When eCoustics first encountered the Dynaudio Symphony Opus One at CES 2025, Chris Boylan named it our Best Concept Soundbar because it clearly was not another skinny TV speaker pretending to deliver real home theater. Opus One was something very different: a full-scale, ultra-premium all-in-one system from a serious loudspeaker company, aimed as much at music-first listeners as design-conscious home theater buyers.
Early pricing chatter suggested it could land near $20,000 USD, which made the concept feel even more audacious. Now that Dynaudio has moved Opus One closer to reality, the details are starting to look a lot more concrete.
At HIGH END Vienna 2026, Dynaudio brought Opus One back for its European debut, giving the ultra-premium all-in-one system a much larger hi-fi stage. A few days later, Dynaudio made it official with a launch event at its new Copenhagen concept showroom during 3daysofdesign, moving Opus One from impressive showpiece to actual product.
The latest confirmed hardware is substantial: 24 distinct drivers, including six soft-dome tweeters, 14 mid/bass drivers, and four dual-diaphragm force-cancelling subwoofers, powered by 1,500 watts of digital amplification and managed by Dynaudio’s proprietary spatial-audio processing. The 186.4 cm-wide chassis is built around a precision-machined aluminum-alloy frame, 72 motorized Karimoku wooden fins, and a footprint optimized for 83 to 85 inch TVs.
Advertisement
Dynaudio now lists Opus One at 1864 x 236 x 207 mm or 73.4 x 9.3 x 8.1 inches, with a weight of 45 kg / 99 pounds. In other words, this is not something you casually slide under the TV after dinner.
Dynaudio has also confirmed pricing and initial availability. The base model is listed at €13,000 RRP, with stands and mounting accessories priced between €500 and €5,000. Opus One will launch first in Denmark and China before rolling out to other markets. US pricing, US availability, and a firm global shipping timeline have not been confirmed but we believe that the $20,000 USD price will be accurate.
At about 73 inches wide, the Dynaudio Opus One matches an 83-inch or 85-inch flat panel TV quite nicely, both sonically and vidually.
Some important AV details remain unresolved. Dynaudio has not yet published the final HDMI/eARC input configuration, HDMI passthrough support, streaming platform compatibility, Wi-Fi or Bluetooth specifications, full codec support, or the complete input/output package.
The company has confirmed that setup uses a microphone built into the remote to help the system identify whether it has been placed on a stand, mounted on a wall, or positioned in free space, then optimize its performance for that location. That is useful, but it is not the same thing as a fully disclosed room correction platform.
Dynaudio also says it intends to add support for wireless subwoofers and rear surround speakers in the future, integrated into the same system. That is worth mentioning, but it should still be treated as roadmap language rather than part of the launch package. At this level, “future support” and “included in the box” are separated by a very expensive Danish fjord.
Advertisement
That matters because this is not chasing Sonos, Samsung, or Bose. Dynaudio is aiming at a far more rarefied slice of the market already occupied by Canvas HiFi, Bang & Olufsen, and Steinway & Sons Lyngdorf. Interesting wrinkle? All of them have deep Danish roots or Danish manufacturing ties, making this emerging luxury soundbar category feel less like a global arms race and more like Denmark quietly deciding that big TVs deserve better sound.
eCoustics Editor-at-large Chris Boylan was on-site in Vienna for a hands-on preview of the Dynaudio Symphony Opus One. How did it sound? In a word? “Impressive.”
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
According to Chris, “Rather than simply throwing a wide wall of sound, the all-in-one Dynaudio system produced an enveloping bubble of richly layered sound that held together across multiple seating locations without rear surrounds, ceiling speakers or external subwoofers. When switching between movie and music sound, the system used its motorized fins to direct sound to specific areas of the room in order to best represent Dolby Atmos content vs. standard stereo music. And its size made it a perfect visual and audible match to the 85-inch TV it was paired with.”
Advertisement
Dynaudio has not yet published a frequency-response figure for the Opus One, which is an unusual omission for a €13,000 system. At 73 inches wide and designed to partner with 83-inch to 85-inch televisions, it is clearly aimed at large living rooms and media spaces; in a smaller room, its sheer physical presence could be harder to justify than the price tag. The current system should deliver an unusually ambitious all-in-one experience, but a true dedicated-theater role will depend on Dynaudio following through with the wireless subwoofer and surround speakers it has previously said were planned.
It’s not surprising that Microsoft is looking to turn its Copilot platform into a “Super App,” given that its rivals are doing the same. But Microsoft is going about the task in a way that doesn’t follow its usual playbook, by putting a big bet on a consumer-savvy hire from the outside with some feather-ruffling ways.
The company’s newly minted Copilot Executive Vice President Jacob Andreou came to Microsoft from Greylock Partners and before that, Snapchat-maker Snap. Andreou currently oversees more than 11,000 Microsoft employees, according to a recent profile in Fortune.
Microsoft is bringing onboard another former Snap (and Discord) vice president, Peter Sellis, to help, GeekWire has learned. Sources say Sellis will be leading Copilot Design, Growth and Engineering, reporting to Andreou.
Andreou is part of a recently formed Copilot Leadership Team. His charter is to lead the “Copilot experience” by driving design, product, growth and engineering, as outlined in a March 2026 reorg memo from CEO Satya Nadella. He is one of a small group charged with shaping the future of Copilot, alongside others focused on the underlying Copilot platform and AI models.
Given Andreou’s Snap background, his plan to meld Microsoft’s consumer and enterprise Copilot experiences makes sense. It won’t be a snap, however. (See what I did there?)
Advertisement
Even though both share the Copilot brand, consumer Copilot and Microsoft 365 Copilot don’t work the same way or use the same data sources or architecture. To boot, Microsoft hasn’t had a lot of luck with this kind of consumer-enterprise unification, as evidenced by the low interest in and uptake of its free, consumer-focused Teams product compared to its business-focused Teams collaboration offering.
The 33-year-old, Los Angeles-based Andreou seemingly is undaunted by the challenge and is pushing some employees to clock 12-hour days to keep up with younger, AI-focused companies, Fortune reports.
Microsoft was infamous for requiring employees to work long hours and weekends during crunch times leading up to delivering Windows NT and Windows 95, but not so much in recent years. Microsoft is known as a place where outsiders often struggle to thrive compared to those who climb the corporate ladder for years, making Andreou’s approach feel even riskier.
Andreou has been a big backer of the Tasks productivity layer in consumer Copilot, which is still in public preview. Tasks, which enables Copilot to handle actionable items, is similar to the recently released Copilot Cowork layer that is part of Microsoft 365 Copilot. (I asked Microsoft if the two would merge as a single Cowork-type offering at some point but was told the company had no comment.)
Advertisement
However, the holy grail remains the “Super App.” With the Copilot Super App, Microsoft is looking to give consumers and business users a reason to stay within Copilot regardless of the AI task with which they – or their agents – are engaging.
“Come summer, we will be bringing coding to all knowledge work within one Copilot Super App. That’s really exciting. So you’re going to have Chat, Cowork, and Code all in Copilot,” Nadella told Microsoft Build conference attendees in early June.
Microsoft isn’t the only AI-focused company working on extending its AI coding capability beyond just developers. Nor is it the only one betting on the Super App concept.
OpenAI is working to turn ChatGPT into a Super App that brings together ChatGPT and Codex into a single environment that operates like a personal assistant.
Anthropic is extending Claude to become a Super App (though it hasn’t used that terminology), as well, by creating a single environment that combines productivity, development and automation tools.
The Copilot Super App isn’t Andreou’s only focus. He tells Fortune that AI model choice and home-grown AI model excellence also are among his key priorities.
Microsoft is expanding model choice in the Copilot Cowork feature beyond Anthropic to include OpenAI and soon, Microsoft’s own Cowork 1 model – which may be based on Microsoft’s hosted version of the open-source DeepSeek model. Cowork 1 will be the newest addition to Microsoft’s growing pool of Microsoft-developed models, seven of which debuted at Build this year. Microsoft is seeking to position itself as the champion of lower cost, efficient models built for those who are token-maxxed out.
Advertisement
Andreou definitely has his work cut out for him as a consumer guy in a heavily enterprise-centric company.
Microsoft 365 Copilot and consumer Copilot are just two of more than two dozen different “Copilot”-branded commercial offerings available across the various Microsoft product teams, which can feel overwhelming.
Microsoft also needs to give users a clearer way to find and use the quickly expanding stable of first- and third-party agents, like the OpenClaw-based Microsoft Scout personal assistant. Will Andreou and his Super App quest bring at least some order to the Copilot and agent madness? We’ll know more sometime this summer.
EOFY is a good time to check gaming laptop deals, even if the laptop isn’t going to be used for work. Gaming laptops can be quite expensive, so a legitimate discount can make a bigger difference than it does on a basic everyday laptop.
That said, a gaming laptop can also be a powerful workstation if your work does need extra grunt. A fast CPU, dedicated GPU and plenty of RAM can help with video editing, 3D work, coding, running AI tools, creative apps or just keeping a lot of browser tabs and programs open at once.
It’s also worth checking our main EOFY laptop deals hub even after June 30, because in previous years we’ve seen some great laptop deals hang around or pop up in early July as retailers clear leftover stock.
For gaming laptops, we have deals from lower-cost RTX 5060 machines with generous RAM, through to much more expensive RTX 5090 desktop replacements.
Advertisement
The Acer Nitro V 16S is a good option for a buyer who wants current-gen gaming performance without paying big money. You still get an RTX 5060, 32GB RAM, a 1TB SSD and a 180Hz display for AU$1,777, which is a lot of hardware for the price.
The RTX 5060 is a lower-end current-gen GPU, but that’s still a good fit for 1080p or 1200p gaming, especially if you’re happy to use DLSS or turn down a few settings in the most demanding games. With RAM prices rising, 32GB of RAM is harder to take for granted at this price, so it’s good to see Acer include it rather than cutting back to 16GB.
The Lenovo Legion Pro 7i is at the other end of the scale. Our Lenovo Legion Pro 7i review described it as “perfect for a desktop replacement, just okay as a portable”, and that’s exactly how I’d frame this deal.
Advertisement
You’re not buying it because it’s cheap or easy to carry everywhere. You’re buying it because you want a very powerful 16-inch gaming laptop with an RTX 5090, 32GB RAM, a 1TB SSD and a 240Hz OLED screen.
Our review gave the Legion Pro 7i 4 stars and called out its excellent gaming performance, gorgeous OLED screen and useful port selection. That makes it a good fit if you want one machine for demanding games, an external monitor setup and heavier work like editing, rendering or development.
The big caveat is battery life, which our review said “is not great”, but that’s the trade-off with this kind of desktop-replacement gaming laptop.
If neither of these gaming laptop deals is quite right, our main EOFY laptop deals hub has more options across cheaper Windows laptops, MacBooks, 2-in-1s and higher-end gaming machines.
from the moral-panic-creeping-further-and-further dept
Several U.S. states are pushing to ban young people from social media entirely. This marks the latest wave of censorship bills masquerading as “children’s online safety” measures, with states like Massachusetts, Idaho, Minnesota, North Carolina, South Carolina, Illinois, and EFF’s home state of California leading the charge.
Just a few years ago, lawmakers supporting age-gating laws insisted their efforts were narrowly targeted at limiting young people’s access to adult content. At the time, we warned that they would not stop there: once the government established the authority and built the infrastructure to collect and “verify” massive troves of user data, it would inevitably sweep broader and broader categories of lawful speech into this mass surveillance and censorship system.
Unfortunately, our predictions came true. As legislators across the country advance proposals that would block all young people from accessing the “modern public square,” the Overton window has shifted dramatically towards mass censorship—and the speed of this shift should concern all of us.
This primer breaks down this dangerous wave of social media bans: how they work (and why they don’t), who they harm, and how we can fight back.
Advertisement
How to Spot a Social Media Ban
The details of these bills vary from state to state. Some (like California’s AB 1709) are a flat-out social media ban for all young people under a certain age, while other states (like South Carolina and Minnesota) allow access to young users who hand over even more data to show verifiable parental consent. Many bills regulate certain social media features, too, including by setting default privacy settings, time limits, or notification preferences for all accounts that fail the age-gate.
As for the age-gating mechanism itself, most proposals fall into two broad categories: age verification bills and behavioral age estimation bills.
Age VerificationBills require online services to collect highly sensitive data, including government ID and biometric information, from all users before either restricting or allowing them access.
For example, take California’s social media ban (AB 1709). Starting in January 2027, operating systems will be required to collect enough information from users to sort them into age groups, or “brackets.” Under AB 1709, social media apps would then use that age bracket information to completely block anyone under 16, while supposedly letting everyone else through. By contrast, Florida’s law (HB 3) takes a more aggressive route by forcing platforms to verify users’ identities directly, usually by contracting with private third-party companies to perform verification services.
Advertisement
Behavioral Age Estimation Bills, on the other hand, are a more recent innovation of states like Minnesota (HF 1438) and South Carolina (H 4591). These bills require platforms to estimate the ages of users based largely on data that they already collect, including self-attested age, behavioral information, and account history and activity. In practice, these bills enable tech companies to use algorithms and/or AI to analyze our online behavior and estimate age based on that.
Proponents of behavioral age estimation bills claim that their proposals avoid the massive security risks that come with mandatory age verification bills. However, much of the data that social media platforms collect from us “in the ordinary course of operation” is collected in order to serve us targeted behavioral ads. If we force platforms to use this imperfect data to make more important judgments about who can access their services, we risk entrenching those insidious data collection practices. Surely we don’t want to give social media companies more reasons to justify and sustain their reliance on this exploitative business model.
If you want to dig into the nuance here, our terminology guide sheds more light on the technical differences between age verification and age estimation bills.
Overall, it’s a lose-lose scenario: either platforms collect new forms of our most sensitive and immutable data, or they unleash their AI and algorithms on our existing behavioral data to make creepy guesses about who we are and what we deserve to see. No matter which age-gating method your state chooses to execute its social media ban, there will be lots of error at the margins—and lots of users who will be blocked or chilled from access to lawful online speech.
Advertisement
Why Social Media Bans Are So Dangerous
Social media bans are unconstitutional, discriminatory, and deeply misguided. They reinforce existing structures of oppression, and they are broadlyunsupported by young people, whose voices are conspicuously absent from this conversation. They undermine parental decision-making and replace tailored family-level solutions with a one-size-fits-all band-aid. And, in the places we have seen social media bans go into effect, early reports show that they don’t evenwork.
For example, in Australia, where a social media ban has been in effect since late 2025, a majority of young people can still access social media, those who can’t have lost their access to the news, and crisis helplines are reporting skyrocketing numbers of calls from youth left stranded without online community or resources.
We could go on and on about all of the inherent harms here, but we’ll try to keep this short as we walk through some of the major issues.
1. Security Risks and Privacy Harms
In order to ban some users, social media platforms first must confirm the ages of all users, regardless of age. Bans thus incentivize companies to force users of all ages to hand over government IDs, face scans, and other sensitive information. When parental consent is required, companies must collect even more verification data and often create explicit links between child and parent accounts—further destroying users’ anonymity.
Advertisement
Both of these databases create massive data “honeypots” that invite identity theft and permanent surveillance. We’ve already seen repeated data breaches involving age- and identity-verification services. Yet these laws would force both adults and the youth they claim to protect to feed their most sensitive data into this growing surveillance ecosystem.
If we don’t trust tech companies with our private information now, we shouldn’t pass laws that force us to give them even more of it.
2. Disproportionate Harm to Vulnerable Communities
Where these bills require parental consent, they impose disproportionate access barriers on low-income, non-traditional, and immigrant families. These sorts of families are more likely to share a single family device or have strong reasons to not want the government to track family associations and ID documents.
Advertisement
Beyond the technical failures, these bans cut off a vital lifeline. For LGBTQ+ youth, foster kids, and those stuck in unsupportive home environments, social media is often the only place to find community, explore their identity, or access life-saving resources. Forcibly removing young people isolates those who need connection the most, while creating massive new barriers for adults.
Social science indicates that moderate internet use is a net positive for teens’ development, and negative outcomes are usually due to either lack of access or excessive use. For LGBTQ+ and marginalized youth in particular, social media offers an essential space to access support they might lack offline. By forcing youth into digital isolation, these bans cut off vital access to political news, community, and health resources. They also completely ignore the calls of young people themselves who favor digital literacy and education over restrictive government control.
Advertisement
Instead of cutting off these lifelines, we should support measures that arm all youth (and the adults in their lives) with the knowledge they need to navigate online spaces safely.
4. Reckless Free Speech Violations for Users of All Ages
No matter your age, the First Amendment protects your right to speak and access information.
Blanket social media bans immensely and unconstitutionally chill all users’ exercise of this right. They cut off young people’s access to lawful speech, or ruin their privacy in the home by mandating parental consent and sometimes even parental access to their account activities and settings. They force all users (adults and young people alike) to hand private information over to tech companies before speaking or accessing information on social media platforms, imposing annoying obstacles on lawful online expression and wrongfully blocking some adults outright.
Critically, these bans destroy our right to online anonymity—a cornerstone of our right to free expression that protects whistleblowers, journalists, activists, immigrants, and everyone who has ever used a private browser or account to ask the internet an embarrassing question.
Advertisement
How to Fight Back
Social media bans weaponize parents’ concerns about children’s safety to justify unprecedented levels of surveillance and censorship. In the process, these laws deny young people their rights, threaten online anonymity for everyone, expose our sensitive personal data to breach and abuse, and replace parental decision-making with state authority. This is a battle over the future of the open, private, and free internet, and we must act now to protect it.
Here’s how you can help us fight back: Talk to your community (including young people!) about what’s at stake. If you’re a parent, lean on open conversations and platforms’ existing tools to tailor your child’s experiences instead of handing that power over to the government. And no matter where you live, contact your government representatives and tell them clearly that social media bans are not the answer to kids’ online safety.
Ethan Tan, a memory industry consultant and former Samsung China executive, told Jefferies Equity Research analysts during a recent briefing that he expects memory prices to rise by 40% to 50% in the third quarter of 2026 compared to the prior quarter, and by another 30% to 40% in Q4…. Read Entire Article Source link
Want a cheap Yeti cooler for your 4th of July celebrations? I’m a deal-hunting outdoor expert, and I’ve tracked down the only holiday offers actually worth your money
Looking for a deal on a Yeti cooler for your July 4th celebrations? I’ve got you covered. As the former editor of an outdoor adventure website, I know exactly where to look to find the best offers on Yeti gear, and I have uncovered some great deals that will arrive in time for the big day.
Amazon has some great offers, particularly on soft coolers like the Hopper Flip 8 and 12, both of which are ideal for cans or lunches. There are also big discounts on the roomier Yeti M Series, including backpack-style coolers that make carrying your food and drinks a breeze.
Want a hard cooler? Take a look at Yeti Rescues, where you can find heaps of like-new coolers approved by the company itself, and with big price cuts. It’s a smart way to get a top-quality cooler for a lot less than list price. I’ve tested outdoor gear for years, and these price cuts are rare, so grab them while you can.
Advertisement
Yeti deals at Amazon
Yeti’s online store often holds seasonal sales and special deals on selected colors and product lines. Here are today’s best offers.
Yeti Rescues deals
Can’t see the cooler you want in the Black Friday sale? Take a look at Yeti Rescues — an official Yeti program that takes coolers and other equipment that’s not brand spanking new (products that have been returned, for example, or that Yeti has used for demos or displays), inspects them, cleans them, and sells them at a bargain price.
Advertisement
More Yeti deals
Amazon and Yeti Rescues aren’t your only options when you’re shopping for a cheap Yeti cooler. Dick’s Sporting Goods has a decent selection of offers as well. I’ve rounded up a handful of the best below, but you can also check out the full sale yourself.
Google announced on Monday that the Gemini app is now offering its personalized Nano Banana-powered image generation feature to a broader audience. Starting today, all eligible users in the U.S. can access the feature for free, a service that was previously only available to Plus, Pro, and Ultra subscribers.
Google initially announced that Gemini’s Personal Intelligence feature would get Nano Banana-powered image generation back in April, allowing users to create images that reflect their unique interests. This means that images can be generated based on Gemini’s understanding of your likes and preferences without you having to specify them in your prompt. Gemini utilizes data from your Google account connections — such as Gmail, Google Photos, YouTube, and Search — to achieve this.
For example, instead of saying, “Create an illustration of me and my favorite things, such as coffee and baking,” you can simply request, “Create an illustration of me and my favorite things.”
Gemini can also pull actual images of you from Google Photos, so you don’t need to manually upload photos.
Advertisement
Image Credits:Google
Google initially rolled out the Personal Intelligence feature earlier this year, making it widely available to all U.S. users in March. The company recently expanded this functionality to users in India and Japan.
Personal Intelligence is an opt-in feature, allowing you to decide which apps Gemini can access. Once enabled, it is set as the default for every prompt, but you can disable it using a new toggle in the Tools menu.
Additionally, last month, Google announced several upcoming updates for the Gemini app, including a new “Daily Brief” feature, a revamped interface, access to AI video model Gemini Omni, and a personal AI agent named Gemini Spark.
Notably, Google’s AI chatbot Gemini surpassed 750 million monthly active users (MAUs) earlier this year, reinforcing its position as a major player in the AI space.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Some of Apple’s corporate secrets aren’t so secret any more.
onapalmtree/Shutterstock
On top of leaks around its next smartphone generation, Apple has had sensitive details about its manufacturing processes revealed. Reuters reported that the documents posted on “the dark web” allegedly show information about both components and their suppliers for the iPhone 18 Pro. The leak included specifics on hundreds of parts, such as chips on the main circuit board and elements of the smartphone’s battery and cameras, according to the publication. Last week, AppleInsider first reported on the cyberattack, which took more than 630GB of data from India-based Tata Electronics. Fellow clients Tesla and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. also had documents in the leak, but much of the information seems to center on Apple.
Tata has risen to become one of Apple’s most prominent suppliers outside of China. Apple told Reuters that it is working on long-term security measures with Tata and that it is investigating this incident. The company has typically kept quiet about the specifics of its supplier relationships, and having these details exposed could put Apple on the back foot in terms of any future negotiations with its partners, particularly as it increases prices for many products in the wake of RAM shortages. Apple is expected to announce the iPhone 18 Pro, along with the iPhone 18 Pro Max and possibly its first foldable smartphone this fall.
Historically, being ultra-wealthy meant that there was an obligation to share a chunk of it with the world. Gilded Age industrialists like John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie made lasting cultural and philanthropic contributions, many of which still bear their names. But increasingly, our modern billionaires don’t seem inclined to follow suit.
To show just how little they’ve given, let’s look at the Giving Pledge. Over 15 years ago, some of America’s ultra-rich promised to give at least half of their wealth to charity throughout their lives or when they died. Even Elon Musk, briefly the first-ever trillionaire in history, signed it. That pledge is now on life support.
Bella DeVaan is the director of the Charity Reform Initiative at the Institute for Policy Studies, where she co-authored a study looking at how the pledge is impossible to fulfill. To explain the study’s findings, DeVaan spoke with Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram about why the pledge isn’t the road to a more equitable future and how philanthropy should be done instead.
Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.
Advertisement
Can you remind us what the Giving Pledge was and who signed it?
The Giving Pledge was a voluntary philanthropic commitment founded by Bill Gates, his then-wife Melinda French Gates, and Berkshire Hathaway chair Warren Buffett in 2010. Since then, north of 250 people in the world have signed onto this pledge. And it’s people with tons of money who feel like signing onto something like this is something that they could do, or at least want to be seen as pledging to do.
The Giving Pledge is now 16 years old. My team did a study at 15 — old enough for a driver’s permit. And we feel like there’s a significant body of evidence that the pledge is unfulfilled and unfulfillable. Of the 32 original signers who are still billionaires, they had collectively gotten 283 percent wealthier — or 166 percent adjusting for inflation — since they signed onto the pledge, and only one couple in the group fulfilled their pledge.
So the idea is to get poorer over time, and meanwhile, almost everyone, or if not everyone, has gotten significantly richer.
Advertisement
That’s exactly right. Mackenzie Scott, who is one of the most prolific and generous pledgers, has given away $26 billion. [But] she’s decreased her wealth by less than $6 billion since her separation from Jeff Bezos. So if that’s what the most generous philanthropist is struggling to keep up with, everybody else is faring far worse.
Is it because they don’t genuinely want to give their money away, or is it because they’re simply doing so well all the time and getting exponentially richer all the time that it is really hard to do?
If we want to give them some credit, yes, it is mathematically incredibly challenging to give away as much money as their skyrocketing wealth. But I definitely think these billionaires are not stepping up to the plate and giving as much as they should and even as much as they’ve committed to.
A great caveat of the Giving Pledge is that you get to fulfill it upon your death in your will. That could look like giving your children control of your charitable intermediaries. A big part of our study was finding out that 80 percent of all the gifts that these pledgers have given go into private foundations, often that they control.
Advertisement
That’s what it looks like when you can make a donation that seems like you’re parting ways with your wealth and delivering some kind of benefit to the public, but actually that money doesn’t reach public charities or public works or on-the-ground aid until it leaves the foundation, and there’s a significant lag time in there.
And what’s wrong with all the money going to their foundation that then goes and distributes money to, I don’t know, needy children, medical research firms, whatever it might be?
A weigh station lengthens the journey, right? We figured out that out of all of the living pledgers who are still billionaires, when they signed on, their median foundation payout rate was 9.2 percent a year.
If you’re getting so much wealthier and your foundation is only giving away a single-digit percentage of your foundation’s wealth every year, and you’ve gotten a tax incentive and reduction up front for your gift — which the general public is subsidizing up to 73 cents per dollar — that’s a very significant investment. You’re asking the public to shoulder it and that money is trickling out back to the public. It’s not keeping pace.
Advertisement
Is there any good news here, Bella? Have we accomplished anything? Have we eradicated any diseases? Have we cured any diseases?
It depends who you ask, but I would say no. I think that the great indignity of philanthropy and concentrated wealth at this scale is that multiple things can be true at once.
It can be true that billionaires overexert their power, that they are able to influence the state of science, innovation, the deliverance of public aid, the shape of housing policy, and that can make significant inroads and deliver benefits to people. There’s no arguing with that. But at the same time, they can be hoarding wealth, not doing enough, resting on their laurels, banking on this idea that the reputational benefit of signing the pledge is enough.
That those two things can be true at the same time, while regular people are struggling to make ends meet, means that the system is in need of a dramatic overhaul. And if the billionaires who promised to give half their money away are doing this poorly at it, that tells us everything that we need to know.
Advertisement
Tell us about an overhaul. If you designed the Giving Pledge or a system that’s altogether different, what would it look like?
If it were up to me, the number one most meaningful intervention is to figure out how to tax wealth, figure out how to restructure our economy so that people can’t accumulate these fortunes in the first place, over which they can exercise such plutocratic control.
But knowing that we live in a society that has all these billionaires already and has all these foundations with piles of money that haven’t been deployed for the public benefit, I think we have to increase transparency so that donors can’t use donor-advised funds and other popular intermediary and foundations to conduct dark-money giving or play shell games to change the timing of tax benefits, so that philanthropists have to make the gift and then see their tax benefit instead of getting it upfront without having any obligation to move money.
I’m hearing tax the Rich, I’m hearing reform tax code, I’m hearing change public policy. But as you could admit, less likely to happen. And I just wonder, have all of those things become less en vogue 15 years down the road?
Advertisement
Elon Musk talks about empathy as a weakness. He made cuts to USAID programs that directly resulted in hundreds of thousands of people dying. And people still love him and want to invest in his companies and make him even richer! Do you think we’ve seen a cultural shift around giving around empathy itself?
Yes. In these political conditions, the Giving Pledge is what we’re stuck with. We’re stuck with waiting for a voluntary effort to reshape society instead of knowing that we’ll get structural reform that would be guaranteed to deliver it.
These are all very concerning trends. Philanthropy in America has always been an expectation of the wealthy people in the country. Reaching back to Andrew Carnegie and Rockefeller, that is what is expected of a rich person in America. That value is no longer closely held at all.
Regular people are as generous as they can be. We see this in remittances. We see this in small donations to your local food bank, to your religious institution. Everyday people are as generous as they can be, and I think that our ultra-wealthy people need to take after them more.
IBM has unveiled “what it says is the world’s first sub-1-nanometer chip technology,” reports ZDNet, “designed to pack nearly 100 billion transistors on a fingernail-size die, roughly doubling the density of IBM’s earlier 2-nm test chip, first shown in 2021… Today, the smallest, most powerful chips top out at about 80 billion transistors.”
At the heart of the announcement is NanoStack. This is a three-dimensional, nanosheet-based transistor design that scales vertically, or along the z-axis, by stacking and staggering CMOS devices. Unlike today’s nanosheet architectures, which IBM also pioneered and which are being adopted by leading foundries at 3 nm and 2 nm, NanoStack bonds two nanosheet transistors into a single vertical structure, with each tier optimized independently and contacted from opposite sides. Each transistor in the demonstrated structure uses three sub-5 nm-thick nanosheets, about “15 silicon atoms” across, separated by roughly 9 nm spacers. Two such devices are then bonded vertically using an ultra-thin dielectric process IBM describes as a key innovation. Because the top and bottom devices can use different channel materials, dielectrics, and metals, IBM argues NanoStack is less a single trick and more a transistor platform that can be extended through multiple generations: 7 angstrom (Å), 5 Å, 3 Å, and potentially down to 1 Å in its internal roadmap.
An angstrom, by the by, is one ten-billionth of a meter. In terms of chips, an angstrom is a tenth of a nanometer. “This is the world’s first sub-1 nanometer chip technology with a new transistor architecture,” said Jay Gambetta, Director of IBM Research and IBM Fellow, during a press briefing. “We’re not just making smaller transistors, we’re reinventing how chips are built to deliver dramatically more power and energy efficiency….” Based on internal benchmarking against its 2 nm node, the company said its new chips will deliver up to 50% higher performance at the same power, or up to 70% lower power for the same performance. Big Blue also highlighted a 40% improvement in the scaling of static random-access memory (SRAM) cell area relative to its 2 nm technology.
This is a change IBM described as a “step the industry hasn’t seen in over a decade” and one that could be particularly important for AI accelerators that live or die on on-chip memory bandwidth… According to Huiming Bu, IBM’s VP of silicon technology R&D, NanoStack is a new paradigm. It’s moving chips to scaling fully into three dimensions and giving the industry at least “another decade” of logic advances as it crosses from nanometers into angstroms… The 40% SRAM density bump could also help architects push caches and on-die memory closer to compute units, cutting data movement overhead in training and inference workloads. IBM sees a path to production use “in as early as the next 5 years”, according to the article, and “expects NanoStack to eventually underpin CPUs, GPUs, mobile SoCs, and SRAM arrays.”
Advertisement
IBM’s VP of silicon technology R&D says the new innovation “can improve performance by 50% compared to the best available chip today, and at the same time can reduce power by 70%.”
We tested many mattresses last year and have hit the ground running in 2026. That said, here are a few options we enjoyed and considered but ultimately didn’t make the starter team.
Advertisement
Leesa Original Hybrid Mattress for $1,499: If you don’t mind the bouncy feel generated by the innerspring core, this is a well-engineered mattress that will appeal to most people—it’s not too firm but not too soft, with excellent edge support and an 11-inch height that won’t feel too tall or too low on your bed frame. It’s got a top layer of memory foam, but because of the Original’s sturdy hybrid construction, which incorporates 789 individual pocketed coils, you won’t get the dips or mashed-down spots over time that you might with a foam-only mattress, which can be a real problem for couples. You also can’t beat Leesa’s limited lifetime warranty. The only note is that while Leesa quantifies the Original’s only firmness level as a “medium-firm,” it is definitely on the softer side, so if you’re looking for a true medium-firm, you may want to consider a “firm” from another model. I also tested this with the optional Cooling Quilt Top, which I recommend if you sleep hot, as it was cool to the touch and helped reduce heat absorption overnight. —Kat Merck. $1,050 to $1,664
The Purple Mattress for $1,599: Purple’s signature squishy GelFlex grid is, like Tempur-Pedic’s Tempur-material, divisive: You are either a rabid super-fan or consider it the worst mattress you’ve ever slept on in your life. My household consists of the former. Along with your mattress, Purple sends a little rectangle of the material so you can see exactly what it is: A rubbery polymer grid that crumples to relieve pressure in areas where you need it, like your hips and shoulders. Because each square of the grid is open, it allows for plenty of airflow, and because the gel is squishy, it still absorbs motion transfer just like memory foam would. If you love that soft memory foam feel but hate the heat absorption, you will probably love Purple. And especially this model, as it best showcases the GelFlex grid without any additional foam layers to get in the way. The only problem I had with this mattress was its height: It’s around 9 inches, so if you have a low-profile bed frame and are used to a thicker mattress, it will sit quite low. I didn’t expect 2 or so inches to make a dramatic difference, but it did. Also, the GelFlex grid makes this mattress extremely heavy (make sure it’s exactly where you need it before cutting the vacuum seal), so placing a box spring or anything else underneath to lift the height will void the warranty. —Kat Merck. $1,099 to $2,598
Advertisement
Thuma Luxury Hybrid Mattress for $1,795:Thuma’s hybrid mattress is interesting because it blends together a smorgasbord of mattress materials: a Tencel cover, organic wool, memory foam, organic latex, and recycled-steel coils. The same rubberwood trees are used for Thuma’s popular Classic Bed frame, and for the Dunlop latex in this mattress. Of the three firmness levels offered—plush, medium, and firm—the medium was yielding some pretty strong support. The sleep trial is a bit unclear, as you only get 100 nights of coverage with your first Thuma purchase. So if you’ve already used it on a different Thuma product, like the frame, you may be out of luck here. —Julia Forbes. $1,295 to $1,995
Puffy Cloud for $1,049: This enhanced all-foam mattress offers profound pressure relief without feeling too soft, despite the name “Cloud” being in its name. The Puffy Cloud has a thinner profile and would most likely be too soft for bigger bodies. However, for lightweight and average builds, it really comes through to support the lower back and hug around pressure points. The thinness also didn’t compromise its motion isolation, which meant little to no shaking when my dogs jumped in and out of bed.—Julia Forbes. $449 to $1,298
Advertisement
The Saatva Contour5 for $3,049: The Contour5 is a newer offering from Saatva, replacing the popular Loom & Leaf in the company’s lineup. Like other Saatva mattresses, but unlike most others on this list, it is not roll-packed and comes delivered on a moving truck. The Contour5 has two firmness options and updated cooling tech that uses airflow channels in its gel foam layer, which is thinner than its predecessor, meaning it retains less heat. In my two weeks of testing, I found the Contour 5 was very good at remaining cool through summer nights, which is extra impressive given that it uses very dense 5-pound-weight memory foam. The Contour5 is soft enough for side sleeping without feeling like a saggy hammock and has excellent build quality, which is impressive for an all-foam mattress without springs. I prefer a hybrid with microcoils, but Saatva is popular for a reason, and as all-foam mattresses go, it has a true luxury feel. —Martin Cizmar. $1,899 to $3,649
The Big Fig Classic for $1,999: The Big Fig is designed for larger body frames. Being a bit overweight myself, I was eager to see how well this mattress, which is advertised as comfortably handling 550 pounds per sleeper, performed. It is a well-built mattress with an effective gel cooling layer; however, the aggressive edge support created a hammock-like feel despite the sturdy springs and three layers of high-density foam in the middle of the mattress. This was true both on my back and on my side. Others may appreciate the effect of sinking a bit into the center of the bed more than I do. —Martin Cizmar. $1,499 to $2,399
The Boring Hybrid Mattress for $799: Boring Mattress is a new company founded by two alums from Tuft & Needle. Simplicity is the company’s selling point. There is just one option: the Boring Hybrid Mattress. (You are allowed to pick a size.) This 10-inch hybrid has four layers of both foam and springs. I’m very sensitive to joint pain, and certain beds tend to make it worse, which is why pressure relief is super important for me. Having slept on a variety of different mattresses throughout the years, I was doubtful that this one would work. But I’ve slept on the hybrid mattress for months now and have yet to feel any pain at all. It strikes an excellent balance between firmness and support that my very particular self hasn’t been able to find with other options on the market. It’s worth noting, however, that its layers come equipped with an open-cell design that’s designed to move heat from your body while sleeping. I’m usually cold, so this feature isn’t that important to me. But on nights when I’ve cranked the heat up in my room and woken up sweating a bit, I can’t say it worked all that well for me. This isn’t a deal breaker, but I wouldn’t buy it solely for that. —Brenda Stolyar. $599 to $999
Advertisement
Casper The One for $899: Casper was a leader in the first wave of bed-in-a-box makers in 2014. The company has changed ownership and design a few times over the past decade but last year’s launch of The One finds the company keeping pace with competitors. This is an all-foam mattress that stands 11 inches tall. Because it’s all foam, it’s on the light side, with a queen weighing an easily movable 66 pounds. One of the main issues with all-foam beds is that they get too hot, but Casper’s The One uses an open-cell foam layer called Breathe Flex Foam on the top, which makes it both pleasantly squishy and breathable. Two more layers of foam add up to a medium-firm feel, with the middle layer designed to cradle your hips, and the base layer designed to provide support. —Martin Cizmar. $749 to $1,698
The Winkbed for $1,799: WIRED reviewer Julian Chokkattu slept on the luxury firm version of the WinkBed for almost two years and he was quite happy in that time. His favorite perk? The edge support is fantastic, so his partner never wakes when he slips into bed late at night. The plush pillowtop also adds a luxe, hotel-like feel to a relatively firm bed. —Martin Cizmar. $1,427 to $2,856
Silk and Snow S&S Organic for $950: I wouldn’t expect this to feel silky-soft, but the latex is supportive for sleep. I love how responsive (read: bouncy) this bed is, especially as someone who tosses and turns often. It’s able to move with me so I never feel unsupported, or overheated for that matter. Latex and coils are breathable, as are the organic cotton cover and wool fire barrier. —Julia Forbes. $800 to $1,300
Nest Bedding Quail for $1,299: When it comes to all-foam mattresses from classic bed-in-a-box brands, I prefer the Casper above, but the Quail by Nest is a nice option if you want an all-foam bed that’s a little firmer and you’re willing to pay a little more. My biggest issue with the Nest was that despite its claimed cooling system—the foam is infused with minerals and designed with an airflow layer—I did sleep a little hot on it during my week of testing. —Martin Cizmar.$849 to $1,499
Advertisement
Courtesy of Helix
Helix Sunset Elite for $3,095: Our top pick, Helix, also has an Elite collection that consists of seven mattresses along a spectrum of softness. At 15 inches high, the Sunset Elite is “the tallest mattress on the internet,” and comes shipped in two separate boxes, each heavy enough to max out FedEx requirements. The firmness is dictated by the foam density of the upper layer, which zips into a larger support system. This makes the mattress adjustable if you end up regretting your order. The bottom section has a separate layer of microcoils. I spent a month sleeping on the softest model from the Elite line, dubbed the Sunset, and appreciated the deep cradling effect. Helix offers a 100-day trial period on all of its mattresses. —Martin Cizmar.$2,871 to $4,871
Wayfair Sleep 14-Inch Plush Cooling Gel Hybrid Mattress for $324: This plush mattress has a top layer of cooling gel that conforms to your body for comfort and has classic pocket coils below for structure and support, with layers of memory foams with varying thickness surrounding the coils for extra support (the coils and memory foam mixture helps with low motion transfer, too). The top knit cover and sides help with breathability and the overall cooling effect. The mattress is also compatible with an adjustable bed base, has solid edge support, is CertiPUR-US and Oeko-Tex Certified (ensuring no harmful toxins), and has a 10-year warranty. This bed is super comfy if you like a more plush mattress. —Molly Higgins.$555 to $1,014
Mattresses to Avoid
Advertisement
Not every mattress we test can be a winner, which is why we test in the first place. Here are a few that did not make the cut according to our standards.
Birch Elite Hybrid for $2,619: This is the newest model from Birch, and frankly, you would be just fine sticking with the Birch Natural or Birch Luxe Natural instead. The Birch Elite Hybrid was incredibly top-heavy and incredibly difficult to move, given the floppiness and weight of its numerous latex and coil layers. The top layers slid around, creating a lumpy surface, and the new “CoolForce” layer was completely undetectable. —Julia Forbes. $2,499 to $4,499
Brooklyn Bedding Spartan for $1,499: This mattress is designed for “athletic recovery,” and as a former collegiate athlete, I was excited to try it. I had opted for medium firmness over the soft and firm options, but upon receiving it, I had to double-check that I hadn’t gotten the soft option by accident. The medium cratered around me, leaving me with unhappy pressure points. The lack of overall support didn’t help me recover from soreness, so I couldn’t tell you whether the Far Infrared Ray recovery tech in the cover helped at all. —Julia Forbes $1,099 to $2,399
Sleep Number Climate360 Smart Bed for $8,712:This bed can be temperature-controlled, which is amazing. The adjustable base means you can be comfortable when watching TV, reading, or sleeping. Unfortunately, the price tag has too many digits, and sleep experts recommend avoiding electronic usage before bed—advice the Sleep IQ app defies. Did we mention it costs as much as a used Buick and the weight is not far behind? —Martin Cizmar. $10,249 to $14,499
Advertisement
Tempur-Pedic Tempur-Adapt for $2,199: Tempur-Pedic is one of the country’s best-known and loved mattress brands, but two separate WIRED reviewers (Martin Cizmar and Nena Farrell) have both disliked different mattresses from the company over the past two years. Nena found the Tempur-Adapt totally lacking in support, and felt like she was sinking into a void when she lay on it. Her spine and muscles both ached after sleeping on it so she gave it to her sister who also hated it, describing it as like sleeping on a leaky air mattress. —Martin Cizmar.$1,699 to $3,398
Parachute Eco Comfort Mattress for $2,650: This mattress just doesn’t live up to its extravagant price. The model we tested didn’t have enough proper padding above its coils. —Martin Cizmar.$1,550 to $2,850
Advertisement
Frequently Asked Questions
Our testing process is simple—we dedicate a week or so to each mattress, sleeping on it at home to understand what it’s all about. The WIRED Reviews testing team has been refining our testing methodology since 2019, when we would try out mattresses side by side in a conference room, much like a mattress store experience. But just like what can happen at a mattress store, the experiences we were documenting in these brief observations could change the more time we spent with a mattress. Hence, we went back to basics and dedicated a week or more to sleeping on each one, noting down our nightly experiences.
That being said, I have spent the last six years as a certified sleep science coach and professional mattress testing becoming a mattress sommelier of sorts. Instead of devising tests to show how much a bed can support at the edge or reduce motion transfer, it really comes down to understanding the range of materials, sleeping positions, and body types in the mattress space.
What Should You Look for When Buying a Mattress?
Advertisement
Mattress shopping requires a bit of self-assessment before you even get into the particulars of a mattress. Taking note of your body type, preferred sleeping position, pain points, and material preferences for things like allergies or staying chemical-free are all data points that make the search a lot easier. From there, we can help you narrow down options for different scenarios, such as if you are a couple looking for a firm mattress to help with back pain. For that, I’d point you to some of our other guides, such as the best mattresses for sex and the best mattresses for back pain, to discuss some of our favorite options we’ve tested.
What Are Mattress Certifications?
This is one of the most critical factors to look for when buying a mattress, as it’s basically a cheat code for evaluating a mattress’s material and quality claims. For mattresses that use memory foam or organic and natural components, mattress certifications help us, as consumers, gain insight into the sourcing and safety of these materials. CertiPUR-US certification is a non-negotiable for me when it comes to memory foam because it shows that harmful chemicals were not used in its production. GreenGuard Gold is another certification that ensures any off-gassing from your mattress upon unboxing won’t affect your indoor air quality—important if you have sensitive skin, a strong sense of smell, allergies, or asthma.
How Long Does a Mattress Last?
Advertisement
As a ballpark estimate, your mattress should last eight to 10 years. I don’t recommend going much beyond that, as the mattress materials are past their prime and aren’t providing adequate support or comfort.
Just like picking out a bed, there are several factors involved that dictate how long it’ll last. Durability of the mattress’s materials always comes into play, as beds with coils tend to remain more structurally intact than all-foam beds, which can sag around the middle and edges over time. Your build also plays into this, because if your bed starts to buckle under your weight night after night, that’s obviously an issue. If this is the case for you, I’d recommend reviewing your warranty to see if it can be replaced.
How Long of a Mattress Warranty Should I Look For?
The industry standard for a warranty is about 10 years, so that should be the minimum in most cases. Many brands will offer prorated coverage beyond that decade mark, meaning the mattress can be replaced at a significant discount, depending on how long it’s been. This is where the fine print of a warranty is especially important to review, because many mattresses offer lifetime warranties. For example, DreamCloud has a “Forever Warranty” that fully covers its mattresses the first 10 years. After that 10-year mark, you have to pay $50 each way for the mattress repair or replacement to be delivered. It’s still a good deal, but something to be aware of.
Advertisement
Should I Buy My Mattress In-Store or Online?
Where you purchase your mattress is another personal preference. Many people may live near a showroom that sells a mattress they’ve been eyeballing, and want to go see it in person before buying. Others may do that and wait for an online holiday sale to secure a major deal.
The nice thing about buying online is that you get much more variety than what you’d get with a mattress store. You’ll still receive the sleep trial component that most brands offer for in-store purchases when opting to do so online. You can try the bed from the comfort of your home for a set number of days, typically 90 nights to an entire year, depending on the brand. Many companies, but not all, will require a 30-day adjustment period for you to get used to the mattress before they will process a return. If you do end up returning a mattress, some brands, both online and brick-and-mortar, may ask you to donate it to a local charity or arrange for pickup as part of the warranty. By donating, mattresses are kept out of landfills and put to good use.
Should I Wait for a Mattress Sale Before I Buy?
Advertisement
In all honesty, it comes down to how you’re currently faring with your mattress and sleep schedule. If you’re sleep-deprived and ready for a change, there’s no time like the present. We do cover coupons and promos that come up in non-holiday periods. For example, we have a special code for the Nolah Evolution running at all times.
During the holidays, the WIRED Reviews process is unique because we meticulously track price changes and sales year-round. That way, we can deliver news about the really good sales rather than what’s dominating headlines. Major mattress sales weekends include Presidents’ Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Black Friday, and Cyber Monday. There are plenty of ad hoc sales that pop up for various events in between, too.
How Does WIRED Acquire Mattresses for Testing?
We conduct a lot of research about what’s new in the mattress world, as well as the legacy of established brands and models. To perform hands-on testing, we will request free media samples from these brands or buy them outright on sites like Amazon or Wayfair, or from smaller vendors. Some brands will engage with us in partnerships, but that does not dictate their placement within an article, what we say about the product, or even if we cover it. Even if we receive commission, it’s essential that we publish our true account of our experiences.
Advertisement
What Does WIRED Do With the Mattresses After Testing Them?
Because most mattresses we test are provided as media samples, we donate them locally upon completion of testing.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login