If you switch between two iPhones regularly, you’re going to love this new feature.

Setting up iPhone Handoff

Why and how to use iPhone Handoff

Mathematician Tristan Buckmaster believes OpenAI used his work to rush ahead and beat him to solving a legendary math problem with a $1 million bounty.

But that’s not been enough for him to stop using the company’s models—and he’s not the only mathematician that feels that way.

“Even if you don’t agree with any of this, you’re kind of stuck. With AI being so useful, it’s hard to completely prevent oneself from using it,” Buckmaster tells WIRED. “These companies have a monopoly, and there is not much choice,” he adds.

In the week and half since the New York University professor accused OpenAI of copying his approach, Buckmaster has been using the company’s coding agent Codex to tidy up his research papers. When he has time to do math (which he says is rare, since the fallout thrust him into the spotlight), the tool has been helping him understand the logical steps OpenAI’s agents might have taken to get from his earlier workings to the final proof.

Buckmaster had used Codex as well as Anthropic’s competing Claude to work on what’s known as the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem, alongside Anthropic researcher Levent Alpöge. OpenAI deployed tens of thousands of agents to reach the solution, but only after it learned the equation was close to being solved, Buckmaster says.

When Buckmaster went public with his claims, it ignited a firestorm about artificial intelligence and whether it would make human mathematicians obsolete. It also led OpenAI to do an investigation and amend its announcement about solving Navier-Stokes to say it “confirmed that Buckmaster’s Codex prompts over the two months preceding this announcement and paper on September 8, 2026, could not have influenced the system in any way, including through training.” The company pointed WIRED to its announcement in an email.

Showing that AI was pushing the boundaries of mathematics was “more important than the result,” Buckmaster says. But churning out solutions to long-standing math problems without fully crediting the human work undergirding them—especially ahead of major IPOs—is irresponsible and “childish,” he says.

Other mathematicians have raised similar concerns. Only a handful of people on the planet understand the techniques in geometric group theory that German mathematician Andreas Thom has dedicated the last two decades to developing. So when OpenAI said in August that its Astra model had used them to prove a long-standing problem he had been working on, “I was amazed,” says Thom. “And of course I was wondering, how did they learn about it?”

So he says he asked OpenAI researchers Mark Sellke and Sébastien Bubeck. In an August email, he pointed out that the firm’s assertion that “no progress” had been made on the problem in the last decade overlooked a 2019 paper of his, as well as other mathematicians’ work. The company amended its press release. He and a colleague had been using ChatGPT to assist their work on the problem in the months running up to the result, but when he asked if their interactions had been fed into training data, Thom says Sellke replied: “That did not happen.”

“I set it aside,” Thom recalls. “I’m not so much interested in these political things; I want to work on mathematics.”

While Thom has seen OpenAI’s statement that Buckmaster’s prompts couldn’t have influenced the system, he says he doesn’t trust this and concedes he will probably never know whether his work actually fed the result.

“AI really kills this entire idea that you could trace back who contributed what,” he says. “That is probably over.”

Cheap Gaming: Valor Mortis is launching soon, and the developers have announced the game’s starting price. The Soulslike will be relatively affordable, or at least cheaper than many competing games, as it is launching in close proximity to several other major releases.

One More Level (OML), the studio behind the critically acclaimed first-person “runner” Ghostrunner, is almost ready to launch its new game. Valor Mortis will apply the developer’s experience with first-person games to the Soulslike genre and will apparently require a smaller upfront payment than other “triple-A” productions while still offering a complete game experience.

The official Valor Mortis account recently shared the tidbit on social media. The game will launch on October 13 and cost $40/€40. The studio spent a year debating the game’s final price, which will offer players a 20-hour story set in an alternative, supernatural take on Napoleon’s war in Eastern Europe during the 19th century.

The studio is confident in the quality of its product and its chances of succeeding against other “full-price” titles. However, Valor Mortis is also launching alongside many high-profile games and is one of the few original IPs competing against some massively popular franchises that gamers already know well.

One More Level highlights how this fall is going to be pretty “stacked” in terms of gaming releases. A partial list of games scheduled for release in October includes Gears of War: E-Day, Ace Combat 8, Star Wars: Galactic Racer, Final Fantasy Resonance, and Phantom Blade Zero. Meanwhile, September releases include Marvel’s Wolverine, Silent Hill: Townfall, Control Resonant, and more.

Needless to say, many of these games will cost more than Valor Mortis. According to publisher Lyrical Games, the price the developers agreed upon could eventually send the wrong message to potential customers. The recent social post was framed as a reassuring message about the quality of Valor Mortis, which OML says will bring a novel twist to Soulslikes and first-person action games.

The developers are also wary of pre-orders, asking players to judge the complete version of their game instead. However, in the same message, OML also pre-announced additional paid and free content that will launch in a future update. OML doesn’t want gamers to pre-order its game, but it is now asking “collectors” to buy the Deluxe Edition of Valor Mortis and the upcoming DLC for $60/€60.

– Valor Mortis (@ValorMortis) September 17, 2026

Despite the somewhat contradictory stance, OML’s message is likely to add even more fuel to the growing debate over the price of modern game releases. Many recent and upcoming titles cost significantly more than Valor Mortis’ $40 price tag, with the GTA VI blockbuster having a “reasonable” $80 price tag compared with the previously rumored $100 base price.

Boox has just unveiled its latest pocket-sized e-reader with the Palma 3, but how does it differ from the Palma 2?

Considering we awarded the Palma 2 with a solid four-star rating, how does the Palma 3 look set to compare? Are there enough updates to warrant an upgrade?

We’ve compared the specs of the Palma 3 to the Palma 2, and noted all the key differences and noteworthy similarities between the two below. Once you’re finished here, be sure to check out our best e-reader guide too. 

Specs Comparison Table

	Boox Palma 3	Boox Palma 2
Display	6.13-inch E-Ink	6.13-inch E-Ink
Dimensions	6.3 x 3.1 x 0.31 inches	6.3 x 3.1 x 0.31 inches
Bluetooth	6.0	5.1
Battery	3950mAh	3950mAh
Operating System	Android 16	Android 13
RRP	€339.99	€299.99

Price and Availability

The Boox Palma 3 has a starting RRP of €339.99/$319.99 but, at the time of writing, we don’t know when exactly the device will be available to buy. Instead, Boox has just teased that the device is “coming soon”.  

Advertisement

Advertisement

In comparison, the Boox Palma 2 is cheaper than its successor, with a starting RRP of €299.99. 

Boox Palma 3 has stylus support

Boox introduced stylus support with the Palma 2 Pro and has carried that on with the Palma 3. However, neither the 2 Pro nor the 3 come with the compatible Boox InkSense Plus pen in the box and will cost an additional $49.

It’s not compulsory for using the device, but it is a useful addition for handwriting quite notes or doodles. We also found during our time with the Palma 2 Pro that the pen is lag-free, responsive and feels natural to use too. With that in mind, we expect a similar performance with the Palma 3. 

Otherwise, the Palma 2 doesn’t offer stylus support and is solely designed to be used as a touchscreen device. We found that the Palma 2 did experience a slight lag between interacting with the display and getting a response from the interface. While we could still type fairly quickly and accurately, the lag is definitely noticeable.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Boox Palma 3 comes with Android 16 installed

Both the Palma 3 and Palma 2 are Android devices, which means they offer access to the Google Play Store. That’s a brilliant addition especially when you consider the best Kindles only provide access to the Kindle store and no other apps. 

While the Palma 2 runs on Android 13, the Palma 3 benefits from the newer Android 16 – though at the time of writing, we don’t know how many years of security updates Boox will offer. 

Both share roughly the same dimensions – though Palma 3 is slightly heavier

At first glance, you’d be forgiven for thinking there weren’t any differences between the Palma 3 and Palma 2’s design. Both have a 6.13-inch display and measure in at 6.3 x 3.1 x 0.31 inches. However, the Palma 3 is slightly heavier than its predecessor, at 195g compared to 170g.

Advertisement

The reason behind the increased weight comes down to the material. While the Palma 2 has a plastic frame, the Palma 3 benefits from an aluminium frame which results in a more solid build.

Boox Palma 3 has Bluetooth 6

Both Palmas are equipped with Bluetooth, which means you can pair compatible headphones, earbuds or even speakers and enjoy a higher quality listening experience – whether you’re listening to audiobooks, podcasts or streaming music from Spotify. 

Advertisement

Perhaps unsurprisingly as it’s a newer model, the Palma 3 is equipped with Bluetooth 6 rather than Bluetooth 5.1 which the Palma 2 sports. This means you can expect better reliability, less dropouts and an overall smoother connection than the older iteration. 

Neither offer SIM support

Unlike the Palma 2 Pro, neither the Palma 3 or Palma 2 offer SIM support. That means you’re reliant on a Wi-Fi connection if you want to make calls or send messages via supported apps like WhatsApp or Telegram. 

Early Verdict

The biggest difference between the two is the fact that the Palma 3 offers stylus support while the Palma 2 doesn’t. Although the stylus annoyingly isn’t included in the box, it is a useful addition that makes handwriting notes much easier.

Advertisement

Advertisement

If you’re not fussed about being able to handwrite notes, or perhaps you already own a device like the Remarkable Paper Pro, then there’s perhaps little reason to upgrade from the Palma 2 to the Palma 3. 

On the other hand, if you’re looking for a new e-reader and want one that can double as a digital notebook, then the Palma 3 seems like a solid choice.

At $799, the HEDDphone D1 enters a crowded part of the headphone market where established dynamic-driver models like the Sennheiser HD 650 and Beyerdynamic T1 have been reference points for years. What makes the D1 interesting is that HEDD is not trying to beat them by doing more of the same.

Heinz Electrodynamic Designs, better known as HEDD, was founded by Klaus Heinz and his son, Dr. Frederik Knop, with the goal of combining meticulous German engineering with new approaches to driver technology. HEDD is still a relatively young company, but its founders have considerably deeper roots in professional audio. Heinz previously co-founded ADAM Audio, while Knop came to HEDD with his own academic and engineering background in Berlin’s audio industry.

Klaus Heinz’s expertise with the Air Motion Transformer was developed during his years at ADAM and became central to HEDD’s earliest products. The original HEDDphone used the company’s Variable Velocity Transformer, a full-range descendant of the AMT, while HEDD’s studio monitors have continued to employ advanced AMT designs of their own.

That made the HEDDphone lineup instantly recognizable, both sonically and visually. The first several models used the VVT driver and distinctive squared-off earcups, including the HEDDphone TWO GT that we reviewed recently. The D1 breaks from both traditions.

Some will undoubtedly look at the D1 and conclude that HEDD simply needed a less expensive headphone for a broader audience, so it produced a more conventional dynamic-driver model. “Entry level” is already doing some heavy lifting at $799, but dismissing the D1 as HEDD’s ordinary dynamic headphone misses what is actually going on inside it.

HEDD prides itself on innovation, and apparently even the dynamic driver still had unfinished business.

The HEDDphone D1 is the first dynamic-driver headphone to use Thin-Ply Carbon Diaphragm technology. Originally developed by Swedish researchers at Composite Sound, TPCD uses extremely thin layers of carbon fiber to create a diaphragm that is both exceptionally light and extremely rigid. Similar thin-ply carbon materials have found applications in aerospace, Formula 1, marine racing, and other fields where low weight and high strength are rather important.

For a dynamic headphone driver, those properties offer an obvious advantage. Traditional diaphragms can flex under load, creating localized breakup and additional harmonic distortion. The rigidity of the TPCD diaphragm allows it to behave more uniformly across its surface while also controlling resonance structurally rather than relying as heavily on external damping.

That may sound like a small engineering distinction, but controlling the motion of a dynamic driver has always been one of the fundamental challenges of headphone design. A diaphragm needs to start, stop, and change direction quickly without continuing to ring after the signal has moved on. The lighter and more rigid that diaphragm can be made without introducing other problems, the greater the potential for cleaner transients and lower distortion.

Which helps explain why HEDD was willing to move away from its beloved AMT technology to build an “ordinary” dynamic-driver headphone.

As it turns out, ordinary is not really what HEDD had in mind.

Related Reading:

Build & Fit

Construction is a mix of metal and polymer, with a steel headband and grilles paired with polymer gimbals and earcups. The underside of the headband is padded with memory foam and wrapped in a soft, suede-like material, while the outer section uses a polymer frame to keep the padding centered and properly positioned.

Headband adjustment is positive, with clearly defined clicks at each stop and enough range to accommodate most head sizes. The cups offer roughly 20 degrees of rotation on the vertical axis, divided evenly between the front and rear, along with approximately 35 degrees of horizontal movement. That gives the D1 enough flexibility to conform comfortably to a wide range of head shapes.

The ear pads use the same suede-like material as the headband, with softer internal padding and generous internal dimensions. My ears never touched the pads, nor did they come into contact with the driver screens.

I also had no trouble achieving a good seal while wearing eyeglasses, helped by the wide adjustment range and relatively low clamping force. At 350 grams, the D1 is not especially light, but the weight is distributed well enough that I had no issues wearing it for extended listening sessions.

The supplied cable connects to each earcup through separate 3.5mm TS jacks positioned along the bottom. It is cloth-wrapped and terminates in a 3.5mm TRS plug, with a screw-on 6.35mm adapter included for use with full-size headphone amplifiers and other sources.

One of the more thoughtful aspects of the D1 is its emphasis on long-term serviceability. The perforated ear pads, headband cushions, structural yokes, and individual driver-baffle assemblies can all be removed and replaced independently by the owner rather than requiring the entire headphone to be sent back for relatively simple repairs.

Those who would rather leave the screwdriver in the drawer will also appreciate the five-year warranty.

Internals

Having already spent a good deal of time on the 50mm TPC diaphragm used in the D1, I’ll keep the rest of the specifications brief. Nominal impedance is 32 ohms, sensitivity is rated at 100 dB/mW, and frequency response extends from 5Hz to 40kHz.

That places the D1 firmly in the easy-to-drive category, which is another significant departure from HEDD’s earlier AMT-based headphones. Those models demanded considerably more from the source and, combined with their greater weight, were never especially well suited to portable use.

The D1 is both easier to power and considerably lighter, making it far more practical for listeners who want to use it away from a full-size desktop headphone rig.

HEDDphone D1 Specifications:

• Design: Open-back, over-ear
• Driver: Dynamic, Thin-Ply Carbon Diaphragm (TPCD)
• Driver Size: 50mm
• Frequency Response: 5Hz-40kHz
• Impedance: 32 ohms
• Sensitivity: 100 dB/mW
• Weight: 350 grams
• Ear Pads: Perforated velour
• Cable: 2-meter textile-covered detachable cable
• Connections: Dual 3.5mm mono inputs
• Termination: 3.5mm TRS with 6.35mm adapter
• Warranty: 5 years with registration
• Manufactured: Berlin, Germany

Listening

The first thing I noticed about the D1’s low end was how much more punch it delivers than almost any other reference-tuned headphone near its price point. That does not mean the bass is pushed forward, because it really is not. It is simply palpable in a way that many neutral headphones are not.

The D1 should appeal to listeners who want slam and rumble without sacrificing a near-neutral overall balance. The next thing that becomes obvious is how clean the bass sounds and how well defined it remains even at the very bottom. Nothing sounds dull, thick, or droning, and the D1 maintains excellent definition as it reaches into the lowest octaves.

That makes tracks like Duran Duran’s “A View to a Kill” especially entertaining, with the walking bass line during the introduction having real weight and texture. The same is true with something like Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture, where the larger dynamic swings and cannon blasts can be properly celebrated.

There is no bleed from the mid-bass into the lower midrange, and just as I heard in the lows, instruments and voices through the mids retain their own space and definition. Lower-register vocals have good weight without sounding heavy, guitars growl and scream when called upon, and strings have the energy and attack they deserve.

Piano also sounds impressively natural, which is a rarer talent than it should be, while higher-pitched voices retain good energy without becoming nasal or strident. The overall clarity is excellent. Tracks like 40 Fingers’ “Sunset Jig” become particularly enjoyable because it is so easy to follow the individual contribution of each guitarist.

There is a slight lift in the lower treble, but it never becomes excessive. That added energy helps strings retain their bite and gives percussion plenty of snap and rattle. The lift appears to extend from roughly 3kHz through just above 11kHz before beginning to taper off, giving the D1 a somewhat brighter treble presentation than many reference headphones.

It never struck me as hot, however, and the stronger-than-average bass presence gives the overall presentation good balance. Cymbals sound realistic without becoming clicky, while air and sparkle are both very good. The D1 sounds exceptionally open through the upper registers.

The soundstage does not immediately announce itself as absurdly large or artificially stretched. With Cowboy Junkies’ “I’m So Lonesome I Could Cry” from The Trinity Session, the reverberation extends naturally into the surrounding space and reveals just how large the recorded environment really is.

On other recordings, the stage can sound more contained, which suggests that the D1 is reproducing what is actually present rather than imposing the same oversized presentation on everything. Imaging is extremely precise, and placing individual musicians within an orchestral recording is almost laughably easy.

The Bottom Line

The HEDDphone D1 is largely neutral in overall balance with a mild treble lift, but describing it that way risks underselling what makes it so compelling. Too many listeners still equate neutral with boring, and the D1 is anything but.

Bass is not exaggerated, yet it has more impact and physical presence than most reference-tuned headphones in this price range. It reaches deep, remains exceptionally clean, and delivers enough punch and texture that it can sound more substantial than the measurements might suggest. The midrange is equally well defined, while the slightly elevated treble adds energy, openness, and detail without pushing the presentation into harshness.

HEDD has also addressed one of the biggest complaints surrounding its earlier headphones. At 350 grams, the D1 is considerably lighter and easier to wear for long sessions. The improved comfort, lower power requirements, and more conventional form factor make it a far more practical headphone for everyday use without sacrificing the technical strengths that have defined HEDD’s more ambitious designs.

To my ear, the D1 is one of the strongest reference-tuned dynamic headphones available below $1,000. It offers better bass definition, greater dynamic impact, and a more engaging overall presentation than long-standing reference models such as the Sennheiser HD 650 and Beyerdynamic T1, while still maintaining the tonal balance and resolution expected from a serious reference headphone.

HEDD may have built its reputation around far more exotic driver technology, but the D1 proves that its most conventional headphone may also be its most broadly appealing.

At $799, it is not inexpensive. It is, however, exceptionally good value for what it delivers, and an easy Editors’ Choice.

Pros:

• Exceptionally clean, well-defined bass with impressive slam and extension
• Near-neutral tuning that still sounds engaging and dynamic
• Excellent clarity and separation through the midrange
• Slight treble lift adds openness, detail, and energy without sounding harsh
• Precise imaging and a soundstage that reflects the recording rather than exaggerating it
• Considerably lighter and more comfortable than previous HEDD headphones
• Easy to drive at 32 ohms and 100 dB/mW
• User-replaceable pads, headband cushions, yokes, and driver-baffle assemblies
• Five-year warranty

Cons:

• $799 is still expensive for a dynamic-driver headphone
• 350-gram weight is improved, but not especially light
• Mild treble emphasis may not suit listeners who prefer a darker presentation
• Open-back design limits portability and isolation
• More conventional styling may feel less distinctive than earlier HEDD models

Our Ratings:

★★★★★★★★★★ Sound Quality

★★★★★★★★★★ Comfort

★★★★★★★★★★ Build Quality

★★★★★★★★★★ Value

Where to Buy:

For more information: hedd.audio

Related Reading:

This past summer, Samsung launched the Galaxy Watch9 alongside the Galaxy Watch Ultra2, its more rugged, shock-resistant smartwatch for outdoor adventures.

The Watch9 is the everyday option, and it’s a solid smartwatch and fitness tracker with a plethora of health features. It’s available in a 40-mm size in cream and graphite, and a 44-mm size in graphite and silver, starting at $80. Compared with last year’s Galaxy Watch8, it’s a modest update, though. There’s a faster processor, a slightly larger battery capacity, and an expanded suite of wellness metrics.

After two weeks of testing the 40-mm model, I wouldn’t necessarily upgrade to the Watch9 from the Watch8. But if you have an older Galaxy Watch or you’re invested in Samsung’s ecosystem and are looking for a smartwatch, the Watch9 is the best choice.

A Familiar (Squircle) Face

The Galaxy Watch’s main hardware update is its new processor. It now utilizes Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Wear Elite platform, which Samsung claims enhances CPU and GPU performance along with efficiency. In testing, the watch responded smoothly when scrolling menus, launching apps, and dismissing notifications.

Wear OS 7 also adds more customizable widgets and live updates from compatible apps. One of the more exciting new additions is raise-to-talk for Gemini. Lift your wrist toward your mouth, and you can start talking to Google’s AI assistant. The Google Pixel Watch has had this feature for two generations now, so I’m happy to see Samsung finally catch up.

Samsung has also slightly increased the battery capacity. The 40-mm model has a 390-mAh battery (up from 325 mAh), while the 44-mm models get a 445-mAh cell (up from 435 mAh). Unfortunately, that doesn’t translate to an improvement in battery life, which is probably because it’s being used to power the watch’s expanded suite of health features (more on that later). Samsung still estimates up to 30 hours of battery life, but I averaged closer to 25 hours with Always-On Display enabled. That’s enough to get through a full day and night, but not enough to make charging something you can forget about. A full recharge also took me about 100 minutes on average, which is significantly longer than the 45 minutes it takes the Pixel Watch 5 to reach a full charge.