Technology

Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for April 11.

The promise of a lot what we currently call AI is that these tools can streamline some of the most tedious bits of life. They can summarize that meeting you missed without having to read a transcript or they can trim a video without you manually cutting every silent second. Adobe has taken that to the next stage with its new range of AI agent features.

Adobe’s new agentic AI actively takes on full tasks, not just bits of larger projects. It can suggest edits in Photoshop and make them happen with a click. The AI can analyze hours of raw video footage in Premiere Pro, then make a judgment call about the best clips, assemble a rough cut, and even make color corrections. The AI agents will build an animated flyer from scratch in Express and read your PDFs in Acrobat, highlighting what they believe matters. They will even use them to produce a full sales pitch.

The idea of delegating the mind-numbing roles to AI so you can focus on the parts that engage your mind creatively is appealing. Adobe isn’t wrong when it says this could significantly shift how people carry out these projects. But it's also a moment fraught with uncertain implications.

The more we let the AI handle the heavy lifting, the fewer hours we spend manually adjusting every image or organizing the minutes of every meeting, and the easier it becomes for those passing out those assignments to devalue the creativity underlying the toil.

It’s easy to tell ourselves we’re still in control. That we’re just tweaking what the machine gives us. But at some point, if all we’re doing is picking from drop-downs and nudging sliders, how much of the “creative” in the “creative process” is left?

Creative business

Adobe says this isn’t about replacing creativity but amplifying it. The AI isn’t the artist; it’s the assistant. And in many ways, that’s true. The AI doesn’t know your brand voice, your weird sense of humor, or your obsession with putting subtle frog references in every campaign.

It can’t feel the rush of a good idea or the gut instinct that something just works. It doesn’t daydream in the shower or scribble storyboards on napkins. It just calculates.

Artists, whether professional painters, commercial designers, or guerrilla documentarians, all understand that the AI's help is only as good as the human vision. Even so, there are plenty of people who would reason that if an AI can generate 10 polished options in seconds, then it's not worth paying a human to spend hours coming up with one that may not work out.

After all, why wrestle with structure, tone, or typography when your digital agent is happy to make those calls for you?

In a business context, speed and cost often win out. If the AI can generate something that’s “good enough,” will anyone fight for the slower, messier, more human-made alternative?

If a marketing department can produce entire campaigns in minutes that are on-brand, on-message, and 85% ready to go, how long before creative teams become more like editors, checking the machine’s work rather than making their own?

Uncertain visions

This isn't happening today or tomorrow or even next year. There are still a thousand tiny decisions that only a human can make, or at least make well. The inevitable mockery and outrage that greets attempts to delegate creative tasks to AI fully makes that clear.

Remember the ad Google had for the Olympics suggesting a little girl use AI to write a fan letter? There's a reason Google had to answer a lot of questions about the point of that ad. There’s still a soul in the work. But the slope is starting to feel a little slippery.

I don't claim to have all the solutions, but I do have a few ideas on how to think about AI's place among creative tools. I do think there's a place for it, but at the same time, the more people and companies that reserve space in a project for actual creative exploration, the better.

Related to that, talking about the value of AI is certainly worthwhile, but it shouldn't outweigh highlighting human creativity. AI might be 'good enough' almost always, but rough ideas, weird experiments, and even bad drafts are still worth making. Sometimes, they're the only things worth remembering.

Creative future

Adobe does seem to get this. They talk a lot about keeping the human in the loop in their announcement, about making the creator the director and the agent the crew. They describe how these tools are transparent, responsive, and in service of creative goals. And for now, that feels mostly true. You can reject suggestions. You can still do things the long way. You’re not being forced to hand over the reins.

It still feels like a potential cultural shift as much as a technological one. The future Adobe is working toward is one where creative professionals may be expected to do more, faster, with fewer people, by relying on agents that never sleep and don’t charge hourly rates. That’s great for productivity. Maybe less great for careers built on the slow, joyful chaos of making stuff.

Agentic AI is not the death of creativity, but it might constrain its presence without conscious effort. If we don’t pay attention and let speed and convenience dictate artistic efforts, creativity might become mostly a hobby and not something valued outside of that. If ideas come from prompts and output comes from agents, humans will mostly be there to sign off.

That doesn’t have to happen. These tools can be incredible if we use them intentionally. They can give beginners a head start and help pros focus on what matters most. They can democratize design and storytelling in ways we’ve never seen. I'm sure we can come up with all new ways for creativity to flourish beyond the reach of any AI if we use our imagination.

You might also like

• I refuse to jump on ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli image generator bandwagon because it goes against everything I love about those movies
• Why Bill Gates is wrong about AI and 3 things he needs to realize
• Meta's AI chief is right to call AI fearmongering 'BS' but not for the reason he thinks

Make this Mother's Day one to remember for the new mom in your life.

• Google Docs is introducing a new Audio Overviews feature
• Audio Overviews can read your documents aloud or summarize them like a podcast
• The tool aims to help users improve their writing and enable multitasking

Reading your writing out loud is one of the best ways to discover any mistakes or awkwardness that could use some editing. But as the writer, you might have a blind spot for your own typos or be too close to what you wrote to note where it needs some rewriting (or outright cutting).

So, if you don't always have a friend on hand to help, Google will start jumping in with a new Audio Overview feature for Google Docs.

Audio Overviews are already a part of Google's NotebookLM platform. Now, Google is sending that “natural-sounding” narration to Google Docs to read your documents aloud.

The goal is for the user to hear Audio Overviews read a document back to you, uncovering every mistyped word and stilted phrase you didn't hear when you wrote it.

(Image credit: Google)

Google is also including a second option besides just getting an AI recitation. You'll be able to hear what the company calls a “podcast-style overview” of the text, meaning just a collection of the highlights instead of every single word. For texts that are more than a dozen pages long and full of research, that could be a big help.

Alas, this isn't the kind of podcast-style review available on NotebookLM, which will generate an actual conversation between two AI voices discussing everything you've uploaded.

Reciting AI

Google claims the voices will be indistinguishable from an actual human, and if it's the same AI voice model employed by NotebookLM, that's not far from the truth. Of course, mispronouncing words, especially proper nouns they haven't heard before, is a very human foible when reading out loud. Still, that might not matter much if it also catches your actual errors.

The feature also has a major accessibility benefit as AI voices reading text have been a boon for people with impaired sight or other reading difficulties. An upgraded, more natural-sounding voice to read Google Docs would only make text more accessible. Plus, it could help anyone who just has a lot going on. You could 'read' a long report while driving, folding laundry, or doing anything else that keeps your eyes busy.

This isn't a world-shaking feature, but it's the kind of quality-of-life improvement to a widely used product, Google Docs, that AI is uniquely suited to provide. It's hard to argue that using AI to enhance productivity software to make it more adaptive is unnecessary.

Anything to streamline how you polish your writing will be a draw. Not that Google is unique in this pursuit, though, as both Microsoft and Apple have been experimenting with similar AI augmentation of their word processors.

Even so, Google Docs is the go-to for millions of people, students, and professionals alike, and this move makes the product that much easier to stick with.

You might also like

• I used NoteBookLM to help with productivity - here’s 5 top tips to get the most from Google’s AI audio tool
• One of my favorite AI tools is getting an iPhone app, and here's why you should install it
• Google will turn those long documents into your next favorite podcast

The new sensor — expected to launch in the second half of 2025 — will provide easier diabetes management for eligible users.

There are so many portable Bluetooth speakers on the market, but which ones sound the best? Our experts tested many to find the cream of the crop, and here they are.

Looking for the top internet providers for your home? CNET experts tested and compiled a list of the most reliable options to explore in Temple.

You don't need to pay for a streaming service to watch a sky full of shooting stars. Here's a look at the year ahead in meteor showers.

• Dough Spectrum Canvas is an affordable alternative to Apple's Studio Display
• It is the display every Mac user has been waiting for
• The display offers a Mac-friendly design, tailored for creatives

For many Mac users, Apple’s Studio Display is a highly desirable product, but its steep price will have placed it out of reach for some potential buyers.

Tech start Dough is developing the Spectrum Canvas, an alternative to the Apple Studio Display, based on feedback from Mac users on r/Mac.

This device is a 32-inch 6K monitor aimed at creatives, remote workers, and professionals who want Apple-like quality without the premium price tag. The Canvas aims to strike a balance between visual fidelity, premium materials, and community-informed features.

6K display built with macOS in mind

At the heart of the Spectrum Canvas is LG’s 6K IPS Black panel, which was announced at CES 2025. It offers true 10-bit color, 98% DCI-P3 coverage, 218 PPI, a 2000:1 contrast ratio, and 99.5% AdobeRGB coverage.

The monitor also includes an ATW polarizer, which helps reduce IPS glow and improves color uniformity. With this level of performance, the Canvas is being positioned as one of the best 5K/8K monitor options available for modern Mac users.

In terms of design, the device features an anodized aluminum body, a die-cast stand, and solid cover glass on the front. The glass finish is glossy yet anti-reflective, avoiding the glare typically associated with glossy panels.

At the time of writing, some aspects of the monitor, such as power delivery specs, webcam options, speaker integration, and USB hub layout, are still under development. Instead of finalizing these decisions internally, Dough is involving its user community in the process. Those interested in contributing can join the company’s Reddit community.

For users searching for the best monitor for Mac Mini or the best monitor for MacBook Pro, the native 6K resolution and large format of the Spectrum Canvas promises to deliver a seamless experience across both everyday tasks and creative workflows.

As of now, Dough has not released official details regarding pricing or availability.

You may also like

• These are the best vertical monitors around today
• We've also listed the best laptops for working from home
• And here are the best monitors for programming that we've found

You're not getting older. You're getting stronger. These three moves help keep your body flexible, energized and ready for anything.

Astronaut Don Pettit captured the footage while the ISS was flying backward.

• China’s GPMI cable could finally replace HDMI and Thunderbolt
• GPMI supports 16K video, high power, and universal control
• GPMI offers more speed and power than HDMI ever could

Following its push to replace Bluetooth with Nearlink, China is now turning its attention to physical connectors, targeting HDMI, USB4, and Thunderbolt with a new high-bandwidth alternative.

The General Purpose Media Interface (GPMI) was recently unveiled by the Shenzhen 8K UHD Video Industry Cooperation Alliance, a consortium of over 50 tech companies.

Designed to meet the demands of ultra-high-resolution content, GPMI promises significant improvements in speed, power delivery, and versatility, enough to transmit 8K, and potentially even 16K, video.

A choice of versions

The GPMI standard comes in two versions - the more powerful GPMI Type-B offers a massive 192Gbps bandwidth and can deliver up to 480 watts of power, enough to support high-performance laptops for photo editing, and far exceeding the capabilities of HDMI or Thunderbolt.

GPMI Type-C, on the other hand, uses the widely adopted USB-C form factor but doubles the bandwidth of USB4 and Thunderbolt 4, reaching 96Gbps.

It also matches USB4’s 240-watt power delivery, enough to power 5K/8K monitors and charge devices simultaneously.

In comparison, HDMI 2.1 maxes out at 48Gbps and delivers no power. USB4 and Thunderbolt 4 both top out at 40Gbps, with power delivery of 240W and 100W, respectively. DisplayPort 2.1, currently the leader in bandwidth at 80Gbps, does not offer power transmission.

Additionally, the GPMI standard supports a universal remote-control protocol, allowing users to control multiple connected devices with a single remote.

This will be especially useful for creative professionals who rely on multiple displays or peripherals, such as those using high-end laptops for graphic design.

Via TomsHardware

You may also like

• These are the best mobile workstations you can buy right now
• We've also listed the best portable monitors for every budget and resolution
• Intel's former CEO invests in hardware startup that aims to make Nvidia obsolete

Hints and answers for Connections for April 11, No. 670.

Here are hints and answers for the NYT Strands puzzle No. 404 for April 11.

Here are hints and the answer for today's Wordle No. 1,392 for Friday, April 11.

Hints and answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, No. 200, for April 11.

The bad news? the FDA recalled a specific lot of Cabot Creamery butter found to have elevated levels of coliform bacteria. The good news? It's not a widespread issue.

As someone who's covered Apple for almost a quarter of a century, this Apple Intelligence Siri chapter is by far its most confounding one. We're now just two months away from the next Apple developer's conference, and it will likely mark an ignominious anniversary for Apple's artificial intelligence efforts.

Apple's uncharacteristic failure to deliver on a product promise has shocked many fans. Ever since the company announced it would not deliver some of the promised Siri enhancements this year, I, for one, have been wondering how we got here.

Now, a new report paints a surprising picture of rival AI factions or rather two teams with divergent strategies that somehow led to flashy demos and some unfulfilled promises.

Not everything in The Information's report on the Apple Siri debacle is surprising. I've been writing for some time about how Apple's usually laudable adherence to privacy principles hamstrung its Siri efforts.

However, The Information's claim that Apple's AI lead John Giannandrea and Craig Federighi (Apple's software engineering head) were in some fashion acting at cross purposes is unexpected.

Giannandrea's slow and steady approach and Apple's insistence on using its own models as opposed to, say, OpenAI's GPT LLMs was in stark contrast to the obvious excitement Federighi's Intelligent Systems team had for experimenting with and possibly using third-party models.

Two visions, no clarity

(Image credit: Future / Lance Ulanoff)

Internal battles are not unheard of in companies of all sizes, but they usually don't play out on a public stage at Apple. As The Information tells it, the Apple Intelligence demos I saw last June at WWDC may have broken what I thought was a cardinal rule for Apple: never announce technology that you can't demo live, at least in some fashion.

When Apple stunned WWDC 2023 with the new Apple Vision Pro, it followed later that afternoon by inviting a handful of journalists (including me) for hands-on demos. The pricey mixed reality headset wasn't done, but it was still functional enough to blow our collective minds.

In the case of Apple's Intelligence, though, our post-event demos were limited (Siri was no smarter). It seems that not only were many of the best bits not finished, but Apple may have shown them off in the pre-tapped keynote without giving the main Apple AI team in charge of Siri a full heads-up.

Doing so obviously put Apple in a tough spot. The pre-tapped WWDC video showed us a responsive and aware Siri capable of looking into your iPhone, its apps, and your information to take action on your behalf. Apple then promised we'd see it sometime that year.

Even after Apple delivered the iPhone 16 with iOS 18 and the first blush of Apple Intelligence (a new look, writing tools, Image Playground, Genmojis), most assumed it was just a matter of time before Siri got its major intelligence glow-up.

Half baked

(Image credit: Future / Lance Ulanoff)

By possibly demonstrating technology that was not ready or even fully programmed to run on any Apple Intelligence-ready iPhone, Apple may have set itself or, at least the Siri team, up for failure.

Apple hasn't spoken on the record about this beyond the initial announcement of the delay. News that Apple Intelligence is now reportedly under Craig Federighi's leadership is further proof that perhaps Apple realizes it chose the wrong path.

Federighi's team, according to The Information, is much more open to integrating third-party LLMs. It's a good strategy not only because it will help Apple's AI efforts get back on track but also because it's the same strategy employed by most of its AI competitors, at least those who are not at heart AI companies.

Late in the game, Amazon relied on Perplexity's Claude AI models to build its own Nova system. Samsung has leaned heavily on Google Gemini to develop its own models. As we well know, Microsoft made a big bet on OpenAI's GPT models to power Bing AI and then Copilot to build its own Microsoft AI models.

Siri will rise

(Image credit: Future/Jacob Krol)

This, folks, is the way in. Sure, it's maybe less predictable and, possibly, rock-solid secure than Apple's initial strategy, but most of these companies are racing ahead while iPhone fans wait for Apple to get its act together.

Federighi (and Vision Pro lead Mike Walker) taking over is good news, but much of Apple's future success in the AI space will depend on Apple CEO Tim Cook's leadership.

This failure happened under his watch, possibly because he trusted the team to get the job done and has been adamant about sticking to Apple's secure and private approach. Now Cook has to find a new plan and, with Federighi, identify a clear path that gets you the smarter Siri you want in 2026, if not sooner.

I've seen Apple do amazing things in the past, and honestly, I'm confident it'll do it again here.

You might also like

• Apple Intelligence might finally transform Siri into the ultimate AI assistant if these leadership changes are true
• The big Siri Apple Intelligence delay proves that maybe we really don't know Apple at all
• I installed iOS 18.4 beta and the big Siri intelligence update is nowhere to be found

Surging bond yields can affect borrowing prices and borrowing costs. Experts say for now it's 'wait and see.'

Xfinity is the best internet provider in Las Cruces, but there are more options to consider.