Feed aggregator

UmanWrite gives you a full AI-backed toolbox to transform AI-generated text into human-sounding copy in moments.

The post This Tool Makes AI Copy Sound Human, and It’s Only $79 for Life appeared first on TechRepublic.

The Shards is now streaming on Hulu for US viewers and Disney+ internationally, as it adapts Bret Easton Ellis' novel of the same name.

In my The Shards review, I was pleased to note that it was a welcome return to form for Ryan Murphy. I was also impressed by how well he adapts the source material into a sexy, glamorous yet dangerous TV series.

If you're here, you're wondering when the next episodes will stream. Much like the two episode premiere, we also get two episodes this week.

Here's what you need to know about the release of The Shards episodes 3 and 4.

What time can I watch The Shards episodes 3 and 4 on Hulu?

For US viewers, both The Shards episodes 3 and 4 will drop on Wednesday, August 12 at 6pm PT/ 9pm ET.

Here's when you can stream the new episodes in other countries.

• US – Thursday, August 13 at 6pm PT / 9pm ET
• Canada – Thursday, August 13 at 6pm PT / 9pm ET
• UK – Friday, August 14 at 2am BST
• India – Friday, August 14 at 6:30am IST
• Singapore – Friday, August 14 at 9am SGT
• Australia – Friday, August 14 at 11am AEDT
• New Zealand – Friday, August 14 at 12pm NZDT

When do new episodes of The Shards come out?

(Image credit: Hulu)

After this week's double bill, episodes of The Shards will premiere on a weekly basis until the finale on Wednesday, September 9. We do have another double bill coming up too, which is good news for those who don't like to wait.

For dates as well as the episode titles for the upcoming The Shards releases, take a look below.

• The Shards Episode 1 “Pilot”: Out now
• The Shards Episode 2 “Don’t You Want Me”: Out now
• The Shards Episode 3 “Help Me! Rhonda!”: Wednesday, August 12
• The Shards Episode 4 “Robert’s Party”: Wednesday, August 12
• The Shards Episode 5 “Murder on the Dancefloor”: Wednesday, August 19
• The Shards Episode 6 “Homecoming Part One”: Wednesday, August 26
• The Shards Episode 7 “Homecoming Part Two”: Wednesday, August 26
• The Shards Episode 8 “Hamlet”: Wednesday, September 2
• The Shards Episode 9 “Stairway to Heaven”: Wednesday, September 9

When you ask businesses about how they are innovating their ways of working, one word will come up time and again: Agile. Agile delivery. Agile workflows. Agile everything.

The term has been so overwhelmed by buzzwords, supposed best practice guides, and misguided strategy documents that it has almost lost all meaning.

In fact, if many organizations that believe they’re operating in an Agile manner were to take a step back and take an objective look at their ways of working, they would quickly come to realize they have not moved away from legacy command-and-control structures.

In this fog of misunderstanding, a series of myths has taken hold that have made the role of Agile professionals far less clear-cut, making it harder for organizations to put this invaluable methodology into practice.

One root of these problems lies in a tendency for people to narrow Agile’s scope, approaching it as a tick list of processes to adhere to rather than a fundamental shift in how people work and deliver for a business.

It is critical that Agile professionals equip themselves to fact-check these myths as they come up in their work. Every failed project done in Agile’s name diminishes the luster attached to the methodology, increasing the risk that future businesses will reject this powerful way to improve program and project management.

Myth 1 – “Agile delivery leaders are just administrators”

Agile professionals are often seen principally as bureaucratic note-takers, or schedulers – the people who organize everyone else’s work.

This view misses the point: their real value is as facilitators and protectors from distraction. Good Agile professionals create the space for teams to focus, and align delivery with outcomes rather than just activity.

Myth 2 – “Agile professionals are the scrum police”

Some believe Agile delivery operates within a top-down hierarchy, with Agile professionals in place to enforce frameworks and control how team members spend their time.

This is quite wrong: Agile professionals work with teams, coaching them to make better decisions, remove friction, and build confidence in delivery – without resorting to outdated command-and-control methods.

Myth 3 – “Agile delivery must be technical”

It’s a common assumption that Agile delivery leaders require a deep technical background. Technical awareness can certainly help, supporting a deeper understanding of the team’s tasks and challenges, but it isn’t the core of the job.

The real skill lies in understanding people and processes, then creating the conditions for specialists to succeed. In most projects, the need is for strong communication and facilitation across the entire team rather than strategic decision-making or technical troubleshooting.

Indeed, in some circumstances ‘hands-on’ Agile delivery leaders who think they know best can create conflict within teams, damaging morale and motivation in the process. Think of it like athletics: coaches don’t need to run faster than the athletes; their task is to help the athletes run faster.

Myth 4 – “Certification equals capability”

A certificate may prove that somebody knows about an Agile framework, but it does not demonstrate that they’re capable of applying it in practice.

The best Agile professionals succeed through experience, attitude, and ‘soft’ skills. They know from experience how to adapt Agile values and principles to particular circumstances; when to challenge people, and when to simply step back and get out of their team’s way.

Like any profession, being truly effective at the job requires skill, practical experience, and professional characteristics appropriate for the role. A piece of paper doesn’t make you agile; effectiveness with people and process does.

Myth 5 – “Agile delivery leaders are cheerleaders”

Contrary to popular belief, Agile delivery isn’t principally about arranging team socials or keeping everyone upbeat during stand-ups.

The value lies in keeping people aligned and productive under deadline pressure and/or changing priorities; after all, no plan survives contact with the enemy. Agile delivery leaders are there to create stability within an uncertain environment: they help teams stay focused on what matters, and shield them from distractions so they can maximize time spent ‘in the zone’.

That said, there is value in boosting morale – and championing a team’s achievements is one way to do this. According to the “broaden-and-build” theory of psychologist Barbara Fredrickson, positive emotions broaden our thought-action repertoires, enabling us to develop skills and resources that improve our long-term productivity.

One famous study from the "Journal of Labor Economics" showed that happiness at work leads to improved performance, especially in jobs where creativity and initiative are key.

Myth 6 – “Agile delivery leaders must remove all blockers for their teams”

While impediment removal is without doubt a core responsibility for an Agile delivery leader, the reality is that teams solve most of their own issues – perhaps with the assistance of a little coaching or support.

Nonetheless, sometimes a challenge is too big, distracting or political for them to handle, and Agile delivery leaders must step in – often by representing the team with stakeholders and at governance layers: this can be helpful in reducing the ‘noise’ around the team and the number of distracting interactions that take team members away from the core task.

As captured in the proverb: “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime,” effective Agile delivery leadership is about enabling, not babysitting.

True Agile

So Agile is a much more subtle and responsive discipline than the stereotypes present – and it must be led by subtle and responsive practitioners. The approach can generate huge benefits – saving time, handling change more elegantly, reducing project failure rates and, above all, creating better products and services that more effectively meet customer needs and objectives.

These goals are achieved by working with people – rather than by tinkering with processes – to surface problems early in the development process, resolve them quickly and with a minimum of fuss, and avoid interfering when the team is already functioning effectively.

High-performing teams depend on trust, accountability and continuous learning. Leaders who foster those qualities are more likely to deliver successful outcomes, creating teams that stay focused, take ownership of their work, and continuously improve how they operate.

This is a role that is all about empowerment; when they’re doing their job well, much of an Agile practitioner’s work occurs out of sight. So how do you know when you’ve got a really great Agile delivery leader? When their team runs perfectly well without them.

This may not sound like the smartest business model for the practitioner, but it’s definitely the best outcome for the client’s own business – and that, ultimately, is what Agile is all about.

We've rated and ranked the best productivity tools.

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

• OpenAI expands Daybreak with Blue and Red tiers for defensive cyber work
• New GPT‑5.6‑Cyber model offers high compliance for authorized vulnerability research
• Access remains restricted due to dual‑use risks and reduced safeguard operation

OpenAI has announced two new tiers for its Daybreak dedicated cybersecurity project, each offering a different model with different levels of compliance. It also used the opportunity to introduce a new security-focused AI model, as well.

Hackers and criminals are increasingly abusing AI to improve and speed up the creation of phishing emails and malicious code, and with the introduction of AI agents, they’ve also used it to automate entire attack processes. The AI community responded by placing strong guardrails, making sure their models do not comply with requests to build malware, or hack other companies.

These guardrails ended up being a two-edged sword, because as they slowed down attackers, they also slowed down the defenders.

What is Daybreak?

To give the cybersecurity community the upper edge, companies like OpenAI started creating dedicated cybersecurity initiatives that provide a vetted list of companies state-of-the-art models, free of guardrails. The company also provided them with pre-trained AI agents, as well as access to a pool of shared knowledge.

Initially launched in June 2026, Daybreak originally included GPT.5-5-Cyber (a model optimized for security work), Codex Security (an agent that can analyze codebases, identify vulnerabilities, validate findings, and help develop patches), Patch the Planet (an initiative with Trail of Bits to find and fix vulnerabilities in open-source software), Daybreak Cyber Partner Program (lets approved cybersecurity companies such as Cloudflare or Cisco integrate OpenAI's cyber capabilities into their own products and services), and Trusted Access for Cyber (the governance/access system for organizations doing authorized cybersecurity work with these capabilities).

Now, OpenAI has expanded Daybreak with two access tiers, Daybreak Blue, and Daybreak Red.

The company says Daybreak Blue is “the recommended starting point for most defenders, supporting vulnerability discovery, secure code review, malware analysis, incident response, and patch validation. Companies opting for this tier can expect access to frontier general-purpose models, including GPT‑5.6 Sol, whose safeguards have been tailored to authorized defensive security work.

Daybreak Red, on the other hand, provides access to OpenAI’s “purpose-trained cybersecurity models for authorized vulnerability research, exploit validation, and security testing.” This tier offers the brand new GPT‑5.6‑Cyber, built on GPT‑5.6 Sol and trained to improve capabilities on several specialized cybersecurity tasks such as finding zero-day vulnerabilities and developing exploit chains.

This model is also more compliant and less likely to refuse certain higher-risk, dual-use cyber tasks.

Complying with "dangerous" requests

Request compliance is the name of the game here. OpenAI says the new model addresses feedback from security researchers who “encountered persistent refusals with the earlier model.” General-purpose GPT-5.6 Sol, for example, will comply with just 1.5% of the requests usually given by cyber-defenders working on codebase analysis or vulnerability identification. This percentage increases to 2.0% with Daybreak Blue access.

GPT-5.6-Cyber, on the other hand, completes 95.0% of requests, OpenAI says, up from 57.3% of the previous model, GPT-5.5-Cyber. We weren’t able to independently verify these claims, though.

While it doesn’t outright say it, OpenAI considers these models relatively dangerous to use, which is why they’re locked behind the Daybreak Cyber Partner Program. However, the program is now expanding, allowing these companies to embed the models behind their own products, managed services, or cybersecurity engagements, and offer them to clients of their own.

Those who wish to be a part of the program directly can do so by applying to join online now.

“Models running with reduced safeguards carry risks beyond standard model usage, whether from misuse or misalignment. Despite these risks, we believe that democratizing access to frontier intelligence for defenders is crucial to accelerating and automating cyber defense,” OpenAI said.

“Daybreak Blue and Daybreak Red access are available for approved individuals⁠ and organizations conducting authorized work. We control access through identity verification, account security, monitoring, approved-use restrictions, and legal attestations.”

• Wix launches Symphony, a standalone AI agent platform designed for SMBs
• AI agents work to understand your business, then complete essential tasks on your behalf
• Symphony comes with a built-in quality layer, helping ensure trust.

Wix, one of the world’s biggest website builders, has today launched Symphony, a new platform which aims to provide SMBs with a proactive team of AI agents that are built around their specific business needs, goals, and workflows.

The company says Symphony will allow business owners to move away from working alone to operating with a tailored AI team in just minutes.

What is Symphony?

Wix claims Symphony has been built on the experience and unique data it has accumulated while supporting hundreds of millions of businesses worldwide.

The company highlights how, unlike typical AI tools that simply act on instructions, Symphony learns the business, taking the time to understand its unique needs rather than offering a one-size-fits-all solution.

At the center is Maestro, Symphony’s central AI agent. Maestro understands what is happening across the business, identifies what needs attention next, and coordinates the right agent for each job.

Operating much like a team of humans, Symphony’s AI agents work across approved workflows, executing tasks and connecting to the tools that the business already uses. It then reports back, offering updates, analytics, and flagging key actions for approvals.

Each day your agents will also have a ‘morning meeting’, providing a summary through a simple app of work completed, highlighting what still needs to be completed, and identifying new opportunities based on business activity, customer behavior, and current trends.

Symphony also provides a built-in quality review layer, with a separate agent checking work before it is presented, helping support accuracy.

According to Wix, Symphony is available through a tiered subscription model.

“We built Symphony to be the go-to AI agent orchestrator for SMBs,” said Ronny Elkayam, COO of Wix.

“It is purpose-built for how small businesses operate, combining Wix’s two decades of SMB expertise with a coordinated multi-agent system that can learn how a business works, take action and help owners grow with more speed and confidence. With Symphony, any business owner can have the team they need to scale.”

"I big, I punch," is probably the most effective and concise way of summing up the last three seasons of Reacher on Prime Video. Alan Ritchson's titular hero has slammed, drop-kicked, and battered his way through three separate stories to date, but Reacher season 4 has something new to offer.

Instead of honing in on Reacher's past or personal vendettas, our eight new episodes are ones of political espionage. Adapting the Lee Child novel Gone Tomorrow, he instead becomes embroiled in a CIA conspiracy after suspecting a woman on a New York City subway train is actually a suicide bomber. It's drama that makes you think, for the first time ever in this franchise.

It's a big tonal swing, and probably a risk that the crime drama needed to take four seasons in — but that doesn't mean it's completely paid off. In a nutshell, getting to the bottom of a big city political scandal has never made me yearn for the small-town days of seasons gone by more.

Clearly, this is part of Reacher's big-picture thinking. Seasons 1 and 3 were based in more rural locations, with seasons 2 and 4 respectively based in New York and Philadelphia. We already know that Reacher season 5 will be set in Oklahoma (like the novel Make Me), and I'm desperate to get there.

Does Reacher really have the chops to dig deeper into its punchy action? Probably not. I doubt we'll see the show stray back into these waters again, and there's good reason why.

Jack Reacher isn't the right action hero to lead a political espionage investigation

If the line "Oh no, I got it wrong!" is your signal to the audience that a dramatic twist is about to take place, then you're likely in over your head. This dialogue passes Reacher's lips halfway through season 4, with our bullish hero a fish out of water, scrambling through a plot that's much bigger than he could ever properly cope with.

On the one hand, I like that this level of insecurity humanizes Reacher more. There's always been more to him than just being muscle and meat hooks in a T-shirt, but now he's able to put his money where his mouth is. Selflessness, understanding, and the ability to be vulnerable flow out of Reacher abundantly in a way it never could have before, and I appreciate that.

However, let's not do this kind of storyline again. Our overarching threat is simultaneously too complicated to fully sink your teeth into and too mundane to actually bother caring about it. The armchair detectives among us will work out who is the 'villain' underpinning Reacher's latest disaster in a matter of seconds, and between season 4's beginning and end, you'll need a notepad and pen to keep up.

I think that an obstacle hidden in plain sight is the fact that Reacher himself doesn't have the same gravitas in a city as he does in a town. Plop him in the centre of Georgia, and he'll obviously scare the crap out of everyone around him. But in New York and Washington, D.C., he's a mere fly in the ointment. Add in a subpar storyline, and Reacher season 4 isn't exactly making its mark in an already oversaturated genre.

However, this might be Reacher's best supporting cast to date

(Image credit: Prime Video)

But let's stop being a Debbie Downer... It's clobbering time! For surface-level viewing, Reacher season 4 is ticking every box you'd expect after its last three seasons, and that makes for some satisfying weekly viewing.

The secret weapon, however, is its supporting cast, which may just be my favorite of all we've had to date. New additions Tamara Green (Sydelle Noel), Jacob Merrick (Christopher Rodriguez-Marquette), and Russell Plum (Kevin Weisman) are Reacher's unlikely gang of allies, and the uneasy friendships that develop between them are the relationships that you're really rooting for.

Together, the awesome foursome drive the excitement of the piece, and help us paper over anything that isn't really gelling together in the story itself. We're desperate for them to break the rules and stick two metaphorical fingers up at authority, and they routinely indulge us. Best of all, our trio of newcomers pulls out all of Reacher's caring traits that we're desperate to see, even if they all make a few bad decisions along the way.

Without giving anything away, there are definitely some distasteful tones bubbling underneath the surface, particularly around how the story approaches sex work and, well, women in general. But hey, who cares when Reacher is going to punch something and take his shirt off, huh?

Reacher season 4 begins airing on Prime Video from August 12.

• Spotify is introducing AI Persona tags in mid-September
• The platform aims to improve user transparency by differentiating real artists from AI-generated ones
• Spotify only reviews an artist's profile and images, and not the music itself

Spotify has fallen short on the AI transparency front compared to some of the other best music streaming services, with users pining for a fix — and now the platform is taking its biggest step yet towards combatting AI slop.

The streaming giant announced today (August 11) the arrival of new AI Persona tags, which are designed to differentiate human artists from ones that are AI-generated. Spotify says these tags will roll out to mobile in mid-September, and will appear in an artist’s profile banner, ‘About’ section, in Search, and in song rows in playlists.

Once they become available, users can be safe in the knowledge that the artists they’re listening to haven’t been generated by AI. Spotify added that artists with AI Persona tags will be excluded from all personalized recommendations by default, ensuring that your music-discovery regime remains uninfected by slop.

(Image credit: Spotify)

Though AI Persona tags won’t roll out for another month or so, Spotify says artists can already disclose if their profile is AI-generated. If an artist declares this, a tag reading ‘AI Persona’ will appear next to their name. ‘We hope artists will be transparent, so we are giving them the opportunity to disclose,’ the service shared in its announcement — but it’s not putting all its trust into self-disclosure.

Instead, Spotify says it will take matters into its own hands if need be, and will conduct reviews of profiles where it thinks an artist’s images have been created using generative AI to imitate a lifelike persona. If Spotify detects that an artist profile might be AI-generated, it will display a tag that reads ‘Likely AI Persona’, and the artist will be notified and given the option to self-disclose or appeal.

It’s taken Spotify a long time to catch up to the likes of Deezer when it comes to improving its transparency on AI-generated music. Deezer was the first major audio streaming service to roll out tags that explicitly say if a track has been AI-generated, and recently its Head of Research told us why we need AI filters more than ever.

Spotify’s own AI Persona tags mark a big shift for the platform, and will certainly improve the user experience by giving listeners more peace of mind. However, Spotify’s feature comes with an important caveat.

It reviews the profile only, not the music

(Image credit: Spotify)

AI Persona tags are just one of the ways Spotify has been working towards improving transparency for users. Verified by Spotify was launched a few months back — this is a certification feature that shows if an artist is legitimate, but it’s not as watertight as we’d hoped it would be.

Additionally, Spotify’s SongDNA gives listeners a comprehensive overview of the creatives behind their favorite songs, while AI Credits give artists the opportunity to share where and how they’ve used AI in their music production. It’s not as upfront as Deezer’s methods, but the measures are in place nonetheless, and AI Persona tags are the cherry on top.

That said, AI Persona tags target an artist’s public image, not how the music was made, which could present some issues, as it still leaves room for AI-generated music to slip its way onto the platform.

If Spotify detects that an artist is human-presenting, how are we to know that artist won’t upload AI-generated music to their profile? There’s nothing stopping that artist from publishing slop, because Spotify reviews their name, imagery, and public identity, not the music they upload.

It’s a tricky one, because while Spotify has measures in place that evaluate music and artist image respectively, it doesn’t have a comprehensive tool that reviews both components simultaneously, which again isn’t as upfront as Deezer.

As far as AI-generated content in Spotify goes, I’ve been one of the lucky ones who hasn’t encountered this issue. Because my love for physical media and radio impacts what I listen to on Spotify, I suspect that my algorithm has been trained enough to push AI slop out of my recommendations.

I do think that on top of my streaming habits, Spotify’s anti-AI music measures have helped to keep the fence up and block out unwanted songs to a certain extent — I just wish its approach to tagging was a bit more robust.

• Spotify is introducing AI Persona tags in mid-September
• The platform aims to improve user transparency by differentiating real artists from AI-generated ones
• Spotify only reviews an artist's profile and images, and not the music itself

Spotify has fallen short on the AI transparency front compared to some of the other best music streaming services, with users pining for a fix — and now the platform is taking its biggest step yet towards combatting AI slop.

The streaming giant announced today (August 11) the arrival of new AI Persona tags, which are designed to differentiate human artists from ones that are AI-generated. Spotify says these tags will roll out to mobile in mid-September, and will appear in an artist’s profile banner, ‘About’ section, in Search, and in song rows in playlists.

Once they become available, users can be safe in the knowledge that the artists they’re listening to haven’t been generated by AI. Spotify added that artists with AI Persona tags will be excluded from all personalized recommendations by default, ensuring that your music-discovery regime remains uninfected by slop.

(Image credit: Spotify)

Though AI Persona tags won’t roll out for another month or so, Spotify says artists can already disclose if their profile is AI-generated. If an artist declares this, a tag reading ‘AI Persona’ will appear next to their name. ‘We hope artists will be transparent, so we are giving them the opportunity to disclose,’ the service shared in its announcement — but it’s not putting all its trust into self-disclosure.

Instead, Spotify says it will take matters into its own hands if need be, and will conduct reviews of profiles where it thinks an artist’s images have been created using generative AI to imitate a lifelike persona. If Spotify detects that an artist profile might be AI-generated, it will display a tag that reads ‘Likely AI Persona’, and the artist will be notified and given the option to self-disclose or appeal.

It’s taken Spotify a long time to catch up to the likes of Deezer when it comes to improving its transparency on AI-generated music. Deezer was the first major audio streaming service to roll out tags that explicitly say if a track has been AI-generated, and recently its Head of Research told us why we need AI filters more than ever.

Spotify’s own AI Persona tags mark a big shift for the platform, and will certainly improve the user experience by giving listeners more peace of mind. However, Spotify’s feature comes with an important caveat.

It reviews the profile only, not the music

(Image credit: Spotify)

AI Persona tags are just one of the ways Spotify has been working towards improving transparency for users. Verified by Spotify was launched a few months back — this is a certification feature that shows if an artist is legitimate, but it’s not as watertight as we’d hoped it would be.

Additionally, Spotify’s SongDNA gives listeners a comprehensive overview of the creatives behind their favorite songs, while AI Credits give artists the opportunity to share where and how they’ve used AI in their music production. It’s not as upfront as Deezer’s methods, but the measures are in place nonetheless, and AI Persona tags are the cherry on top.

That said, AI Persona tags target an artist’s public image, not how the music was made, which could present some issues, as it still leaves room for AI-generated music to slip its way onto the platform.

If Spotify detects that an artist is human-presenting, how are we to know that artist won’t upload AI-generated music to their profile? There’s nothing stopping that artist from publishing slop, because Spotify reviews their name, imagery, and public identity, not the music they upload.

It’s a tricky one, because while Spotify has measures in place that evaluate music and artist image respectively, it doesn’t have a comprehensive tool that reviews both components simultaneously, which again isn’t as upfront as Deezer.

As far as AI-generated content in Spotify goes, I’ve been one of the lucky ones who hasn’t encountered this issue. Because my love for physical media and radio impacts what I listen to on Spotify, I suspect that my algorithm has been trained enough to push AI slop out of my recommendations.

I do think that on top of my streaming habits, Spotify’s anti-AI music measures have helped to keep the fence up and block out unwanted songs to a certain extent — I just wish its approach to tagging was a bit more robust.

Stamped on artist profiles, it’ll help listeners figure out who’s an AI musician, and who isn’t.

A new open world model from LTX shows how open-weights models can be used and customized by anyone.

"I big, I punch," is probably the most effective and concise way of summing up the last three seasons of Reacher on Prime Video. Alan Ritchson's titular hero has slammed, drop-kicked, and battered his way through three separate stories to date, but Reacher season 4 has something new to offer.

Instead of honing in on Reacher's past or personal vendettas, our eight new episodes are ones of political espionage. Adapting the Lee Child novel Gone Tomorrow, he instead becomes embroiled in a CIA conspiracy after suspecting a woman on a New York City subway train is actually a suicide bomber. It's drama that makes you think, for the first time ever in this franchise.

It's a big tonal swing, and probably a risk that the crime drama needed to take four seasons in — but that doesn't mean it's completely paid off. In a nutshell, getting to the bottom of a big city political scandal has never made me yearn for the small-town days of seasons gone by more.

Clearly, this is part of Reacher's big-picture thinking. Seasons 1 and 3 were based in more rural locations, with seasons 2 and 4 respectively based in New York and Philadelphia. We already know that Reacher season 5 will be set in Oklahoma (like the novel Make Me), and I'm desperate to get there.

Does Reacher really have the chops to dig deeper into its punchy action? Probably not. I doubt we'll see the show stray back into these waters again, and there's good reason why.

Jack Reacher isn't the right action hero to lead a political espionage investigation

If the line "Oh no, I got it wrong!" is your signal to the audience that a dramatic twist is about to take place, then you're likely in over your head. This dialogue passes Reacher's lips halfway through season 4, with our bullish hero a fish out of water, scrambling through a plot that's much bigger than he could ever properly cope with.

On the one hand, I like that this level of insecurity humanizes Reacher more. There's always been more to him than just being muscle and meat hooks in a T-shirt, but now he's able to put his money where his mouth is. Selflessness, understanding, and the ability to be vulnerable flow out of Reacher abundantly in a way it never could have before, and I appreciate that.

However, let's not do this kind of storyline again. Our overarching threat is simultaneously too complicated to fully sink your teeth into and too mundane to actually bother caring about it. The armchair detectives among us will work out who is the 'villain' underpinning Reacher's latest disaster in a matter of seconds, and between season 4's beginning and end, you'll need a notepad and pen to keep up.

I think that an obstacle hidden in plain sight is the fact that Reacher himself doesn't have the same gravitas in a city as he does in a town. Plop him in the centre of Georgia, and he'll obviously scare the crap out of everyone around him. But in New York and Washington, D.C., he's a mere fly in the ointment. Add in a subpar storyline, and Reacher season 4 isn't exactly making its mark in an already oversaturated genre.

However, this might be Reacher's best supporting cast to date

(Image credit: Prime Video)

But let's stop being a Debbie Downer... It's clobbering time! For surface-level viewing, Reacher season 4 is ticking every box you'd expect after its last three seasons, and that makes for some satisfying weekly viewing.

The secret weapon, however, is its supporting cast, which may just be my favorite of all we've had to date. New additions Tamara Green (Sydelle Noel), Jacob Merrick (Christopher Rodriguez-Marquette), and Russell Plum (Kevin Weisman) are Reacher's unlikely gang of allies, and the uneasy friendships that develop between them are the relationships that you're really rooting for.

Together, the awesome foursome drive the excitement of the piece, and help us paper over anything that isn't really gelling together in the story itself. We're desperate for them to break the rules and stick two metaphorical fingers up at authority, and they routinely indulge us. Best of all, our trio of newcomers pulls out all of Reacher's caring traits that we're desperate to see, even if they all make a few bad decisions along the way.

Without giving anything away, there are definitely some distasteful tones bubbling underneath the surface, particularly around how the story approaches sex work and, well, women in general. But hey, who cares when Reacher is going to punch something and take his shirt off, huh?

Reacher season 4 begins airing on Prime Video from August 12.

• Facial recognition systems are expanding to the London Underground
• British Transport Police say images will be checked against a watchlist
• Privacy groups are calling the technology intrusive

The debate over public surveillance and privacy is only getting more intense, with the British Transport Police (BTP) the latest organization to stoke the fires: it's expanding a trial of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology across several London Underground stations from today.

As per the BTP's official statement, this will start at Victoria and then rotate around other stations until November. "Our deployments are intelligence-led and focused on identifying people wanted by the police or courts, including those suspected of serious offences and those who may be breaching bail conditions or court orders," says the BTP.

The cameras work by comparing scanned faces to a watchlist of suspects and criminals wanted by the police. If there's a match, it's reviewed by a police officer — if not, the image is "immediately and permanently" deleted. The tech is already in use at other transport hubs in London, but is now being expanded to the Tube.

As for opting out of being surveilled, the police say the cameras will come with clear signage, and that "alternative routes" will be available too — which presumably the criminals can also sneak through. It's not clear if sunglasses and a hood would help you avoid being scanned, but you might be politely asked to remove them.

A 'dystopian' expansion

A map of Victoria Tube station showing the alternative routes (Image credit: British Transport Police)

According to the BBC, the BTP are looking out for people wanted in connection with serious offences, including sexual assault, robbery, and knife crime. Police intelligence data will be used to select the stations covered by the cameras, with the aim of reducing violence and harassment.

However, as the BBC points out, scans of some 530,000 faces across UK railway stations since February have resulted in zero matches, zero arrests, and one false identification. That's based on the BTP's own deployment logs, suggesting that to date the technology isn't helping much.

Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo suggests that the tech "treats the public like suspects" and is a "disturbing and dystopian expansion" of facial recognition systems. The privacy rights group has long been campaigning against the use of these cameras, arguing that they're intrusive and unnecessary.

The reaction online has been mostly negative too: comments in one Reddit thread question the effectiveness of this type of facial recognition, and air concerns about more nefarious uses of the tech further down the line. However, others also point out that public transport stations are already extensively covered by camera monitoring.

• Facial recognition systems are expanding to the London Underground
• British Transport Police say images will be checked against a watchlist
• Privacy groups are calling the technology intrusive

The debate over public surveillance and privacy is only getting more intense, with the British Transport Police (BTP) the latest organization to stoke the fires: it's expanding a trial of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology across several London Underground stations from today.

As per the BTP's official statement, this will start at Victoria and then rotate around other stations until November. "Our deployments are intelligence-led and focused on identifying people wanted by the police or courts, including those suspected of serious offences and those who may be breaching bail conditions or court orders," says the BTP.

The cameras work by comparing scanned faces to a watchlist of suspects and criminals wanted by the police. If there's a match, it's reviewed by a police officer — if not, the image is "immediately and permanently" deleted. The tech is already in use at other transport hubs in London, but is now being expanded to the Tube.

As for opting out of being surveilled, the police say the cameras will come with clear signage, and that "alternative routes" will be available too — which presumably the criminals can also sneak through. It's not clear if sunglasses and a hood would help you avoid being scanned, but you might be politely asked to remove them.

A 'dystopian' expansion

A map of Victoria Tube station showing the alternative routes (Image credit: British Transport Police)

According to the BBC, the BTP are looking out for people wanted in connection with serious offences, including sexual assault, robbery, and knife crime. Police intelligence data will be used to select the stations covered by the cameras, with the aim of reducing violence and harassment.

However, as the BBC points out, scans of some 530,000 faces across UK railway stations since February have resulted in zero matches, zero arrests, and one false identification. That's based on the BTP's own deployment logs, suggesting that to date the technology isn't helping much.

Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo suggests that the tech "treats the public like suspects" and is a "disturbing and dystopian expansion" of facial recognition systems. The privacy rights group has long been campaigning against the use of these cameras, arguing that they're intrusive and unnecessary.

The reaction online has been mostly negative too: comments in one Reddit thread question the effectiveness of this type of facial recognition, and air concerns about more nefarious uses of the tech further down the line. However, others also point out that public transport stations are already extensively covered by camera monitoring.

• Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick defends Grand Theft Auto 6's $80 base price
• He says, "Our goal is to deliver way more value to consumers than what we charge them"
• The CEO says GTA 6 will be "an incredible bargain"

Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick has defended Grand Theft Auto 6's $80 base price, saying Rockstar Games will "overdeliver" on the experience.

Speaking during a Q&A session after the publisher's Q1 FY27 financial report, Zelnick explained that the game's cost has everything to do with maximizing price by delivering on an experience that will last for consumers.

"Our goal is to deliver way more value to consumers than what we charge them," Zelnick said when asked why it decided to leave NBA 2K27's base pricing at $70 compared to GTA 6, which is priced at $80, and how Take-Two will go forward with pricing other "premium" AAA titles. "And the truth is that the real cost of a AAA video game is a whole lot lower today than it was 20 years ago.

"Pricing has not kept pace with inflation. And our goal is to continue to overdeliver for our consumers because how you feel about any experience is the intersection of the experience itself and what you paid for it."

He continued, "So, to say that we expect that Grand Theft Auto 6 will be an incredible bargain as experiences go is a gross understatement, because Rockstar Games is known for overdelivering."

Zelnick also pointed to GTA Online, which is now 13 years old but continues to draw in millions of players every year, suggesting that a premium experience will keep players engaged, no matter the cost.

"Remember, we're 13 years after GTA Online was launched and people are still highly engaged," he said. "We have record-setting engagement at times. So, that's our goal.

"Our goal is not to maximize price. So, in this case, I think what we've decided to do makes a whole lot of sense in the context of what we're delivering. And that's the lens through which we're going forward as well."

GTA 6 will launch on November 19 with two editions: the Standard and Ultimate Edition. While the former costs $79.99 / £69.99, the more expensive $99.99 / £89.99 Ultimate Edition will offer additional content. While initially criticized by fans, Zelnick told analysts during the Q&A that it's selling more than the Standard Edition.

Take-Two also reported earnings of $1.39 billion during GTA 6's pre-order period, which Zelnick called an "exceptional start to pre-orders," but couldn't share specific sales numbers.

• Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick defends Grand Theft Auto 6's $80 base price
• He says, "Our goal is to deliver way more value to consumers than what we charge them"
• The CEO says GTA 6 will be "an incredible bargain"

Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick has defended Grand Theft Auto 6's $80 base price, saying Rockstar Games will "overdeliver" on the experience.

Speaking during a Q&A session after the publisher's Q1 FY27 financial report, Zelnick explained that the game's cost has everything to do with maximizing price by delivering on an experience that will last for consumers.

"Our goal is to deliver way more value to consumers than what we charge them," Zelnick said when asked why it decided to leave NBA 2K27's base pricing at $70 compared to GTA 6, which is priced at $80, and how Take-Two will go forward with pricing other "premium" AAA titles. "And the truth is that the real cost of a AAA video game is a whole lot lower today than it was 20 years ago.

"Pricing has not kept pace with inflation. And our goal is to continue to overdeliver for our consumers because how you feel about any experience is the intersection of the experience itself and what you paid for it."

He continued, "So, to say that we expect that Grand Theft Auto 6 will be an incredible bargain as experiences go is a gross understatement, because Rockstar Games is known for overdelivering."

Zelnick also pointed to GTA Online, which is now 13 years old but continues to draw in millions of players every year, suggesting that a premium experience will keep players engaged, no matter the cost.

"Remember, we're 13 years after GTA Online was launched and people are still highly engaged," he said. "We have record-setting engagement at times. So, that's our goal.

"Our goal is not to maximize price. So, in this case, I think what we've decided to do makes a whole lot of sense in the context of what we're delivering. And that's the lens through which we're going forward as well."

GTA 6 will launch on November 19 with two editions: the Standard and Ultimate Edition. While the former costs $79.99 / £69.99, the more expensive $99.99 / £89.99 Ultimate Edition will offer additional content. While initially criticized by fans, Zelnick told analysts during the Q&A that it's selling more than the Standard Edition.

Take-Two also reported earnings of $1.39 billion during GTA 6's pre-order period, which Zelnick called an "exceptional start to pre-orders," but couldn't share specific sales numbers.

The Open Compute Project is pushing fleet-scale hardware management for AI data centers as APAC operators contend with rapid capacity growth, higher rack densities, and tighter power availability.

The post OCP APAC Summit Highlights AI Data Center Management as Power Constraints Grow appeared first on TechRepublic.

California lawmakers are advancing SB 903, a bill that would restrict AI therapy chatbots and set new rules for AI use in mental healthcare.

The post California Wants to Draw a Legal Line Between AI and Human Therapists appeared first on TechRepublic.

This article was originally published in April 2024, following the total solar eclipse in the US. The experience in advice is relevant for those thinking about attempting to photograph the 2026 eclipse — which will be total in parts of Iceland, Spain and Portugal, and there will be major partial eclipse in the UK and other European countries — so we're sharing it again.

If you’ve never seen a total eclipse in person, whatever you’ve seen and what you imagine don’t come close. The best photos, the most stunning video, they won’t match the silent, dazzling fury of the real thing. Your phone or monitor won’t capture the infinite diamond brilliance of the Sun’s corona twinkling around the black Moon.

I set out to shoot the total eclipse with my three best camera phones and my Nikon DSLR, but I am thankful that I decided to enjoy the eclipse in the scant three minutes I was under its totality.

Before I talk tech, I’ll do my best to describe the total solar eclipse if you’ve never seen one in person. April 8, 2024 was my first total eclipse, and before that day I thought it would be my last.

After seeing the total solar eclipse live, I felt like I can’t live the rest of my life without seeing one again. I’ve never seen a photo that was equally compelling. Seeing the real eclipse in person, it was so gloriously beautiful that I was immediately sad that it was so fleeting.

Here's what a total solar eclipse really looks like

I was not shocked to hear the crowd around me erupt into spontaneous applause.

There is a bright flash in the instant before the Sun goes dark. The world gets colder suddenly, but the landscape is not pitch dark. Watching the eclipse from the shore of Lake Champlain in Burlington, Vermont, the view of Mount Marcy and the Adirondacks presented a panoramic sunset, with waning light surrounding me at the horizon on all sides, and the black eclipse at the center.

The Sun’s corona dazzles and flares with wisps of magic. You’ve never seen any light move in such a way. The contrast between the shockingly dark moon and the incredibly bright corona makes the halo seem brilliant and crisply present, as though the Sun is just beyond your grasp, and not seven light-minutes away.

The corona is bright, but not as bright as the face of the Sun. It reaches the limit of what my eyes could tolerate without causing pain. To see something so shockingly intense, after avoiding the painfully bright Sun for the previous hour, is a revelation. It feels like a gift being unwrapped in the sky above. It is a surprise and a joy, and I was not shocked to hear the crowd around me erupt into spontaneous applause.

I was awestruck. I forgot everything I was supposed to do at that moment. I’m now grateful that I decided at the last minute to drive all the way up to Burlington, where the clouds were wispy and few and the totality lasted more than three whole minutes. A good friend traveled farther to experience just over thirty seconds of totality in the Ozarks. Neither of us regrets taking our trip.

Ruining a solar eclipse with too much tech

The eclipse shot with iPhone 15 Pro Max and Vaonis Hestia telescope (Image credit: Philip Berne/ Future)

Back to the tech. My plan was … too much. I brought a telescope, and a DSLR, and three phones, and even smart glasses on my face. I don’t know what I was thinking. The eclipse lasted three minutes. I barely had time to focus one camera, let alone try to shoot with five. My plans fell to pieces, and I gave up quickly. I got a few good shots, then I turned my attention to the sky and just allowed myself to soak it in.

Seeing the eclipse was more rewarding than the best photo I’ve seen of the eclipse.

Here’s the gear I brought to shoot the solar eclipse. I borrowed a Vaonis Hestia telescope, which uses your phone as the viewfinder. I used an iPhone 15 Pro Max to take photos and view the eclipse through that telescope, with a solar filter provided by Vaonis. Those photos turned out pretty good, but it isn’t the most powerful telescope. Plus, an eclipse is a very complicated scene for lighting, especially for a phone camera.

Philip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / Future

I also had a Google Pixel 8 Pro and a Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra. I already decided I was not going to try to take telephoto zoom shots of the eclipse with these phones. The 5X range is simply not enough to capture any detail, and the sensor for the longest lens is also the smallest, lowest-quality sensor on the phone. Better to take wide-angle photos.

I set up the Galaxy S24 Ultra to shoot a time-lapse (Samsung calls it Hyperlapse) video of the entire event. I was pretty disappointed with the results. The sun was too high in the sky for even the widest lens to capture the scene around me as well as the eclipse in progress. The camera had trouble balancing the incredibly bright partial eclipse with the surroundings, so it just looks like a sunny day until totality occurs. When the eclipse happens, the camera balances the light in a way that doesn’t present the sunset colors and the changing light in the way I remember it.

The eclipse shot with Pixel 8 Pro and a solar filter (Image credit: Philip Berne/ Future)

I attached a solar filter to the Google Pixel 8 Pro, hoping I would be able to see more of the partial eclipse as it happened. Nope, the filter cut out too much light for the phone to handle. I was barely able to see the Sun through the filter, let alone capture great shots.

At the last minute, I decided to also bring my Nikon D750 camera with a Nikon 80-400mm lens. I don’t have a solar filter for that huge lens, so I planned on shooting only the totality of the eclipse, when it is safe to look at the sun without glasses. I got some pretty good shots, but I was rushing around too much, juggling too many chores. I should have reduced the exposure levels, or used a manual mode to dial back the shutter speed. The photos were blurry and blown out, not very good.

Eclipse shot with Nikon D750 at 400mm (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)Philip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / Future

In the end, I got a couple of good shots from the iPhone on the telescope. They were better than the shots my friends took with their phones, and they impressed the people I shared them with. From my own perfectionist standards, I was disappointed with my pics, but I wasn’t disappointed at all with the experience.

In fact, I’m happy that I didn’t try much harder to take great photos, because at the last minute I chose to sacrifice the pics and enjoy the eclipse. It was amazing. It was the greatest natural phenomena I’ve ever seen. For the next eclipse, I’ll bring only one camera, and only one easy plan, and if I screw it up then I won’t even care. The best photo I could get would pale in comparison to the totality of the real thing.

You might also like...

• I shot the eclipse with an iPhone 15 Pro Max, Google Pixel 8 Pro and a Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – here's which one did best
• You took amazing smartphone eclipse photos, but reminded me why I didn't use Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra's 100x Space Zoom
• How to photograph the total solar eclipse with your camera or smartphone

This article was originally published in April 2024, following the total solar eclipse in the US. The experience in advice is relevant for those thinking about attempting to photograph the 2026 eclipse — which will be total in parts of Iceland, Spain and Portugal, and there will be major partial eclipse in the UK and other European countries — so we're sharing it again.

If you’ve never seen a total eclipse in person, whatever you’ve seen and what you imagine don’t come close. The best photos, the most stunning video, they won’t match the silent, dazzling fury of the real thing. Your phone or monitor won’t capture the infinite diamond brilliance of the Sun’s corona twinkling around the black Moon.

I set out to shoot the total eclipse with my three best camera phones and my Nikon DSLR, but I am thankful that I decided to enjoy the eclipse in the scant three minutes I was under its totality.

Before I talk tech, I’ll do my best to describe the total solar eclipse if you’ve never seen one in person. April 8, 2024 was my first total eclipse, and before that day I thought it would be my last.

After seeing the total solar eclipse live, I felt like I can’t live the rest of my life without seeing one again. I’ve never seen a photo that was equally compelling. Seeing the real eclipse in person, it was so gloriously beautiful that I was immediately sad that it was so fleeting.

Here's what a total solar eclipse really looks like

I was not shocked to hear the crowd around me erupt into spontaneous applause.

There is a bright flash in the instant before the Sun goes dark. The world gets colder suddenly, but the landscape is not pitch dark. Watching the eclipse from the shore of Lake Champlain in Burlington, Vermont, the view of Mount Marcy and the Adirondacks presented a panoramic sunset, with waning light surrounding me at the horizon on all sides, and the black eclipse at the center.

The Sun’s corona dazzles and flares with wisps of magic. You’ve never seen any light move in such a way. The contrast between the shockingly dark moon and the incredibly bright corona makes the halo seem brilliant and crisply present, as though the Sun is just beyond your grasp, and not seven light-minutes away.

The corona is bright, but not as bright as the face of the Sun. It reaches the limit of what my eyes could tolerate without causing pain. To see something so shockingly intense, after avoiding the painfully bright Sun for the previous hour, is a revelation. It feels like a gift being unwrapped in the sky above. It is a surprise and a joy, and I was not shocked to hear the crowd around me erupt into spontaneous applause.

I was awestruck. I forgot everything I was supposed to do at that moment. I’m now grateful that I decided at the last minute to drive all the way up to Burlington, where the clouds were wispy and few and the totality lasted more than three whole minutes. A good friend traveled farther to experience just over thirty seconds of totality in the Ozarks. Neither of us regrets taking our trip.

Ruining a solar eclipse with too much tech

The eclipse shot with iPhone 15 Pro Max and Vaonis Hestia telescope (Image credit: Philip Berne/ Future)

Back to the tech. My plan was … too much. I brought a telescope, and a DSLR, and three phones, and even smart glasses on my face. I don’t know what I was thinking. The eclipse lasted three minutes. I barely had time to focus one camera, let alone try to shoot with five. My plans fell to pieces, and I gave up quickly. I got a few good shots, then I turned my attention to the sky and just allowed myself to soak it in.

Seeing the eclipse was more rewarding than the best photo I’ve seen of the eclipse.

Here’s the gear I brought to shoot the solar eclipse. I borrowed a Vaonis Hestia telescope, which uses your phone as the viewfinder. I used an iPhone 15 Pro Max to take photos and view the eclipse through that telescope, with a solar filter provided by Vaonis. Those photos turned out pretty good, but it isn’t the most powerful telescope. Plus, an eclipse is a very complicated scene for lighting, especially for a phone camera.

Philip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / Future

I also had a Google Pixel 8 Pro and a Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra. I already decided I was not going to try to take telephoto zoom shots of the eclipse with these phones. The 5X range is simply not enough to capture any detail, and the sensor for the longest lens is also the smallest, lowest-quality sensor on the phone. Better to take wide-angle photos.

I set up the Galaxy S24 Ultra to shoot a time-lapse (Samsung calls it Hyperlapse) video of the entire event. I was pretty disappointed with the results. The sun was too high in the sky for even the widest lens to capture the scene around me as well as the eclipse in progress. The camera had trouble balancing the incredibly bright partial eclipse with the surroundings, so it just looks like a sunny day until totality occurs. When the eclipse happens, the camera balances the light in a way that doesn’t present the sunset colors and the changing light in the way I remember it.

The eclipse shot with Pixel 8 Pro and a solar filter (Image credit: Philip Berne/ Future)

I attached a solar filter to the Google Pixel 8 Pro, hoping I would be able to see more of the partial eclipse as it happened. Nope, the filter cut out too much light for the phone to handle. I was barely able to see the Sun through the filter, let alone capture great shots.

At the last minute, I decided to also bring my Nikon D750 camera with a Nikon 80-400mm lens. I don’t have a solar filter for that huge lens, so I planned on shooting only the totality of the eclipse, when it is safe to look at the sun without glasses. I got some pretty good shots, but I was rushing around too much, juggling too many chores. I should have reduced the exposure levels, or used a manual mode to dial back the shutter speed. The photos were blurry and blown out, not very good.

Eclipse shot with Nikon D750 at 400mm (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)Philip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / FuturePhilip Berne / Future

In the end, I got a couple of good shots from the iPhone on the telescope. They were better than the shots my friends took with their phones, and they impressed the people I shared them with. From my own perfectionist standards, I was disappointed with my pics, but I wasn’t disappointed at all with the experience.

In fact, I’m happy that I didn’t try much harder to take great photos, because at the last minute I chose to sacrifice the pics and enjoy the eclipse. It was amazing. It was the greatest natural phenomena I’ve ever seen. For the next eclipse, I’ll bring only one camera, and only one easy plan, and if I screw it up then I won’t even care. The best photo I could get would pale in comparison to the totality of the real thing.

You might also like...

• I shot the eclipse with an iPhone 15 Pro Max, Google Pixel 8 Pro and a Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – here's which one did best
• You took amazing smartphone eclipse photos, but reminded me why I didn't use Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra's 100x Space Zoom
• How to photograph the total solar eclipse with your camera or smartphone

• A modder has taken the innards of a Steam Deck and put them into a Game Boy-style case
• The end result is the 'SteamBoy', although it's not quite finished (the screen doesn't yet work)
• There's a lot of excitement about this DIY project, and some gamers have even said they'd be keen to buy a retro handheld like this

Ever wished the Steam Deck looked a bit more retro — or indeed a lot more retro? Meet the 'SteamBoy', which takes the innards of Valve's handheld and transplants them into a case styled on the Game Boy.

Steam Deck HQ noticed this clever piece of modding in the form a project by 'PhyFawkes' as posted on Reddit (via VideoCardz).

The SteamBoy uses the motherboard, controller, buttons, speakers, and battery from the Steam Deck, fitting the components into a case which the maker says is the same dimensions as an original Game Boy, with a thickness of 32mm (yes, it's thick).

PhyFawkes explains: "The battery is the original battery, and it basically takes up the whole width of the device on the inside. It's sandwiched between the motherboard and the display. The motherboard and controller boards are completely intact as well."

The only element that isn't functional yet is the screen, so this device is still a work in progress. The Redditor has demonstrated it working on an external monitor, though.

Analysis: next stop Kickstarter?

(Image credit: PhyFawkes on Reddit)

The snag with getting the screen going is that the motherboard firmware reports the display properties directly to SteamOS, and so the firmware details must be updated with the info for the new screen. The Redditor says it hopefully it won't take too long to sort this out.

Another part of the recipe that's missing is the triggers, but PhyFawkes says that they might be able to add them eventually, but that space constraints with the case could make this too tricky a proposition.

Apparently the handheld runs cool enough with some slight under-volting. All in all, this a very smart-looking project, and I'm seriously impressed. The case itself is 3D-printed, with the Redditor noting that they're going to provide the details on how to make one for those who might want to try their hand at this enterprising piece of handheld DIY.

Of course, constructing something like this is well beyond the scope of your average gamer, and there are fans of this concept out there who'd be willing to pay money for a SteamBoy of their own. Plenty of them, in fact, as the reception for this project has been nothing short of glowing.

As someone on Reddit put it: "This is legitimately so cool. I would totally back something like this on Kickstarter."

Another Redditor said: "Looks amazing! I'd probably buy 2 of these bad boys."