cameras and Insta360 models?

Insta360: Insta360 already has some of the foundational capabilities needed for the future cameraman. Features like AI stitching, FlowState stabilization, subject tracking, reframing, auto-editing, and on-device image processing are all part of the camera’s evolution toward more intelligent and autonomous capture. That said, today’s products are still early versions of what that fully realized experience could become.

We’ve spent years building deep expertise in 360 imaging, and that gives us a strong foundation in spatial intelligence. Compared with a traditional camera that records only a single frame, 360 imaging data provides a complete field of view and continuous spatial context. Combined with our work in spatial modeling and generative intelligence, that helps AI move from simply “seeing” the world toward actually understanding it.

That’s a key difference in how we think about the future of imaging. And going forward, we’ll continue investing in areas like panoramic depth estimation, world models, and autonomous follow systems.

TC: What's the timescale for this 'cameraman'?

Insta360: This is a long-term vision, and we expect to realize it through continuous product iteration over time. Rather than arriving all at once in a single product, we see it developing step by step as the underlying technologies mature and become ready for real-world use.

Did you know TechRadar now has membership?

(Image credit: Future)

Become a TechRadar Insider by simply clicking 'Join Now' at the top of this page. Have a question? Please email membership@techradar.com

TC: Does this 'cameraman' record autonomously? If so, couldn't that be a privacy concern?

Insta360: This is one of the most important questions in the age of AI hardware. Our view is that future intelligent imaging devices should be able to automate recording much more deeply — even to the point of capturing everything the user wants preserved — but always under the user’s authorization and control.

The core idea behind cameraman is not uncontrolled, limitless recording. It’s about turning the camera from a manually operated tool into an intelligent companion that understands what the user wants to capture and helps do that more effectively. That may require environmental awareness and autonomous recording when the user explicitly enables them, but those capabilities should always be bounded by clear user intent, permissions, and controls.

In other words, autonomy is important, but user agency is essential. We believe that’s the right balance for the future of intelligent imaging.

TC: Does Insta360 envision the system ultimately replacing professional content creators, or is the vision aimed at consumers?

Insta360: No — this is not about replacing photographers, videographers, or creators. It is mainly about helping consumers capture moments more easily, with less friction and less fear of missing the shot.

For professionals, we see these capabilities as assistive tools, not substitutes for human creativity. Great photography and filmmaking still depend on judgment, storytelling, taste, and human connection. Our goal is to reduce technical friction in capture, not replace the creator behind the camera.

The Luna Ultra now works with a POV Head Tracker (see the device in the man's ear), which synchronizes head and camera movement, truly freeing up the user for hands-free immersive POV shots. (Image credit: Insta360)The right side of the line?

It remains to be seen just how autonomous Insta360 cameras could become, but Insta360's response somewhat allays my fears about where its camera tech could be heading. And I get the logic — the ease of use and streamlined workflow of Insta360's consumer cameras in particular, which include leading 360-degree and vlogging cameras, are integral to their success.

Cameras such as the Insta360 X5, and Insta360's companion app are already packed with smart tools that make 360-degree video content easier to capture and edit. So, thinking ahead, why make the process unnecessarily difficult for the sake of user agency, when an intelligent camera knows which direction to point in?

Why pour over lengthy 360-degree video clips to manually piece together an edit, when AI knows where the best action is happening and can suggest / make the edit for you?

It's this intersection of human creativity and automated AI tools where we might start to see more intelligent functions assisting users in shooting, editing and sharing, freeing them up to "be more present" as JK puts it, rather than being bogged down with camera operation. And if any company is in the position to advance this kind of intelligent camera tech, it's Insta360.