Technology

Google’s Pixel range comprises some of the best phones on the market right now, but it’s with the A series that the phonemaker really shines. Year on year, the company has produced one of the best affordable premium smartphones, beating out competitors on price while offering exceptional performance where it matters. In 2025, however, I’m feeling less energetic about the beloved handset.

Don’t get me wrong – the Google Pixel 9a is a phenomenal phone and there are legitimately good reasons to buy it. It’s no doubt better than the iPhone 16e where it matters most and more accessible than the Samsung Galaxy S24 FE.

However, it’s only slightly higher specced than the Pixel 8a, and introduces a new design that looks more iPhone-like than anything else.

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

The Tensor G4 chip found in the Pixel 9a only offers gentle performance improvements over the G3 in the Pixel 8a. The larger battery only accounts for about two extra hours of battery life in our stress test – worthy of note and praise, but not enough to offset the Tensor’s habit of being a power hog.

And so when collecting my thoughts on the Pixel 9a, a phone I’ve enjoyed using over the past month, I’ve really only been pushed back to the Pixel 8a – a phone I truly loved but scolded for a price bump it received in Australia (where I live) over the 7a. Weighing the differences, it’s tough for me to recommend the Pixel 9a as the phone to buy, when the previous model is now cheaper and technically similar. After all, the main focus of the A series device is to be accessible – so I’m naturally in favor of the less expensive device.

Old vs new

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

The Pixel 8a is much the same beast as the Pixel 9a, but in fairness I think there are legitimate reasons for someone to upgrade. Looking at benchmarks passed through Geekbench and 3DMark, there’s not much of a performance argument to be made here, but there are odd features that may have you wanting the newer device, such as the new editing tools and the higher brightness.

I’m just going to be efficient. Below I’ve listed the areas where the phones actually differ. I’m not listing the price, as they both had the exact same starting cost though retailers are now offering the Pixel 8a cheaper.

Additionally, the Pixel 9a also includes several editing features previously found on the more expensive Pixel 9 devices, such as Add Me, macro focus, auto frame, Reimagine and macro focus video. The charging time figures above were observed by the good folks at Android Authority.

With retailers still offering the Pixel 8a, and often at a steeply discounted price, there’s not really a lot of improvement here that’d make me want the Pixel 9a instead. The screen is nicer and slightly larger, but not as large as the one found on the similarly priced Nothing Phone 3a Pro – a phone that I personally prefer over the Pixel 9a, also.

The Pixel 9a has observably better gaming performance, but I’d argue that, if gaming’s a priority for you, you’d be better off with the iPhone 16 Plus or, hell, the Pixel 9 Pro XL – though obviously these don’t come cheap, and if you’re OK with a smaller display, the 9a might be fine.

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

The battery may be larger in the Pixel 9a than in the Pixel 8a, but that hasn’t really translated to a meaningful difference on testing (or in my day-to-day use). The same can be said of charging times, despite a 5W increase in capacity.

The cameras are brilliant on both devices and I’m not prepared to say one is better than the other – Google’s really good at this specific thing and you’re getting a brilliant snapper either way.

Finally, on the topic of ongoing support, it’s brilliant that phone companies are starting to support their devices for seven years. However I’d argue that, even if shopping for an affordable all-rounder like the Pixel 9a, you’d likely upgrade within that time. You’ll notice quality and battery alike degrade and you’ll probably be looking for the next thing within three or so years – but even if you want to keep your phone around for a while, six years of remaining support isn’t bad at all.

What's worth upgrading for?

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

Don’t take me as pessimistic – there are legitimate reasons for getting the Pixel 9a instead of the 8a.

The brighter screen is a good one. The 700 nits difference in favor of the Pixel 9a is observable, although the 2,000 nits performance of the Pixel 8a still leaves many key competitors (looking at you, iPhone 16e) in the dark.

The stronger IP rating of the Pixel 9a would give me greater peace of mind that it wouldn’t break as easily from contact with water. The same goes for the greater battery life – even if I may argue in the previous section that it’s not that big of a difference, you may personally be shopping for the biggest battery possible, and I can’t argue against that.

There's also those earlier mentioned camera and editing tools that the Pixel 9a has – you might be particularly taken by some of them (Add Me is very cool), and although I don't think any of them are more worthwhile than a saving, you might prefer a more feature-rich handset.

Finally, the phone looks great! I actually love the design – Google’s removal of the camera bar originally had me apprehensive, but I don’t mind what they’ve done with a more neutral shape. It’s more iPhone-like and generally might be preferred among some shoppers.

Look for a sale

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

It’s a safe bet the Pixel 8a will be discounted more and more as time goes on, and I’d encourage you to jump on it when the price suits. The Pixel 9a will also likely see a discount sometime in 2025 from some retailers (likely including Google itself come Pixel 10 season), but we’ll have to wait and see.

I’d really love for Google to reshape its range around the A series – it’s a phenomenal device, but I can’t help but feel that they could make it more appealing. A cheaper variant is at the top of my list, but also a model with a larger screen would be nice – one that brings the fight to other Android phones that may offer larger displays but miss out on all the other great Google features.

For now though, while I’m usually head over heels for new phones, I’ve long been of the mind that Google’s Pixel range should be just a tad more accessible, given a couple of price increases in the past five years. I’d certainly like the Pixel A to be cheaper, and it’s a shame that we can’t call the Pixel 9a ‘budget’. With price drops, however, the Pixel 8a is looking more and more attractive.

You might also like...

• Nothing makes sense: why the company's new 3a Pro is my favorite affordable premium smartphone over the Google Pixel 9a
• From iPhone to Android and (almost) back again – the iPhone 16e failed to lure me back to iOS
• After 3 weeks with Samsung's Galaxy A56, I'm closer than ever to ditching my iPhone for Android

What a week we've had. GTA 6 got a new trailer that looks stunning, Sonos and IKEA sadly ended their audio partnership, and Sony teased its new flagship headphones.

To catch up on all this and more scroll down to see the week's seven biggest tech news stories with quickfire snippets on each and links to the larger story if you're keen to know more.

When you're done be sure to check out seven new movies and TV shows to stream this weekend (May 9).

7. YouTube Premium started seeing double

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

YouTube started to pilot a two-person YouTube Premium membership in select countries this week (namely France, India, Taiwan, and Hong Kong).

It will allow two people to split a subscription at a rate that’s cheaper than two individual plans, or splitting a family plan. In France an individual plan costs €12.99 per month and a family plan is €23.99, while a two-person plan is €19.99 – so we’d expect it to cost around $18.99 / £16.99 / AU$26.99 in the US, UK, and Australia.

Apparently, this plan is part of YouTube’s ongoing experiments that look to find “new ways to provide greater flexibility and value to our YouTube Premium subscribers.” Though it’s yet to be seen if this will make YouTube Premium a better value proposition.

• Read more: YouTube Premium's new two-person tier looks like a good deal – but it's still not enough to get me to pay for YouTube

6. The Netflix homepage got its biggest-ever upgrade

(Image credit: Future)

Netflix is finally acknowledging that it’s not just for movies and TV shows anymore, redesigning its home screen to accommodate live events and gaming in a way that should better connect you to real-time events.

It’s also finally dabbling in generative AI in, perhaps, the smartest way possible: search. Now you can find your next binge using natural language queries.

There are other big changes like labels on top of title images and a general reshuffling of interface elements. It’s too soon to say if everyone is loving the new Netflix.

• Read more: Netflix is redesigning your TV homepage

5. Whoop revealed two new promising wearables

(Image credit: Whoop)

After four years without hardware, Whoop has unveiled not one but two new wearables for 2025. The Whoop 5.0 and Whoop MG are actually one and the same device, the latter a "medical-grade" variant with more intensive health features like ECG, blood pressure, and more. The wearables look great and boast a 14-day battery life, as well as a new design.

Unfortunately, there's also a new pricing structure that means the very best features are reserved for those who pay the highest price. There is now a cheaper option and a more expensive one to the previous offering, but the Whoop 5.0 has some features disabled at the cheapest pricing tier.

It's a tough pill to swallow for users who have waited four years for new Whoop wearables, but with Garmin and others taking subscriptions to another level, it's the direction the industry appears to be heading in with no remorse.

• Read more: Whoop unveils two brand new wearables, but their best features are hidden behind a paywall

4. Sonos and IKEA ended their unlikely audio duet

(Image credit: IKEA)

Earlier this week, Sonos and IKEA announced that they would be parting ways after six years of collaborating on audio homeware tech which includes the popular Symfonisk bookshelf and lamp speakers. In an email sent to The Verge, Sonos spokesperson Erin Pategas broke the news and revealed that Symfonisk’s current inventory of products is being phased out globally at all IKEA locations, with no plans to release future products.

Though the future of Sonos and IKEA will cease to exist, Sonos has offered reassurance that existing products in its Symfonisk range will still receive software updates despite the discontinuation of the partnership. The news come as quite the surprise since we’ve been very fond of Symfonisk’s speakers, but with the unpredictable future of new tariff laws looming over businesses, this is a measure that Sonos has had to carefully consider.

• Read more: Sonos and IKEA have announced they are parting ways after a six year collaboration

3. Microsoft announced two new Surface devices

(Image credit: Microsoft)

Microsoft expanded its Surface lineup, with the all-new Surface Laptop 13-inch and the Surface Pro 12-inch 2-in-1 device using the Snapdragon X Plus processor. Most importantly, the former is the lightest and thinnest Surface Laptop to date. Battery life has also been upgraded for both, providing that extra time needed while you're away from your desk or power source.

It’s worth noting that these new devices are much cheaper on this occasion; the Surface Laptop 13-inch starts at $899 / £899 / AU$1,699, while the Surface Pro starts at $799 / £799 / AU$1,499 – a huge fall from the previous versions for both, starting at $1,099 / AU$1,899. They’re available for pre-order right now.

• Read more: Here are the 4 key things you need to know about Microsoft's new Surface devices

2. We got a launch date for Sony’s next flagship headphones

(Image credit: Sony)

It’s been three years since Sony debuted its top-end wireless headphones, the WH-1000XM5s. But after numerous leaks, the tech giant has confirmed exactly when we’ll be seeing its successors – on May 15, next week.

What can we expect from them? The rumors so far point to improved noise cancelling and audio processing, plus the return of a hinged design that Sony skipped on the current model. On the downside, there will also likely be a small price hike. But despite that, May 15 (or May 16, if you’re in Australia), is a date for your diary if you’re in the market for some premium, travel-friendly cans.

• Read more: Sony confirms launch date for flagship WH-1000XM6 headphones – here are 6 things to expect

1. GTA 6 got a brand new trailer

GTA 6 broke the internet this week with a brand new trailer focused on Vice City and the game's partners in crime, Jason and Lucia. But story teasers aside, it looks incredible.

We’ve already called it one of the most beautiful games of this generation – it looks leagues ahead of what other studios have achieved – and most staggering of all the trailer was apparently captured entirely on a PS5.

It clearly impressed many others too as the trailer has racked up over 94 million views in three days (at the time of writing) and Spotify streams of the song Hot Together which featured heavily in the trailer surged by 182,000% in the hours after the trailer released.

All we have to do now is wait a little over a year until May 26, 2026 so we can play it for ourselves.

• Read more: Grand Theft Auto 6 looks mind-blowingly beautiful in latest screenshots

You might also like

• Sony will finally launch its first ‘Alpha’ camera phone soon – here’s what that could mean for the Xperia 1 VII
• Samsung can make the Galaxy Z Fold 7 as thin as it likes, I'm not buying a phone with a 22:9 screen
• I compared Google Gemini's new image editing feature to ChatGPT's, and it's much better at sticking to the original

Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for May 10.

One revolutionized first-person shooters on consoles, another taught us how to care for a virtual pet, but they all deserve a spot in history.

Hints and answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, No. 229, for Saturday, May 10.

Hints and answers for Connections for May 10, #699.

This season's Islanders haven't been announced, but there is a premiere date set.

Someday, hopefully not soon, I'll shed this mortal coil and in short order be forgotten. Unless someone makes an AI Lance Ulanoff.

In short, please don't.

I had this epiphany and realized the need for a public statement that might one day protect my likeness from appearing after my demise after reading about the tragic case of an Arizona man and road rage victim whose AI avatar delivered a short and, I must admit, moving speech to a judge who was considering the sentence of the man who, according to the ruling, killed him.

It's a terrible and sad case, and in the video, Christopher Pelkey appears to deliver forgiveness and even some humor. It's not a perfect rendering. The voice sometimes sounds robotic, and the video is a bit stiff, but the overall effect is quite a thing.

There's no getting around the tragedy of the court case, but the decision by Pelkey's family to bring him to life as an AI-generated avatar is problematic. While Pelkey appears to be delivering the impassioned words, they're actually written by his sister. I assume she knew her brother well, but I doubt she can know exactly what he would have said in the event of his death.

There's no stopping this now

This slippery slope we're standing over is crumbling underfoot, and we are about to slide down into a very weird and uncanny valley. That this technology was used in a court of law and done without, it appears, the assistance of a major corporation or significant funds, means that more and more people will consider not only trying to bring dead relatives back to digital life but also enabling real-world and sometimes important interactions for them.

Pelkey's appearance is an extreme case, for now, but will likely not be an outlier. I expect others to start putting long-lost relatives to work as AI avatars in all sorts of cases, from class action suits to civil divorce proceedings.

I'm sure many family members will think they're acting in your best interest when they digitally resurrect you. Just this week, we saw the family of legendary NBA broadcaster Jim Fagan okay the AI recreation of his voice for future NBA games (mostly promos and not, it seems, any play-by-play). I'm sure that a full-bodied AI Fagan isn't far behind.

Pelkey, though, was not a celebrity, and businesses will likely crop up to help anyone digital revive Grandma, a brother, Sis, Aunt June, anyone you've lost and desperately miss.

Just don't

I understand the intention and, to be honest, I don't know if I would reject a chance to "bring back a loved one." Of course, you're not bringing back anyone. The AI avatar will only look and sound like the deceased, though I guess it could go further than that.

Last year, I wrote about Silicon Intelligence, a Chinese company that wants to use photos and videos to build a digital persona that can even respond in ways that the original, living relative might have done.

The technology necessary to make fully functioning digital replicas of anyone living or dead is here now, which is why I'm encouraging everyone to declare publicly whether or not they approve of this for their corporeal presence.

I understand that with the hours and hours of videos and thousands of photos available online depicting me blathering on about technology, I'm an easy target for this. My family may not be interested in resurrecting me, but I worry any enterprising techy could build their own Lance Ulanoff and then spend hours teasing it about all the times the real Lance Ulanoff was wrong.

You might also like

• The best steak I've ever had was made by an AI robot grill
• Google and NBC are using AI to try and stick the landing at the Paris Olympics
• The AI That Cried AAAAAAHHH!
• I tried the most realistic AI voice companion ever created - if ChatGPT or Gemini ever gets this good, reality is in trouble

This free AI tool will help you create Lego designs that actually work.

Here are hints and the answer for today's Wordle, No. 1,421, for Saturday, May 10.

Here are hints and answers for the NYT Strands puzzle No. 433 for May 10.

The new all-access ESPN app will be different from the ESPN Plus app and include live sports and more.

• NBC Sports will use an AI-generated version of legendary announcer Jim Fagan’s voice in its upcoming NBA coverage
• The re-creation will appear in intros and promos with the approval of Fagan's family
• NBC hopes to evoke nostalgia for 1990s basketball with the AI voice

The booming, baritone narration by Jim Fagan is as much a part of 1990s NBA games as Bugs Bunny selling shoes with Michael Jordan or the “Roundball Rock” theme song. Though Fagan passed away in 2017, NBC has his voice ready to go for the upcoming season thanks to AI voice cloning. NBC Sports announced the plan for when it regains broadcasting rights this October.

Fagan’s voice won’t be narrating entire games, the current commentators don't have to worry about direct AI competition just yet. The plan is to use him selectively: show opens, promotional spots, maybe the dramatic lead-in to a playoff broadcast.

The network is reportedly shelling out billions as part of a massive rights package shared with Amazon and Disney. What better way to brand its return than with the voice that defined the league’s TV glory years? NBC just hopes Fagan's phantom voice will remind people of the NBA's golden age three decades ago.

NBC approached the project carefully to avoid a backlash from Fagan's fans. The company built Fagan's vocal doppelganger with the permission and cooperation of Fagan’s family.

"He took great pride in his work with NBC Sports, especially in helping set the stage for some of the most memorable moments in NBA history. Knowing that his voice will once again be part of the game he loved – and that a new generation of fans will get to experience it – is incredibly special for our family," Fagan’s daughters, Jana Silvia Joyce and Risa Silvia-Koonin, said in a statement. "He would be so thrilled and proud to be a part of this."

Slam dunk AI

If this sounds like the echo of a similar idea, that's because NBCUniversal has dipped into its AI audio toolbox very recently. At the Paris Olympics last year, NBC recreated Al Michaels’ voice to deliver Olympic recaps on Peacock.

There’s a trend in sports broadcasting to remix the past using futuristic tools. Whether it’s classic theme songs, throwback logos, or AI-generated recaps, the goal is novelty nostalgia, a feeling more than a strictly perfect recreation. And if it works, get ready for AI to resurrect Marv Albert next.

You might also like

• Google and NBC are using AI to try and stick the landing at the Paris Olympics
• The AI That Cried AAAAAAHHH!
• I tried the most realistic AI voice companion ever created - if ChatGPT or Gemini ever gets this good, reality is in trouble

NordVPN’s recently released Linux GUI app makes improving privacy on Linux easier and more accessible, especially for beginners.

If a new phone gave me an occasional electric shock, I wouldn’t recommend it. Even if it only shocked me occasionally, when I open a specific app, I'd say no. If a phone wasn’t just bad, but shockingly harmful, I would say that phone, or at least the electric shock part, should be removed.

I just spent a couple weeks with the Google Pixel 9a, which has a tool called Pixel Studio, available on all of Google’s latest Pixel phones. Pixel Studio is an AI-powered image generator that creates images from a text prompt. Until recently, Pixel Studio refused to depict people, but Google removed those guardrails, and the results predictably reinforce stereotypes. That’s not just bad, that’s harmful.

At first Pixel Studio seemed like fun, when there were no people involved (Image credit: Google)

I’m asking Google – and all phone makers – to stop offering image generators that make images of people. These tools can lead to bigotry.

Let’s try a quick role play: You be the Pixel Studio, and I will be me. Hey, Pixel Studio: Make me an image of a successful person!

What image will you make? What do you see in your mind when you think of success? Is it someone who looks like you? The answer will be different for everybody, depending on your own view of success.

Not for Pixel Studio. Pixel Studio has a singular vision of a successful person. Unless you happen to be a young, white, able-bodied man, Pixel Studio probably doesn’t see you when it envisions success.

Here's what the Pixel 9a thinks a successful person actually looks like Image 1 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 2 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 3 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 4 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 5 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 6 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 7 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app, is usually young, white, male, able-bodied, thin, with good hair and expensive-looking clothes, in an urban environment. All of those are stereotypes

Image 8 of 8

A successful person, according to the Google Pixel Studio app (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

I got this result after more than 20 attempts to create an image of a successful person. This was the first Black person Pixel Studio generated.

I asked Pixel Studio five times for an image of ‘a successful person.’ Of the five people Pixel Studio created for me, zero were older. None used a wheelchair or hearing aids, or a cane.

All of them wore expensive-looking suits, even the woman. That’s right, just one woman and four men. And yes, all of them were white.

I have a serious problem with this because the Pixel's digital brain is clearly rooted in lazy stereotypes. These stereotypes support misogyny, ableism, racism, ageism, and who knows what other biases.

This is ingrained in the Pixel's thinking. If you use the Pixel 9a to be more successful, you should know that it has a very limited, stereotypical idea of success. Whenever the Pixel phone represents success in its suggestions, it may be colored by this bigotry.

In Pixel Studio's narrow world, success means you are young, white, able-bodied, probably a man, and wealthy. Apparently, nobody successful is old, non-white, disabled, transgender, or uninterested in flashy suits or material wealth, among countless diverse characteristics a successful person might have.

It's not just the Pixel. Motorola's Moto AI generates questionable images as well (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

Did I just get unlucky? I asked Pixel Studio five times, then I asked twice more when I realized it only created one woman. I got another white man and a woman who looked like she might be Latina or of Middle Eastern descent. Both young, standing tall, and wearing suits.

I’m not simplifying anything; Pixel Studio is simplifying things down to the most basic, biased denominator. That's baked into how these AI tools learn.

Pixel Studio generates stereotypes because that's how it's supposed to work

First of all, AI training data was mostly taken from the Internet and public forums. The data inevitably mirrors the biases of the messy, unequal world that created it.

There was no concerted effort to combat stereotypes or introduce diversity into the training data. AI companies like Google simply hoovered up everything they could find, apparently without much thought regarding the biases shaping the data itself. That taints the entire model from the ground up.

Second, machine learning looks for patterns and groups things together. That's not always a bad thing. When a computer looks for patterns and groups, for instance, letters and words together, you get language and ChatGPT.

Apply that pattern-matching to people's appearances, and voilà: stereotypes. That’s pretty much the definition of a stereotype.

Here's an image of a successful Android, which is not at all offensive (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

Merriam-Webster defines a stereotype as “something conforming to a fixed or general pattern.” The fundamental way machine learning works reinforces stereotypes. It’s practically unavoidable.

Finally, machine learning tools are trained by us – users who are asked a simple question after each response: was this a good response? We don’t get to say if the response is true, accurate, fair, or harmful. We only get to tell the AI if the response is good or bad. That means we're training the AI on our gut reactions – our own ingrained stereotypes.

An image conforming to our biases feels comfortably familiar, or good. A response that defies our expectations will cause cognitive stress. Unless I'm actively trying to deconstruct my biases, I'll tell the machine it’s doing a good job when it reinforces stereotypes I believe.

Stereotypes are bad, mmmmkay?

Let's be clear: stereotypes are poison. Stereotypes are a root cause of some of the biggest problems our society faces.

Stereotyping reduces diverse groups of people into simple, usually negative and unpleasant caricatures. That makes it easier to feel like the group doesn’t belong with the rest of us. This leads to prejudice and discrimination. There is no benefit that comes from stereotyping.

This isn't just philosophical hand-wringing; stereotyping causes real harm. People who feel discriminated against experience more health problems like cardiovascular disease and hypertension. Doctors who stereotype patients offer a lower standard of care without realizing they are causing harm.

The kind of stereotypical thinking reflected in these AI images contributes to hiring discrimination, wage gaps between different groups in the same jobs, and a lack of opportunities at higher level positions for marginalized groups.

Pixel 9 Pro Fold with Pixel Studio. Is this app really making the Pixel better? (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

When we look at attacks on diversity, equity and inclusivity, we must draw a depressingly straight line that passes through the Pixel Studio’s narrow vision of ‘success’ to real-world bigotry.

It is ironic that these features are part of so-called Artificial Intelligence, because they demonstrate a profound lack of actual intelligence.

What should the AI do, and what should we do about the AI?

This egg is rotten and needs to be tossed

If you asked me, an intelligent human, to draw a successful person, I would say that’s impossible because success isn’t a characteristic that defines the way a person looks. I can’t just draw success, I need to know more before I can create that image. Any attempt to create an image from just the word ‘success’ would be dumb.

But AI isn't meant to be intelligent. It's designed to be a reflection of us - to give us what we want. It's designed to reinforce our stereotypes so that we will pat it on the head and say "good job, Pixel Studio!" while we share these tired images.

I asked Google if it had any concerns about the results I got from Pixel Studio. I asked if it's a problem that the Pixel Studio reinforces negative stereotypes? And if this problem cannot be solved, would Google consider again removing the ability to make images with people? I asked those questions a couple of weeks ago and Google has not responded.

This is not a chicken-and-egg question. It doesn’t matter whether the image generator creates the stereotype or simply reflects it. This egg is rotten and needs to be tossed. All of the eggs this chicken lays will be rotten. Let the AI play Tic Tac Toe and leave people alone.

You might also like...

• Pixel Studio on the Pixel 9 now lets you generate AI images of people, and the results can be terrifying
• Google confirms Android 16's useful new battery health tools will skip older Pixel phones
• AI is making phones smarter, but notifications are more broken than ever

In addition to the Whoop 5.0, there is now the Whoop MG. These new wearables can track your pace of aging, heartbeat, blood pressure and more.

Can Frank Lampard guide the Sky Blues to Wembley?

• GMKtec's EVO-X2 launch reportedly saw hundreds of units sold on day one
• The devices are powered by AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 with 50 TOPS AI performance
• Racks of the RGB-lit mini PCs were shown during aging tests for quality assurance

GMKtec, a mini PC manufacturer based in Shenzhen, China, has launched its new flagship device, the EVO-X2.

The company says the debut of the product, which had the first unit personally signed by Lisa Su, the CEO of AMD, drew strong interest, with hundreds of units sold through its official website on the first day.

In response, GMKtec has shifted into high gear, triggering what it calls “emergency production protocols” to meet this early demand.

(Image credit: GMKtec) First come, first served

GMKtec shared a rare photo from inside its factory (see header image) showing rows of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 powered units undergoing final aging tests, each equipped with RGB cooling fans.

This testing stage helps verify system stability under continuous operation before shipping and is part of its standard quality control process, designed to ensure the mini PCs hold up under real-world workloads.

The EVO-X2 is built around the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 processor, which is manufactured on TSMC’s 4nm FinFET process. It features 16 cores and 32 threads and can reach speeds up to 5.1GHz.

This high-performance processor includes an AI engine based on AMD’s XDNA 2 architecture, capable of delivering up to 50 TOPS from the NPU alone. GMKtec claims the chip achieves up to 2.2 times the AI performance of an Nvidia RTX 4090 in LM Studio, while consuming less power.

The mini PC is targeted at creators, hybrid professionals, and gamers. Memory options include 64GB or 128GB LPDDR5X, and storage options scale up to 16TB with dual M.2 slots. Video output supports resolutions up to 7680×4320 at 60Hz.

EVO-X2 offers a wide range of ports, including HDMI, DisplayPort, USB4, multiple USB-A connections, a 2.5G Ethernet jack, and both front and rear 3.5mm audio jacks. It supports Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4.

The EVO-X2 is available to buy on GMKtec’s official website. Two configurations are being offered, and a limited-time code (X2PR30) gives a $30 discount if purchased from here. Shipments are going out on a first-come, first-served basis.

You may also like

• Check out our list of the best mobile workstations for any budget
• And these are the best workstations you can buy right now
• Chinese brand’s $2,000 Ryzen AI Max+ mini PC set to go on sale

Superfoods are nutrient-dense foods that offer various health benefits. Here is everything you need to know about incorporating them into your diet.

• Insight Partners confirms effects of January 2025 breach
• VC firm reveals some sensitive data was stolen
• No one has yet claimed responsibility for the attack

Insight Partners, a major venture capital organization that invested in some of the biggest tech organizations around today, has confirmed suffering a cyberattack in which it lost sensitive data on employees and some of its partners.

In mid-February 2025, the company released a statement, informing that it suffered a cyberattack a month earlier.

“On January 16, 2025, Insight Partners detected that an unauthorized third-party accessed certain Insight information systems through a sophisticated social engineering attack,” the announcement reads. “As soon as this incident was detected, we moved quickly to contain, remediate, and start an investigation within a matter of hours. We notified stakeholders connected to Insight in January to alert them and encourage vigilance and tightened security protocols irrespective of having shared data compromised. We also notified law enforcement in relevant jurisdictions.”

Investor details compromised

The company said it didn’t find evidence of intrusions after January 16, and added that, since the attack was contained to a single day, it did not disrupt its day-to-day operations.

It recently updated the announcement, saying the breach was verified and confirming that some sensitive data was indeed lost, including fund information, management company information, portfolio company information, banking information, tax information, personal information of current and former employees, and information related to limited partners.

The company doesn’t know how many victims there are just yet, but said it would be notifying affected entities over the coming days. Finally, it urged everyone to keep a close eye on financial statements and credit reports.

No one has yet claimed responsibility for the breach.

Insight Partners is a global venture capital and private equity firm that invests in high-growth technology, software, and Internet businesses.

The firm manages more than $90 billion in assets and has invested in more than 800 companies worldwide. Some of its more notable investments include cybersecurity firms like Armis and Wiz, as well as public-facing platforms such as monday.com and Wix.

Via BleepingComputer

You might also like

• Top venture capital firm Insight Partners confirms it was hit by cyberattack
• Take a look at our guide to the best authenticator app
• We've rounded up the best password managers