Connect with us

Tech

The Complicated Legacy Of Mind Controlled Toys

Published

on

Imagine a line of affordable toys controlled by the player’s brainwaves. By interpreting biosignals picked up by the dry electroencephalogram (EEG) electrodes in an included headset, the game could infer the wearer’s level of concentration, through which it would be possible to move physical objects or interact with virtual characters. You might naturally assume such devices would be on the cutting-edge of modern technology, perhaps even a spin-off from one of the startups currently investigating brain-computer interfaces (BCIs).

But the toys in question weren’t the talk of 2025’s Consumer Electronics Show, nor 2024, or even 2020. In actual fact, the earliest model is now nearly as old as the original iPhone. Such is the fascinating story of a line of high-tech toys based on the neural sensor technology developed by a company called Neurosky, the first of which was released all the way back in 2009.

Yet despite considerable interest leading up to their release — fueled at least in part by the fact that one of the models featured Star Wars branding and gave players the illusion of Force powers — the devices failed to make any lasting impact, and have today largely fallen into obscurity. The last toy based on Neurosky’s technology was released in 2015, and disappeared from the market only a few years later.

I had all but forgotten about them myself, until I recently came across a complete Mattel Mindflex at a thrift store for $8.99. It seemed a perfect opportunity to not only examine the nearly 20 year old toy, but to take a look at the origins of the product, and find out what ultimately became of Neurosky’s EEG technology. Was the concept simply ahead of its time? In an era when most people still had flip phones, perhaps consumers simply weren’t ready for this type of BCI. Or was the real problem that the technology simply didn’t work as advertised?

Shall We Play a Game?

NeuroSky was founded in 1999 to explore commercial applications for BCIs, and as such, they identified two key areas where they thought they could improve upon hardware that was already on the market: cost, and ease of use.

Advertisement

Cost is an easy enough metric to understand and optimize for in this context — if you’re trying to incorporate your technology into games and consumer gadgets, cheaper is better. To reduce costs, their hardware wasn’t as sensitive or as capable as what was available in the medical and research fields, but that wasn’t necessarily a problem for the sort of applications they had in mind.

Of course, it doesn’t matter how cheap you make the hardware if manufacturers can’t figure out how to integrate it into their products, or users can’t make any sense of the information. The average person certainly wouldn’t be able to make heads or tails of the raw data coming from electroencephalography or electromyography sensors, and the engineers looking to graft BCI features into their consumer products weren’t likely to do much better.

NeuroSky engineer Horance Ko demonstrates a prototype headset in 2007.

To address this, NeuroSky’s technology presented the user with simple 0 to 100 values for more easily conceptualized parameters like concentration and anxiety based on their alpha and beta brainwaves. This made integration into consumer devices far simpler, albeit at the expense of accuracy and flexibility. The user could easily see when values were going up and down, but whether or not those values actually corresponded with a given mental state was entirely up to the interpretation being done inside the hardware.

These values were easy to work with, and with some practice, NeuroSky claimed the user could manipulate them by simply focusing their thoughts. So in theory, a home automation system could watch one of these mental parameters and switch on the lights when the value hit a certain threshold. But the NeuroSky BCI could never actually sense what the user was thinking — at best, it could potentially determine how hard an individual was concentrating on a specific thought. Although in the end, even that was debatable.

The Force Awakens

After a few attempted partnerships that never went anywhere, NeuroSky finally got Mattel interested in 2009. The result was the Mindflex, which tasked the player with maneuvering a floating ball though different openings. The height of the ball, controlled by the speed of the blower motor in the base of the unit, was controlled by the output of the NeuroSky headset. Trying to get two actionable data points out of the hardware was asking a bit much, so moving the ball left and right must be done by hand with a knob.

Advertisement

But while the Mindflex was first, the better known application for NeuroSky’s hardware in the entertainment space is certainly the Star Wars Jedi Force Trainer released by Uncle Milton a few months later. Fundimentally, the game worked the same way as the Mindflex, with the user again tasked with controlling the speed of a blower motor that would raise and lower a ball.

But this time, the obstacles were gone, as was the need for a physical control. It was a simpler game in all respects. Even the ball was constrained in a clear plastic tube, rather than being held in place by the Coandă effect as in the Mindflex. In theory, this made for a less distracting experience, allowing the user to more fully focus on trying to control the height of the ball with their mental state.

But the real hook, of course, was Star Wars. Uncle Milton cleverly wrapped the whole experience around the lore from the films, putting the player in the role of a young Jedi Padawan that’s using the Force Trainer to develop their telekinetic abilities. As the player attempted to accurately control the movement of the ball, voice clips of Yoda would play to encourage them to concentrate harder and focus their minds on the task at hand. Even the ball itself was modeled after the floating “Training Remote” that Luke uses to practice his lightsaber skills in the original film.

Advertisement

The Force Trainer enjoyed enough commercial success that Uncle Milton produced the Force Trainer II in 2015. This version used a newer NeuroSky headset which featured Bluetooth capability, and paired it with an application running on a user-supplied Android or Apple tablet. The tablet was inserted into a base unit which was able to display “holograms” using the classic Pepper’s Ghost illusion. Rather than simply moving a ball up and down, the young Jedi in training would have to focus their thoughts to virtually lift a 3D model of an X-Wing out of the muck or knock over groups of battle droids.

Unfortunately, Force Trainer II didn’t end up being as successful as its predecessor, and was discontinued a few years later. Even though the core technology was the same as in 2009, the reviews I can still find online for this version of the game are scathing. It seems like most of the technical problems came from the fact that users had to connect the headset to their own device, which introduced all manner of compatibility issues. Others claimed that the game doesn’t actually read the player’s mental state at all, and that the challenges can be beaten even if you don’t wear the headset.

Headset Hacking

The headsets for both the Mindflex and the original Force Trainer use the same core hardware, and NeuroSky even released their own “developer version” of the headset not long after the games hit the market which could connect to the computer and offered a free SDK.

Advertisement

Over the years, there have been hacks to use the cheaper Mindflex and Force Trainer headsets in place of NeuroSky’s developer version, some of which have graced these very pages. But somehow we missed what seems to be the best source of information: How to Hack Toy EEGs. This page not only features a teardown of the Mindflex headset, but shows how it can be interfaced with the Arduino so brainwave data can be read and processed on the computer.

I haven’t gone too far down this particular rabbit hole, but I did connect the headset up to my trusty Bus Pirate 5 and could indeed see it spewing out serial data. Paired with a modern wireless microcontroller, the Mindflex could still be an interesting device for BCI experimentation all these years later. Though if you can pick up the Bluetooth Force Trainer II headset for cheap on eBay, it sounds like it would save you the trouble of having to hack it yourself.

My Mind to Your Mind

So the big question: does the Mindflex, and by extension NeuroSky’s 2009-era BCI technology, actually work?

Advertisement

Before writing this article, I spent the better part of an hour wearing the Mindflex headset and trying to control the LEDs on the front of the device that are supposed to indicate your focus level. I can confidently say that it’s doing something, but it’s hard to say what. I found that getting the focus indicator to drop down to zero was relatively easy (story of my life) and nearly 100% repeatable, but getting it to go in the other direction was not as consistent. Sometimes I could make the top LEDs blink on and off several times in a row, but then seconds later I would lose it and struggle to light up even half of them.

Some critics have said that the NeuroSky is really just detecting muscle movement in the face — picking up not the wearer’s focus level so much as a twitch of the eye or a furrowed brow which makes it seem like the device is responding to mental effort. For what it’s worth, the manual specifically says to try and keep your face as still as possible, and I couldn’t seem to influence the focus indicator by blinking or making different facial expressions. Although if it actually was just detecting the movement of facial muscles, that would still be a neat trick that offered plenty of potential applications.

I also think that a lot of the bad experiences people have reported with the technology is probably rooted in their own unrealistic expectations. If you tell a child that a toy can read their mind and that they can move an object just by thinking about it, they’re going to take that literally. So when they put on the headset and the game doesn’t respond to their mental image of the ball moving or the LEDs lighting up, it’s only natural they would get frustrated.

So what about the claims that the Force Trainer II could be played without even wearing the headset? If I had to guess, I would say that if there’s any fakery going on, it’s in the game itself and not the actual NeuroSky hardware. Perhaps somebody was worried the experience would be too frustrating for kids, and goosed the numbers so the game could be beaten no matter what.

Advertisement

As for NeuroSky, they’re still making BCI headsets and offer a free SDK for them. You can buy their MindWave Mobile 2 on Amazon right now for $130, though the reviews aren’t exactly stellar. They continue to offer a single chip EEG sensor (datasheet, PDF) that you can integrate into your projects as well, the daughterboard for which looks remarkably similar to what’s in the Mindflex headset. Despite the shaky response to the devices that have hit the market so far, it seems that NeuroSky hasn’t given up on the dream of bringing affordable brain-computer interfaces to the masses.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tech

‘Marshals’: When Does Episode 3 Premiere on Paramount Plus?

Published

on

Marshals, a new Yellowstone spinoff starring Luke Grimes as Kayce Dutton, is currently airing on CBS. You can also tune in with Paramount Plus.

The Yellowstone sequel series sees Grimes’ former Navy SEAL join an elite unit of US Marshals to bring range justice to Montana, according to a synopsis from CBS. The show also includes Yellowstone actors Gil Birmingham as Thomas Rainwater, Mo Brings Plenty as Mo and Brecken Merrill as Tate. Spencer Hudnut is the showrunner of Marshals — formerly known as Y: Marshals — and Taylor Sheridan is an executive producer.

Advertisement

When to watch new Marshals episodes on Paramount Plus

Episode 3 of Marshals airs on CBS on Sunday, March 15. Viewing options for Paramount Plus customers vary by subscription tier. You can watch the episode live if you have Paramount Plus Premium, which includes your local CBS station. If you subscribe to Paramount Plus Essential, you can watch the installment on demand the following Monday, but not live on Sunday. 

Here’s how to watch the next two episodes of Marshals.

  • Episode 3, Road to Nowhere: Premieres on CBS/Paramount Plus Premium on March 15 at 8 p.m. ET/8 p.m. PT/7 p.m. CT. Streams on Paramount Plus Essential on March 16.
  • Episode 4, The Gathering Storm: Premieres on CBS/Paramount Plus Premium on March 22 at 8 p.m. ET/8 p.m. PT/7 p.m. CT. Streams on Paramount Plus Essential on March 23.

You can also watch CBS and the third episode of Marshals without cable with a live TV streaming service such as YouTube TV, Hulu Plus Live TV or the DirecTV MyNews skinny bundle. In addition to offering a lower-cost option, Paramount Plus lets you watch the other two Yellowstone spinoffs: the prequels 1883 and 1923.

Advertisement

James Martin/CNET

After a price increase in early 2026, the ad-supported Essential version runs $9 per month or $90 per year. The ad-free Premium version runs $14 per month or $140 per year. Paying more for Premium gives you downloads, the ability to watch more Showtime programming than Essential and access to your live, local CBS station.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

ByteDance will reportedly buy NVIDIA’s latest AI chips to use outside of China

Published

on

TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance has figured out a way to access NVIDIA’s latest AI chips despite export restrictions, according to a report by . The company is working with a firm called Aolani Cloud and building out Blackwell computing systems in Malaysia.

This should give ByteDance access to around 36,000 B200 chips. That’s NVIDIA’s most powerful processor. The hardware buildout will reportedly cost more than $2.5 billion. The company says it plans on using this new computing power for AI research and development outside of China.

The country has been unable to access the B200 chip, as it was designed in California and, as such, subject to US export controls. This has led to do what ByteDance is doing with Aolani Cloud. The Singapore-based firm will buy up the components from NVIDIA and will operate exclusively in Malaysia, giving ByteDance access in the process.

“By design, the export rules allow clouds to be built and operated ​outside controlled ​countries,” an NVIDIA spokesperson said. They also said that all of the company’s cloud partners go through review before being approved to receive its products.

Advertisement

A representative from Aolani Cloud ‌that the company adheres to all applicable export control regulations and that ByteDance will be just one of many customers. It plans on providing cloud-computing services to multiple companies across Asia and the globe. However, it’s worth noting that Aolani currently operates ‌with just $100 million worth ⁠of hardware and ByteDance is planning to inject a whopping $2.5 billion.

The US did recently , but they’ve been slapped with a 25 percent tariff. Additionally, the US government mandated that the export license would only be approved if NVIDIA accepted a Know-Your-Customer requirement, which is an attempt to ensure that China’s military can’t access the chips. NVIDIA .

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Protecting data during hypervisor migration

Published

on

Vmware

Broadcom’s acquisition of VMware in 2023 set off a wave of migrations that shows no signs of subsiding. But moving from VMware to another hypervisor may introduce significant technical and operational risks.

IT teams must prepare for challenges that are not always apparent at the start of a migration.

Price hikes, licensing changes and shifts in customer support have driven VMware customers to look for alternatives. Recent operational problems haven’t helped.

Last year, VMware Workstation auto-updates failed due to a Broadcom URL redirect. In 2026, the migration continues. Gartner research VP Julia Palmer recently predicted that VMware would lose 35% of its workloads by 2028.

Advertisement

Many of those workloads will shift to platforms such as Microsoft Hyper‑V, Azure Stack HCI, Nutanix AHV, Proxmox VE or KVM. Unfortunately, the journey comes with challenges. Switching hypervisors is a high-stakes infrastructure change.

IT professionals need to focus on completing a successful migration with their data intact and available.

Why hypervisor migration is technically risky

It sounds simple: Export data, convert it to a new format and then import it into a new hypervisor. But that process is far riskier than it sounds.

That’s because hypervisors don’t interoperate. Multiple technical variables increase the risk of failed or unstable migrations. Hypervisors differ in disk formats, hardware abstractions, driver stacks and networking models.

Advertisement

Virtual hardware versions, storage controllers, chipset emulation and network virtualization layers don’t always translate cleanly.

Snapshots and templates behave differently. Even subtle configuration differences can create instability that only surfaces once workloads are under real production pressure.

Migrating from VMware can increase cost, risk and operational drag, while limiting strategic options.

Acronis Cyber Protect gives IT leaders control with a flexible, AI‑powered cyber protection platform that cuts migration time by up to 60% and keeps the business secure and responsive throughout change.

Advertisement

See how Acronis delivers control

Backup is essential to a successful hypervisor migration

The most important prerequisite for any platform migration is not a conversion tool. It is verified, restorable backup.

Organizations need to protect workloads with full-image, application-consistent backups that IT pros can restore not only to the same hypervisor but to dissimilar hardware or an entirely different virtualization platform.

IT teams need to perform recovery drills before they start migration, not just after cutover.

A platform-agnostic backup architecture provides a necessary safety net. It enables restoration from the source environment to the destination environment, and it allows rapid reversion to the original platform if compatibility or performance issues arise.

Advertisement

The bottom line is that data remains safe and accessible.

Any-to-any hypervisor recovery — restoration from physical, virtual or cloud environments to any other destination — reduces migration risk and has the added advantage of reducing long-term vendor lock-in.

How to avoid three risks most teams underestimate during migration

Even the most carefully planned and executed migrations can fail for predictable reasons.

1. Teams often underestimate planned downtime

Advertisement

Too many teams plan for an ideal level of downtime as opposed to a worst-case scenario. Unfortunately, migrations frequently stretch beyond maintenance windows. If a window closes when systems are not stable, organizations can suffer missed transactions, stalled operations, SLA violations and reputational damage.

That’s why migration planning must include a formal business continuity strategy, Ask in advance:

  • How long can each workload realistically be offline?
  • What happens if rollback is required?
  • Who makes the go or no-go decision?
  • What is the communication plan if restoration time exceeds expectations?

Backup and recovery are critical. The ability to quickly restore workloads to their original platform can mean the difference between a short delay and a multi-day outage.

2. Backup and recovery gaps can plague transitions

Migration creates a dangerous gray zone for backup and disaster recovery, with environments are often split between old and new platforms. That is when recoverability must be strongest. The time it takes to restore backups from either environment is critical.

Advertisement

Common gaps appear when:

  • Backup chains are broken during VM exports.
  • Incremental backup jobs may fail after platform conversion.
  • Application-consistent snapshots are not validated on the new hypervisor.
  • DR replication targets are not synchronized during phased cutovers.

Backup and recovery must function continuously throughout the migration. IT teams need to maintain parallel protection during overlap periods so that workloads are recoverable from both the legacy and target platforms until the transition is finished.

3. An expanding attack surface means backup images need protection

Migration also expands your attack surface.

With two hypervisor stacks running, complexity spikes. Backup repositories, an image-level backups in particular, can become high-value targets. If attackers compromise them during migration, your rollback and recovery options disappear.

Advertisement

Immutability is essential during this phase. IT teams need to protect backup images against modification or deletion, even by privileged accounts. They need to tighten role-based access controls and limit administrative access.

Equally important is adherence to the 3-2-1 principle: At least three copies of data, on two different media types, with one copy stored off-site or offline. During migration, that third copy becomes critical insurance.

If both production and primary backup infrastructure are affected, an isolated copy preserves your recovery path.

The value of a natively integrated platform

Maintaining parallel protection is essential because it lowers operational risk. However, it also increases management complexity. Two hypervisor stacks, multiple storage systems and parallel protection policies must coexist without creating gaps.

Advertisement

A unified cyber protection platform can simplify this process for IT teams. A unified cyber protection platform can reduce complexity by delivering consistent backup, recovery and security controls across physical servers, hypervisors and cloud workloads through a single point of control.

Natively integrated protection and migration capabilities in Acronis Cyber Protect can reduce transition timelines while maintaining rollback readiness and continuous synchronization.

Migration as a resilience opportunity

The shift away from VMware has made one concept clear: Migration planning is a long-term competency, not a one-time project.

Teams that succeed treat hypervisor transitions as resilience exercises. They validate backups in advance, ensure cross-platform recovery capability, maintain rollback paths, harden backup storage against ransomware and verify data integrity after cutover.

Advertisement

With these safeguards in place, migration becomes more predictable and significantly more likely to succeed.

VMware migrations don’t have to be slow, risky or disruptive.

With Acronis Cyber Protect, IT teams gain a flexible, responsive platform that accelerates migration while delivering AI‑powered security, backup and recovery in one natively integrated solution.

If you’re planning a move away from VMware, see how Acronis helps organizations migrate faster and stay protected at every step.

Advertisement

Learn how Acronis Cyber Protect accelerates VMware migration.

Sponsored and written by Acronis.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

The Luxury Car Brand With The Highest Customer Satisfaction Score Isn’t Mercedes-Benz

Published

on





With newer car brands like Tesla gaining prominence, along with the broader rise of electric powertrains, and other formerly high-end technology becoming common on even the most basic new cars, it often feels that the line between luxury automakers and mainstream car brands is blurrier than ever.

Still, no matter what type of powertrain is under the hood, there are lots of car buyers who desire the prestige, performance, and extra amenities that come with these luxury brands, and they’re happy to pay the additional cost to own them. This market position is distinct enough for luxury brands to have their own separate category when it comes to ranking things like reliability and customer satisfaction. When it comes to the top-ranked luxury brand for customer satisfaction, the winner shouldn’t be too surprising for anyone who has followed the industry for a while. 

In the 2025 American Customer Satisfaction Index Automobile Study, it was the Toyota-owned Lexus that ranked highest among luxury automakers, jumping up two spots and overtaking both Mercedes-Benz and Tesla when compared to the previous year’s rankings. A big part of of that is the wide-ranging and high-quality Lexus hybrid vehicle lineup, with hybrids in general earning higher satisfaction rankings across all brands, especially when compared to electric vehicles.

Advertisement

Hybrid is the way

ACSI conducted its automobile satisfaction survey between 2024 and 2025, surveying a little under 10,000 vehicle owners on a variety of different categories that summarize the ownership experience. The list includes traditional satisfaction categories like driving performance, efficiency, comfort, and reliability, along with two new categories added for 2025, total range on a fuel tank or electric charge, and expected resale value.

Advertisement

Lexus took the top spot among all luxury brands with a total score of 87 on a scale of 100, five points ahead of second-place Mercedes-Benz. The result isn’t shocking, as the brand’s corporate parent, Toyota, is also ranked highly when it comes to customer satisfaction. What especially drove Lexus’ rise in this year’s rankings is its hybrid vehicles. Hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles like the popular Lexus RX 500h crossover make up a big part of the brand’s volume, with the vast majority of the Lexus lineup offering some form of hybrid powertrain.

When separated by powertrain type across all luxury brands, hybrids earned the highest satisfaction score with an 83 out of 100, followed by gasoline at 80, and electric at 78. While Lexus does have EV offerings in its lineup, the brand has largely gone the way of parent company Toyota in focusing heavily on hybrid models over pure electric vehicles.  Right now, that decision seems to be paying dividends, especially when compared to the European luxury brands that have pursued EVs more aggressively. 

Advertisement

Other findings in the luxury car market

Overall, across the luxury segment, customer satisfaction scores were down slightly in 2025 from the previous year, with most of that decline attributed to poor performance from electric vehicles, particularly those from Audi and BMW. In its findings, ACSI points out that high driver frustration with those German EVs not only drags down an individual brand’s rankings, but aggregates customer satisfaction across all brands.

One of the new customer satisfaction categories added for 2025, which looks at the driving distance on a full charge or full tank of gas is especially interesting to look at, as it represents a real-world interpretation of driving range that can differ from official specs or EPA ratings. It’s here where luxury hybrids win once again, with a score of 76, compared to 74 for gasoline, and 71 for electric vehicles.

As for the future, with EV sales on a downward trend in America, it’s possible that brands like Audi, BMW, and Mercedes could regain some of their lost ground if EVs represent a smaller slice of their sales going forward, but for now, Lexus seems to be in the catbird seat. Along with luxury brand rankings, ACSI’s study also covers mass market brands, and in the 2025 mass market car customer satisfaction rankings, it was another Japanese automaker that earned the number one spot.

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Siri and refined Liquid Glass controls on the docket for WWDC 2026

Published

on

Apple introduction of its late Siri overhaul is expected to finally arrive during WWDC, as part of a trend by the company to improve the quality of the software it ships.

Close-up of a modern iPhone's triple camera and flash, set against a dark background with glowing, multicolored, overlapping loop shapes in orange, blue, and pink.
We’re still waiting for New Siri…

Apple was thought to be preparing its big update to Siri for a developer beta of iOS 26.4, as well as similar betas for macOS Tahoe and iPadOS 26.4. With it not visible in the developer beta builds at this late stage, the next probable launch time for it will be during WWDC in June.
However, Siri faces being only a part of a number of areas Apple will improve during its annual developer showcase.
Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Camp Snap Camera Review: At Least It Looks Good

Published

on

Cam Spam Camera in a green color

Pros

  • Great retro design
  • As easy-to-use as you can get
  • Lots of great color options

Cons

  • Not as satisfying as you might expect
  • Availability shenanigans
  • Image quality isn’t great

The Camp Snap is a digital pocket camera with the design of a retro-styled film camera. It’s extremely inexpensive and leans into the digicam trend that’s popular among 20-somethings and younger. It doesn’t quite succeed in the same way similar cameras do, like the Flashback.

Image quality is fairly mediocre, even for a budget camera, which, to be fair, might be what some people are looking for with the retro trend. However, spending even a small amount more can get you better images to start with, giving you more options for how the final photos look.

For the price, the Camp Snap isn’t bad. In fact, it’s better than some ultrabudget cameras I’ve tested, but beyond the overall design, the Camp Snap has less to offer, even compared to other cameras with similar vibes and style.

Advertisement

Camp Snap specs

Photo resolution 8 megapixels (3,264×2,448)
Video resolution N/A
Sensor size 1/3.2-inch
Lens 32mm (35mm equivalent) f/1.8
Image stabilization None
Screen type Monochrome LCD with image count only
Storage MicroSD (4GB card included)
Weight 97grams (0.2 pounds)
App None

The Camp Snap has fairly unimpressive specs, not too surprising for something that costs $70. The version I bought was V105, which overall looks the same as previous versions but has the ability to install custom filters for the photos and a slight redesign of the flash toggle.

The toggle also turns the camera on and off. Previous versions used the shutter button to do that. I can see why they made that change. It’s far less likely to take 50 photos of the inside of your bag with a physical power switch.

Advertisement
Featured against a black background, the back of a a Camp Snap camera shows the counter for the number of photos taken.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

Surprisingly, the camera actually has a removable microSD card on the bottom under a door that’s secured with a screw. That’s not exactly the most user-friendly design, which I suppose is why Camp Snap recommends connecting the camera via USB and barely mentions the card.

Next to the card slot, hidden by the same door, are the extent of the Camp Snap’s settings: a mode button and two others for up and down. This is to set the date recorded in the photo’s metadata. That’s it. No exposure settings, modes, switchable filters, nada.

This camera was designed to replicate the feeling of using disposable film cameras. If you want more than that, look elsewhere.

Advertisement
The top of a a green Camp Snap camera.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

You can install a filter for your photos, though this process also isn’t user-friendly. To switch filters, you need to plug the camera into a computer and download a .flt file from the Camp Snap website, drop it into the camera’s memory and all images taken after that will use that filter’s settings. You can’t change it on the go, and unlike the Flashback, you don’t get unfiltered photos to adjust later. 

The bottom of a Camp Snap camera.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

You can, however, design your own filter if one of the premade options on the website isn’t to your liking. It’s an easy-to-use interface, complete with a preview of your adjustments.

Most people buying the Camp Snap will probably stick with either the preinstalled “Camp Classic” or “Vintage” filter (it’s called both on different parts of its site) or choose one of the other premade ones that are available, but being able to design your own this easily is a great feature.

However, again, switching filters isn’t as simple as pressing a button or scrolling through menus.

Advertisement
The filter design page on Camp Snap's website

The filter design page on Camp Snap’s website.

Camp Snap/CNET

Not having Bluetooth or Wi-Fi is likely one of the reasons the Camp Snap is so cheap. It’s also why spending a bit more on the Flashback is probably a wise investment. Not having to connect to a computer to do anything is definitely a bonus. 

The other problem is that the base image quality isn’t great, limiting the effectiveness of the filters in general. I’ll get to that in the next section. 

Usability and photo quality

All images in this section are unedited other than cropping and use the preinstalled Camp Classic/Vintage filter unless otherwise noted.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

Using the Camp Snap isn’t quite as satisfying as the Flashback either. First, it feels even more cheaply made. You wouldn’t think there’d be much of a difference between the Camp Snap’s 97 grams and the Flashback’s 147 grams, but it’s noticeable, and the lighter Camp Snap feels even more disposable.

There’s less tactile and audible enjoyment as well, with a cheap-feeling shutter button, extremely unsatisfying electronic shutter sound and none of the ratcheting click-click-click of the Flashback’s “film” advance dial.

Advertisement
Geoff Morrison/CNET

That said, with a single button and no settings to adjust, the Camp Snap is obviously very easy to use. It doesn’t even have a screen, unless you count a small monochromatic LCD that shows the picture count. You can line up a shot with an optical viewfinder. These never worked particularly well, but it’s better than nothing.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

Going for the retro aesthetic is one thing, but it invites the question: What’s retro? Does that mean the 2000s digital cameras? Or is it 90s disposable film cameras? Black and white?

Digital cameras have long had settings and “filters” that adjust how the final image looks. Some, like many Fujifilm cameras, have built a cult following around their filters (or, as we in the cult call them, recipes).

The Camp Snap’s preinstalled filter is alternately called Camp Classic or Vintage, which they describe as “that classic summer camp vibe.” But again, summer camp from what period?

A photo by the Camp Snap of cacti on a garden path.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

The images with the preinstalled filter have an overly warm color temperature that wasn’t typical in-era, but some imagine it was. The images are noisy and oversharpened, looking vaguely like a budget 2000s digital camera or early camera phone. The camera also tends to blow out highlights. They look better than the Kodak Charmera, at least.

From left to right: Camp Classic/Vintage, Kodaclone, 101Clone and a custom “neutral” filter made using the website tool’s Standard preset.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

I can see what Camp Snap was trying for with the looks of some of the filters, but because the underlying images are mediocre, the filters end up looking like the kind of filters you’d get on a cheap digital camera that you never use after the first day.

Then again, that’s not entirely different than what Camp Snap says it’s going for with this camera. Such marketing just ends up feeling like “if you can’t fix it, feature it,” though. Or to put it another way, you could do what these filters are doing on a camera that produces better images, and the final result would overall be better.

Advertisement

Maybe I’m overthinking it. If people wanted “better” photos, they wouldn’t be looking to mimic old disposable cameras.

More camp, less snap

The Flashback and Camp Snap cameras.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

I’ve mentioned it a bunch in this review because I came away from my time with the Flashback rather enamored with it. It’s a nostalgia-induced dopamine hit for those who used disposable cameras and something delightfully retro for many (most?) of its potential customers that likely never experienced such things the first time around. That’s fine — every generation has that about something.

The bones on the Flashback were good, though. It took decent pictures for a $120 camera, and it was easy to use. I didn’t get that same warm feeling after my time with the Camp Snap. This is a very inexpensive camera that feels and performs like a very inexpensive camera, trying to mimic something it isn’t.

The Camp Snap has the added hassle of needing to connect to a computer to view your images. Not ideal. Even if you have a microSD card reader for your phone, you’d need to also carry a tiny screwdriver to get at the card. Also not ideal.

Advertisement

Then there’s the pictures themselves, which are retro but in a bad way. The Flashback presents images that are an idealized aesthetic of what once was. The Camp Snap is what was, specifically, the worst cameras of the era. 

A sample image from the Camp Snap of some swan boats.

Swan boats with the 101Clone filter taken approximately 0.75 miles from the 101 highway.

Geoff Morrison/CNET

Physically, though, it looks great, and is available in a selection of colors I wish more products had in this era of grays on grays on grays. I don’t believe for a second they sell out of specific colors as often as its website says. That manufactured scarcity seems to be a trend in budget camera viral marketing.

Advertisement

For a little more, the Flashback is the better option. Also, for the same price as that camera is a step-up Camp Snap model, the CS-Pro, which has a 16-megapixel resolution and the ability to choose between four filters on the fly. Plus, it upgrades the flash from the base model’s LED to Xenon.

That latter feature should help get that 90s flashbang look when using it. Camp Snap’s marketing says it has better image quality, but it still doesn’t have Bluetooth or Wi-Fi. It also has a silver-on-black design that looks like SLRs from the 70s. To each their own, but I prefer the color options of the base Camp, snappy as they are. 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Does Canada Need Nationalized, Public AI?

Published

on

While AI CEOs worry governments might nationalize AI, others are advocating for something similar. Canadian security professional Bruce Schneier and Harvard data scientist Nathan Sanders published this call to action in Canada’s most widely-read newspaper (with a readership over 6 million): “Canada Needs Nationalized, Public AI.”


While there are Canadian AI companies, they remain for-profit enterprises, their interests not necessarily aligned with our collective good. The only real alternative is to be bold and invest in a wholly Canadian public AI: an AI model built and funded by Canada for Canadians, as public infrastructure. This would give Canadians access to the myriad of benefits from AI without having to depend on the U.S. or other countries. It would mean Canadian universities and public agencies building and operating AI models optimized not for global scale and corporate profit, but for practical use by Canadians…

We are already on our way to having AI become an inextricable part of society. To ensure stability and prosperity for this country, Canadian users and developers must be able to turn to AI models built, controlled, and operated publicly in Canada instead of building on corporate platforms, American or otherwise… [Switzerland’s funding of a public AI model, Apertus] represents precisely the paradigm shift Canada should embrace: AI as public infrastructure, like systems for transportation, water, or electricity, rather than private commodity… Public AI systems can incorporate mechanisms for genuine public input and democratic oversight on critical ethical questions: how to handle copyrighted works in training data, how to mitigate bias, how to distribute access when demand outstrips capacity, and how to license use for sensitive applications like policing or medicine…

Canada already has many of the building blocks for public AI. The country has world-class AI research institutions, including the Vector Institute, Mila, and CIFAR, which pioneered much of the deep learning revolution. Canada’s $2-billion Sovereign AI Compute Strategy provides substantial funding. What’s needed now is a reorientation away from viewing this as an opportunity to attract private capital, and toward a fully open public AI model.
Long-time Slashdot reader sinij has a different opinion. “To me, this sounds dystopian, because I can also imagine AI declining your permits, renewal of license, or medication due to misalignment or ‘greater good’ reasons.”

Advertisement

But the Schneier/Sanders essays argues this creates “an alternative ownership structure for AI technology” that is allocating decision-making authority and value “to national public institutions rather than foreign corporations.”

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Relays Run This Balanced Ternary Adder

Published

on

If you’re at all familiar with digital computing, you’ll know that computers represent everything in binary values of one and zero. Except that’s not technically the only way to do computing! You can use any numerical system you like if you build your hardware to suit, as [Jeroen Brinkman’s] ternary adder demonstrates.

As you might guess from the prefix, “ternary” refers to a base-3 numerical system. In this case, [Jeroen] implemented a balanced ternary system, which effectively uses values of -, 0, and + instead of just 1 and 0. The adder is built using relay logic, and is designed to handle 4 trits—the ternary equivalent of bits, where each trit can have one of the three aforementioned states. On a hardware level, trit states are represented with voltages of -5, 0, or 5 V in this case, and are handled with special tri-state switching elements that [Jeroen] constructed out of simple SPDT relays.

[Jeroen]’s write-up does a great job of explaining both ternary basics as well as the functioning of the adder. It’s also quite intuitive because it’s possible to see the relays clicking away and the LEDs flashing on and off as the circuit does its work to add values stored in ternary format.

Advertisement

If you’re trying to get your head around ternary computing from the very lowest level, this project is a great place to start. We’ve seen base 3 hardware built before, too—like this simple ternary computer lashed together from accessible components.

If you’re cooking up your own computing apparatus that uses some weird number system or something, remember—we’d love to hear about it on the tipsline!

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

MacBook Neo teardown reveals Apple's most repair-friendly laptop in years

Published

on


Unlike recent MacBook Air and Pro models, where Apple’s unibody “top case” design turns keyboard problems into major surgery, the Neo’s keyboard is treated as its own part rather than being permanently bundled with the upper shell.
Read Entire Article
Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

MacBook Neo, iPhone 17e and special guest David Pogue on the AppleInsider Podcast

Published

on

David Pogue, author of “Apple: The First 50 Years” is our special guest talking about what did and did not make it into the book, plus there are rumors of the HomeHub and real-world news of the MacBook Neo and iPhone 17e, all on the AppleInsider Podcast.

White book titled Apple The First 50 Years by David Pogue, featuring a subtle iPod click wheel illustration on the cover, with a small black ai logo circle to the right
David Pogue talks about his new history of Apple book

Pogue is everywhere this week, talking about his 600-page history of Apple, but now you can hear the very first interview he gave about it. Listen to the stories behind the book, but also hear just how keen he was to find out what AppleInsider thought of it. Listen to the interview here or read the lightly-edited transcript.
It’s a wide-ranging interview, but of course the book is not the only thing happening this week.
Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025