Feed aggregator

Branch is a professional ergonomic furniture company that I have grown to appreciate over the last few years. I've reviewed a pretty wide range of the company's desks and chairs - so I was pretty excited to try out the Branch Aire.

As the name suggests, this chair is light. It has a very breathable design, with a single piece of material running from the seat to the back, creating a cohesive, all-in-one look. All around, this chair is solid. It's lightweight and a bit skimpy, but it's solid, comfortable for most, and out of all the best office chairs I've tested, it's the easiest one I have ever assembled (other than chairs that come fully assembled).

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future) Branch Aire: Price and Availability

The Branch Aire is available on the Branch website right here, where it retails for just under $500 in three different colorways - Vapor (reviewed here), Graphene, and a brand new Hunter color.

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future) Branch Aire: Unboxing & first impressions

The Aire arrived in a compact yet well-packaged box. Each component is labelled and protected with packing material to ensure no rips or punctures in the mesh material during transit.

The chair took only about 7 minutes to assemble as I did not have to screw a backrest into a base or armrests into a base/backrest like I usually have to with the chairs that I test. All I had to do was take the base, add the wheels, add the piston, and then put the chair on top of the piston/base combo. All around, it's it's pretty simple.

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future)

Before I saw this chair in person, I looked it up online. It appeared sleek, sharp, and futuristic. However, experiencing it in person was a completely different story. The mesh material feels both durable and comfortable.

Sitting in it for the first time confirmed my expectations; it conformed to my body so perfectly that it felt like I was sitting in a custom-molded chair. It was significantly lighter than I expected it to be, but that's not a bad thing in the slightest. I've had a lot of cumbersome chairs, so having one that is super lightweight is a nice change of pace.

Branch Aire: Design & Build Quality Specs

Dimensions: 27.4" x 24"
Height: 45.9" to 48.4"
Seat Height: Adjustable from 17.9" to 20.5"
Weight Capacity: 275 lbs
Materials: Polyester and polyelastomer mesh, plastic, and nylon frame
Warranty: 5 years

As I have said, the Branch Aire is an all-mesh chair with one cohesive section of mesh running from the shoulders down to the thigh. The entire back and seat is one piece of mesh, making it minimalist and simple while allowing maximum airflow and comfort.

The frame is sturdy, and the wheels roll nicely on my low-pill carpet, glass pad, and hardwood floor. The waterfall edge makes for a super comfortable thigh portion of the chair, allowing no circulation to cut off from my thigh, hitting a bar or something else uncomfortable.

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future) Branch Aire: In use

Due to the nature of my role, I have a few desk setups. I have one to test new gear, so I can always leave a primary workstation set up to be operational to get work done quickly and easily. For the last 100 days, the Branch Aire has been one of the chairs I have rotated in and out of my secondary workspace, and I have gotten a pretty good feel for it. While it's not the most ergonomic option I've had, it is comfortable even for extended work hours.

I weigh around 205 pounds and stand at 6'2". This chair feels like it was made for people up to about 6', maybe 6'1". Even though I am noticeably too tall for this chair, it's still comfortable. The armrests can raise and lower and move forward and backward while sitting in the chair. However, they cannot get closer to your body.
The chair's design does not allow adjusting seat depth or include any form of lumbar support. So, although the chair does fit snugly against the body of most users, taller or larger users might find that the fit of this particular chair is less adjustable than other chairs manufactured by Branch.

I've done full 8-10 hour days in this chair, occasionally swapping to standing at my Flexispot E7 Plus standing desk. While a part of me misses the heavier-duty chairs that feel more robust, there is something fantastic about the minimalism of this chair. I could see enjoying this chair if I had a simpler workspace, a basic desk and laptop, or even a clean, simple desk in a more visible space like a living room. Since then, this chair has looked more like a statement piece than a comfortable, ergonomic office chair.

Another situation that would be great for this chair would be a conference room or co-working space. I would probably avoid having this in a highly-traffic space like a conference room that's open to the public or has a lot of new people in and out.

(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future)

Attributes

Notes

Rating

Design

Beautiful and sleek

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ease of use

Easy to use

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Practicality

Restrictive for larger users

⭐⭐⭐⭐

Price

Mid range price

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Branch Aire: Final verdict

Branch Aire Chair undoubtedly tops the list due to its innovative design and excellent breathability, collectively making it a highly worthy contender for an office chair that is both comfortable and good-looking.

However, if you're considering this chair, you'll want to note the non-adjustable seat size and the headrest height to ensure a good fit according to your needs.

I recommend this chair for anyone looking for a minimalistic chair to match a minimalistic workspace or someone looking for a modern yet comfortable chair.

For more office essentials, we've rounded up all the best standing desks.

Massachusetts Judge Shelley Joseph was accused of helping an undocumented immigrant evade authorities more than seven years ago. Her case is still unresolved.

(Image credit: Steven Senne)

Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for May 17.

On Friday, Sean Combs' defense lawyers questioned Cassie Ventura about how much of the former couple's activities she willingly participated in. "I had to fight my way out," she said.

(Image credit: Neilson Barnard)

Have you Googled something recently only to be met with a cute little diamond logo above some magically-appearing words? Google's AI Overview combines Google Gemini's language models (which generate the responses) with Retrieval-Augmented Generation, which pulls the relevant information.

In theory, it's made an incredible product, Google's search engine, even easier and faster to use.

However, because the creation of these summaries is a two-step process, issues can arise when there is a disconnect between the retrieval and the language generation.

While the retrieved information might be accurate, the AI can make erroneous leaps and draw strange conclusions when generating the summary.

(Image credit: Google)

That’s led to some famous gaffs, such as when it became the laughing stock of the internet in mid-2024 for recommending glue as a way to make sure cheese wouldn't slide off your homemade pizza. And we loved the time it described running with scissors as "a cardio exercise that can improve your heart rate and require concentration and focus".

These prompted Liz Reid, Head of Google Search, to publish an article titled About Last Week, stating these examples "highlighted some specific areas that we needed to improve". More than that, she diplomatically blamed "nonsensical queries" and "satirical content".

She was at least partly right. Some of the problematic queries were purely highlighted in the interests of making AI look stupid. As you can see below, the query “How many rocks should I eat?” wasn't a common search before the introduction of AI Overviews, and it hasn't been since.

(Image credit: Google)

However, almost a year on from the pizza-glue fiasco, people are still tricking Google's AI Overviews into fabricating information or "hallucinating" – the euphemism for AI lies.

Many misleading queries seem to be ignored as of writing, but just last month it was reported by Engadget that the AI Overviews would make up explanations for pretend idioms like "you can't marry pizza" or "never rub a basset hound's laptop".

So, AI is often wrong when you intentionally trick it. Big deal. But, now that it's being used by billions and includes crowd-sourced medical advice, what happens when a genuine question causes it to hallucinate?

While AI works wonderfully if everyone who uses it examines where it sourced its information from, many people – if not most people – aren't going to do that.

And therein lies the key problem. As a writer, Overviews are already inherently a bit annoying because I want to read human-written content. But, even putting my pro-human bias aside, AI becomes seriously problematic if it's so easily untrustworthy. And it's become arguably downright dangerous now that it's basically ubiquitous when searching, and a certain portion of users are going to take its info at face value.

I mean, years of searching has trained us all to trust the results at the top of the page.

Wait... is that's true?

(Image credit: Future)

Like many people, I can sometimes struggle with change. I didn't like it when LeBron went to the Lakers and I stuck with an MP3 player over an iPod for way too long.

However, given it's now the first thing I see on Google most of the time, Google's AI Overviews are a little harder to ignore.

I’ve tried using it like Wikipedia – potentially unreliable, but good for reminding me of forgotten info or for learning about the basics of a topic that won't cause me any agita if it's not 100% accurate.

Yet, even on seemingly simple queries it can fail spectacularly. As an example, I was watching a movie the other week and this guy really looked like Lin-Manuel Miranda (creator of the musical Hamilton), so I Googled whether he had any brothers.

The AI overview informed me that "Yes, Lin-Manuel Miranda has two younger brothers named Sebastián and Francisco."

For a few minutes I thought I was a genius at recognising people… until a little bit of further research showed that Sebastián and Francisco are actually Miranda’s two children.

Wanting to give it the benefit of the doubt, I figured that it would have no issue listing quotes from Star Wars to help me think of a headline.

Fortunately, it gave me exactly what I needed. "Hello there!" and "It's a trap!", and it even quoted "No, I am your father" as opposed to the too-commonly-repeated "Luke, I am your father".

Along with these legitimate quotes, however, it claimed Anakin had said "If I go, I go with a bang" before his transformation into Darth Vader.

I was shocked at how it could be so wrong… and then I started second-guessing myself. I gaslit myself into thinking I must be mistaken. I was so unsure that I triple checked the quote's existence and shared it with the office – where it was quickly (and correctly) dismissed as another bout of AI lunacy.

This little piece of self-doubt, about something as silly as Star Wars scared me. What if I had no knowledge about a topic I was asking about?

This study by SE Ranking actually shows Google's AI Overviews avoids (or cautiously responds to) topics of finance, politics, health and law. This means Google knows that its AI isn't up to the task of more serious queries just yet.

But what happens when Google thinks it's improved to the point that it can?

It's the tech... but also how we use it

(Image credit: Google)

If everyone using Google could be trusted to double check the AI results, or click into the source links provided by the overview, its inaccuracies wouldn't be an issue.

But, as long as there is an easier option – a more frictionless path – people tend to take it.

Despite having more information at our fingertips than at any previous time in human history, in many countries our literacy and numeracy skills are declining. Case in point, a 2022 study found that just 48.5% of Americans report having read at least one book in the previous 12 months.

It's not the technology itself that's the issue. As is eloquently argued by Associate Professor Grant Blashki, how we use the technology (and indeed, how we’re steered towards using it) is where problems arise.

For example, an observational study by researchers at Canada’s McGill University found that regular use of GPS can result in worsened spatial memory – and an inability to navigate on your own. I can't be the only one that's used Google Maps to get somewhere and had no idea how to get back.

Neuroscience has clearly demonstrated that struggling is good for the brain. Cognitive Load Theory states that your brain needs to think about things to learn. It's hard to imagine struggling too much when you search a question, read the AI summary and then call it a day.

Make the choice to think

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

I'm not committing to never using GPS again, but given Google's AI Overviews are regularly untrustworthy, I would get rid of AI Overviews if I could. However, there's unfortunately no such method for now.

Even hacks like adding a cuss word to your query no longer work. (And while using the F-word still seems to work most of the time, it also makes for weirder and more, uh, ‘adult-oriented’ search results that you're probably not looking for.)

Of course, I'll still use Google – because it's Google. It's not going to reverse its AI ambitions anytime soon, and while I could wish for it to restore the option to opt-out of AI Overviews, maybe it's better the devil you know.

Right now, the only true defence against AI misinformation is to make a concerted effort not to use it. Let it take notes of your work meetings or think up some pick-up lines, but when it comes to using it as a source of information, I’ll be scrolling past it and seeking a quality human-authored (or at least checked) article from the top results – as I’ve done for nearly my entire existence.

I mentioned previously that one day these AI tools might genuinely become a reliable source of information. They might even be smart enough to take on politics. But today isn't that day.

In fact, as reported on May 5 by the New York Times, as Google and ChatGPT's AI tools become more powerful, they're also becoming increasingly unreliable – so I'm not sure I'll ever be trusting them to summarise any political candidate's policies.

When testing the hallucination rate of these 'reasoning systems', the highest recorded hallucination rate was a whopping 79%. Amr Awadalla, the chief executive of Vectara – an AI Agent and Assistant platform for enterprises – put it bluntly: “Despite our best efforts, they will always hallucinate."

You might also like...

• I compared ChatGPT 4.1 to o3 and 4o to find the most logical AI model – the result seems almost irrational
• Most job applicants use AI CV builder tools to get into work, and to my dismay, they say it is fair play
• Audible’s AI narration sounds impressive, but I'd rather hear the story told by a human

It has been a deadly week of Israeli airstrikes in Gaza.

(Image credit: Bashar Taleb)

Boeing agreed last year to plead guilty to defrauding regulators after the crashes of two 737 Max jets, in 2018 and 2019, that killed 346 people. But a federal judge rejected that proposed plea deal.

(Image credit: Shelby Tauber)

Facing allegations of sexual misconduct, Karim Khan has temporarily stepped aside as a U.N. investigation enters its final stage, the International Criminal Court announced Friday.

(Image credit: Michael M. Santiago)

It's been six months since President Trump first announced the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency initiative, which has dramatically shrunk parts of the federal government. And with so many individual stories about federal workers losing their jobs around the country, the big picture can sometimes look blurry.

A team of NPR reporters has been looking at agencies — from food inspectors to nuclear scientists to firefighters and more — and today, we'll connect some of the dots on how DOGE cuts have impacted workers, and hear how Americans far beyond Washington may feel the effects of these cuts.

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

(Image credit: Andrew Harnik)

The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting a group of immigrants in northern Texas under the Alien Enemies Act. It said it's not directly addressing whether the invocation of the act was legal.

(Image credit: Brandon Bell)

We’ve got expert reviews and comparisons to help you find the best wireless earbuds of 2025 -- with top-tier sound quality, noise cancellation, battery life and comfort.

The course provides an overview of generative AI in the workplace for nontechnical folks.

Stream doubleheaders each weekend throughout the 2025 season.

Nothing is officially making its own pair of over-the-ear wireless Bluetooth headphones. The company confirmed the news in an almost four-minute video where the London-based design team discussed their goals for the still-unnamed audio gear.

The news follows Nothing's announcement earlier this week that it will be partnering with British hi-fi institution KEF on new audio products, although there was no mention of this venture in the video.

While the details were sparse, we did learn about a handful of key elements that may set the Nothing over-ear headphones apart from competitors like Apple and Sony.

In fact, the video kicks off with the designers pondering what "XM6" means, possibly referring to the trio of characters in the rather unwieldy name of Sony's newest and, for the moment, industry-leading headphones, the Sony WH-1000XM6.

Mostly, though, the team focuses on the choices they're making for Nothing's first over-ear headphones.

Price

Price is a huge consideration. Calling out the $549 AirPods Max from Apple, which cost about as much as two last-gen Nothing phones, the team said it wants to produce cheaper headphones, ones that cost far less than AirPods Max.

As for how much less, well, one designer mentioned the price, but in that moment, his voice was muted and his mouth was covered with a little message saying that Nothing has to keep some secrets.

Of course Nothing has form in this area. We awarded its budget earbuds the Nothing Ear (a) a five-star review and consider them to be among the best earbuds you can buy, and they cost a mere $99 / £99 / AU$169.

Meanwhile, the Nothing Ear earbuds, now on their third generation, are slightly more expensive – but we still proclaimed them to be "punching well out of their price class."

Ease of use

The designers complain that with most headphones, the buttons all feel the same, and it is impossible to know if you're touching the volume, pause, or Bluetooth controls. Nothing will, it seems, do it differently, designing all buttons to be "completely distinct."

The hope is that there will be "no doubt about which control you're about to touch, [so] you don't make mistakes and we get out of the way of that music listening experience."

Make it special

Nothing's designers say they can do things with headphones that the big companies cannot, because the big tech companies "just can't take risks; they've got to think about this whole global program...and millions and millions of users."

Nothing, by contrast, contends it can just take an idea, build it, test it, and "put it out there." To be fair, that's certainly how it seems with Nothing's unusual and iconic smartphones.

Make the best audio

Nothing's already got a significant experience and a quite good track record in the audio space. Its wireless headphones currently sit near the top of our Best Wireless Earbuds of 2025.

As for how good these over-the-ear headphones sound right now, one Nothing designer said, "I'm already impressed. They're not finished, but you know, I think these might be some of the best sounding on the market."

Not just in their price range, either; Nothing believes these headphones will "punch above their weight."

Nothing's confidence goes even further, as the team muses that these headphones are as good as those you might pay twice as much for, and then adds that they're "better than AirPods Max, and that was always the goal."

A clue

One interesting takeaway is that while Nothing isn't sharing the price, they appear to note that these headphones are as good as ones costing twice as much, and then mention the $549 AirPods Max. Does that mean the Nothing Headphones might list for $275?

While no name was mentioned, we're willing to guess that "Ear" will be in the name and that the full name could be "Nothing Ear (Pros)".

That's all the detail we gleaned from Nothing's unusual announcement video, with the only other tidbit being that these headphones will ship this summer.

It's too early to say if they will truly beat AirPods Max or approach Sony's excellent audio quality. But considering Nothing's audio track record, this will surely be a launch to watch.

You might also like

• Nothing teases new audio gear made with KEF coming in 2025, and I'm excited for this one
• Nothing Ear review: the third-generation wireless earbuds bring major upgrades
• Waiting for new Nothing cheap earbuds to go with the Phone 3a? It won’t be long – but audiophiles should skip 'em

Hints and answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, No. 236, for May 17.

Hints and answers for Connections for May 17, #706.

Here are hints and the answer for today's Wordle No. 1,428 for May 17.

Here are hints -- and answers -- for the NYT Strands puzzle No. 440 for May 17.

If the skinnier phone incorporates a silicon battery, it would be a breakthrough for iPhones.

The combination of two of America's largest cable companies could impact your broadband package. This is what we know so far.