Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Tech

Android phones are getting smarter about detecting when they've been stolen

Published

on


Google recently announced a new suite of anti-theft measures for modern Android devices. The company aims to protect users before, during, and even after an attempted theft. After all, a stolen smartphone not only threatens personal data security but can also lead to further financial scams.
Read Entire Article
Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Tech

Dell is bringing AI to its business laptops

Published

on

Dell is doubling down on AI-powered computing with a new lineup of Pro Precision workstations designed to bring serious AI performance directly to desks.

At the centre of the announcement is a refreshed Dell Pro Precision range. It includes both tower and mobile workstations built specifically for AI-heavy workloads like model training, simulations, and creative production.

The idea is straightforward: instead of relying on cloud infrastructure, Dell wants AI development to happen locally. This way, teams can experiment faster and keep control over their data.

The new Pro Precision 9 tower series, available in T2, T4, and T6 configurations, is aimed at high-end users who need sustained performance. The top-end T6 model pushes things furthest, with support for up to Intel Xeon processors (up to 86 cores), multiple NVIDIA RTX PRO Blackwell GPUs, and as many as 15 PCIe slots. Dell says it’s its most scalable workstation yet, built to handle long-running AI workloads without slowing down.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Moreover, that same focus is now extending to laptops. Dell’s updated Pro Precision 5 and 7 Series mobile workstations bring AI-ready performance into more portable designs, powered by the latest Intel and AMD chips with improved NPUs.

These systems are designed for on-device AI tasks, including local inferencing, without needing constant cloud access. Optional RTX PRO GPUs, faster memory, and Gen 5 storage round out the package.

Dell isn’t stopping at traditional workstations, either. It’s also introducing Pro Max systems with NVIDIA’s GB10 and GB300 platforms, which aim to bring data centre-level AI capabilities to a desk setup. The GB300 model, in particular, is built around NVIDIA’s Grace Blackwell architecture and is designed to run large AI models locally, reducing latency and ongoing cloud costs.

Advertisement

All of this ties into what Dell calls its AI Factory with NVIDIA — a broader ecosystem that connects local development to large-scale deployment, whether on-premises or in the cloud. The goal is to let teams move from prototype to production without needing to rebuild workflows.

In practice, this is less about flashy features and more about shifting how AI work gets done. By pushing more compute power into desktops and laptops, Dell is betting that faster iteration, lower costs, and better data control will matter just as much as raw performance.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Pete Hegseth: We Can’t Wait For Larry Ellison To Turn CNN Into Another Right Wing Propaganda Mill

Published

on

from the we-are-incapable-of-subtlety dept

We’ve noted repeatedly how the U.S. authoritarian right is buying up all of our new and old media companies because they’re trying to mimic what Viktor Orban created in Hungary. Namely, a media where all the major outlets are owned by rich autocratic allies, who spew propaganda 24/7 while the government strangles real, independent journalism just out of frame.

Of course, you’re supposed to try and have some subtlety in this so the public isn’t fully aware of the con. But the Trump administration doesn’t do subtlety.

Last week Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth apparently got upset by the fact Trump’s war in Iran isn’t going very well. Poor Donald clearly didn’t understand the evolving nature of modern and inexpensive drone warfare (despite all the brutal evidence in Ukraine), and has gotten the country bogged down in precisely the sort of clusterfuck the fake populist pretended he opposed last election season.

Even our soggy corporate press has occasionally been making this clear to the public, something that upsets Pete Hegseth very much. Hegseth apparently got particularly upset with CNN recently insisting that the Iran War had “intensified.” It made him so upset that he openly pined for the moment when Larry Ellison (and his nepobaby son) control CNN, so they can cheerlead for war:

Advertisement

Hegseth: “Some in the press can’t stop. Allow me to make suggestions. People look at the TV and they see banners, ‘Mideast War Intensifies.’ What should it read instead? How about, ‘Iran increasingly desperate.’ More fake news from CNN. The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better”

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-13T12:15:57.966Z

One of the funniest parts about this is that claims the war had “intensified” was made by his own agency in a press release!

It’s very clear that the U.S. right wing won’t be satisfied until the entirety of U.S. media is owned by a handful of rich right wingers like Larry Ellison and Elon Musk, allowing them to create a North Korea bullhorn of daily, uniform propaganda that does nothing but lavish praise upon them. To build something like that here in the States requires a level of subtlety they’re simply not capable of:

Democrats historically suck on media policy and reform (even the progressive wing of the party is fairly incompetent on the subject), so you can’t expect much help there.

Advertisement

But there are several things working in our favor, including America’s sheer size (it’s very difficult to maintain the kind of control they’re looking for), our diversity, the decentralized nature of the modern internet, and the fact that most of the nepobabies (David Ellison) and brunchlords (Bari Weiss) integral to their plans appear to have absolutely no Earthly idea what they’re actually doing.

For example, all the debt Ellison has adopted from the purchase of CBS and Warner Brothers is going to force them to engage in massive, unprecedented cost cuttings and layoffs, making it hard to maintain informational control and build an effective, ratings-grabbing propaganda operation (even if Bari Weiss knew what she was doing, which she assuredly does not).

And the public still has agency. Larry Ellison can buy TikTok and Elon Musk can buy Twitter, but they can’t control the flow of the public as they flee to other, less white supremacist, right wing friendly alternatives. It’s sheer hubris to think they can maintain information control in a country this massive and diverse, and there will be some useful entertainment value in watching them set money on fire trying.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, agitprop, consolidation, free speech, iran war, journalism, larry ellison, media, pete hegseth, propaganda

Companies: cbs, cnn, paramount

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

After nuking sales of Galaxy Z TriFold, Samsung is reportedly making a slimmer follow-up

Published

on

The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is already on its way out. A new report suggests that the company is killing sales for the triple foldable phone just three months after its debut, putting an end to its $2,899 experimental showcase.

But while the Galaxy Z TriFold sales are being halted, it’s apparently not the end of the road for such an ambitious smartphone.

What’s left to unfold?

Amid the TriFold’s reported phase-out, fresh rumors hint that Samsung doesn’t plan on abandoning the concept entirely. It would appear that the brand is doubling down with a better successor, which is slimmer and more refined than the original Z TriFold.

Samsung took feedback on the first-generation TriFold, and the thickness seems to be one of its biggest drawbacks. Early tri-folding designs being bulky isn’t a surprise, considering their multi-hinge structure. But Samsung could make the next version even thinner, and refine the overall form factor to make it more practical for everyday use.

Why thickness matters for tri-fold devices

One of the biggest challenges of any foldable phone is its overall width when folded, which is especially true for a triple-folding design. The multiple folding sections can make the device a lot thicker than standard foldables when folded, which can affect everything from portability to in-hand comfort.

In comparison, the notebook-style and clamshell folding flip phones are more mature in their designs. Even the first-gen Galaxy Fold had its fair share of issues, which were ironed out with each passing generation. So Samsung seems to be making a quicker move to improve the TriFold concept before pushing it further.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Humanscale’s New $15K Lounge Chair Is the Ultimate Home Office Workstation

Published

on

The chair starts at $8,995, but that doesn’t include the side table or ottoman. Add those and it costs $10,995. The model pictured above uses Alpaca wool fabric and brings the cost up to $14,995. (There are more than 300 fabrics and colors to choose from, and the swiveling table comes in various woodgrains.) The Herman Miller Eames, of which the Diffrient Lounge also takes inspiration, costs roughly $8,500 today, depending on which leather you choose.

“The Eames is obviously an iconic design—it’s timeless, it’s beautiful—but it’s not something you can work comfortably in for a long time,” Silva says.

Image may contain Cushion Home Decor Couch and Furniture

Levers on the edges of the armrest let you mechanically adjust the recline of the backrest and headrest.

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Don’t let the Lounge in the name fool you. Silva assures me that every chair the company designs is built with ergonomic comfort in mind, with the adjustable work surface and headrest allowing for different postures. While traditional lounge chairs focus on style, Silva says the Lounge prioritizes comfort. In my brief time on the chair, it indeed felt enveloping and cushy yet supportive. And the mechanical levers made it easy to shift the chair into a more active sitting position or a more relaxing posture, without disrupting the ergonomics with a laptop on the table.

Advertisement

Diffrient had been tinkering with the idea of a lounge chair that could double as a workstation for a long time, Silva says, and believed that technology allowed people to work in different ways.

“The chair acknowledges the fact that creativity and productivity don’t necessarily happen when you’re tied to your desk,” he says. “They happen in different postures; more relaxed or moving around the office, and this chair supports those transitions.”

King recites a famous quote from Diffrient: “The best chair is a bed.” When you sit upright, your weight compresses your spine, but when you lean back, a large portion of that weight goes into the backrest, so when you’re lying down, there’s significantly less pressure on your spine. “Reclining is really healthy,” King says. “He always thought it would be a good way to work.”

Luxe Seat

How does a chair come to cost $15,000? Silva highlights Humanscale’s long-standing approach to simplicity. After all, it’s a hallmark of the original Freedom chair. While the Diffrient Lounge may not look very complex, that’s by design, cleverly masking the engineered mechanical system with clean lines and curves. There’s even some automation in the headrest. If you’re fully reclined and the headrest is in a forward position to support your head, as you come back up, the headrest will automatically go into a neutral position.

Advertisement
Image may contain Cushion and Home Decor

There are two USB-C ports on the chair to power your devices, which means the Diffrient Lounge needs to be connected to an outlet.

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

5 Best Folding Phones (2026), Tested and Reviewed

Published

on

Other Folding Phones to Consider

Image may contain Darren Balsley Electronics Phone Mobile Phone Computer Laptop and Pc

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 for $1,056: Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip7 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) is a close second to Motorola’s Razr Ultra. I liked the camera quality from Motorola’s latest flip more than Samsung’s, a big win for the Razr, but the Flip7 captures nice photos and offers better video quality, if that’s your thing. Samsung’s latest Flip has a larger front screen, though you still have to jump through a few hoops to make it useful. For example, you need to install an app called Multistar to add any app of your choosing to the cover screen. The phone also has a lackluster battery life, struggling to last a full day; the Razr Ultra still only lasts a day, but I didn’t feel like I had to plug in as much. And it also gets a little too warm for my tastes when it’s under load. It’s a good flip phone, but I prefer Motorola’s 2025 flagship.

Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold a foldable mobile phone fully open showing the backside cameras and the front side screen.

Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold for $1,250: The only reason to consider the Pixel 9 Pro Fold right now is if you see it on sale. Google’s Pixel 10 Pro Fold is the newer, better handset. The 9 Pro Fold isn’t as slim or as lightweight as the Galaxy Z Fold7, but it’s still a svelte device with a large front screen that feels like a normal phone. The 8-inch inner screen is excellent, and the triple-camera system delivers great results, though not as great as the Pixel 9 Pro series. Read our Best Pixel Phones guide for more.

Advertisement
Image may contain Electronics Mobile Phone Phone Iphone Adult Person Accessories and Glasses

Razr 2025 series

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Motorola Razr+ (2025) for $700: There is technically a third phone in Motorola’s latest Razr lineup: the Razr+ 2025. However, it’s nearly identical to the Razr+ 2024, with fresh colors and the improved IP48 rating and titanium-reinforced hinge. It sits in an awkward middle ground, though. It’s not as affordable as the standard Razr, which offers a pretty nice experience for the money. But it’s also not as flagship as the Razr Ultra. It is also the only one of the lineup without the ultrawide camera. I usually love telephoto zoom lenses, but ultrawides are so handy on flip phones for group selfies. If you’re considering this model, it’s also worth considering the Razr+ from 2024, as you’ll see some nice discounts on it throughout the year; it just lacks the reinforced hinge and IP48 rating.

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6 a foldable phone showing the exterior screen and cameras

Galaxy Z Flip6

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6 for $899: Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip6 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) from 2024 might be a better buy than Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip7 FE—the new “budget” folding flip phone the company introduced alongside the flagship Flip7 and Fold7. That’s because the Flip7 FE is a reskinned Flip6 with a Samsung Exynos processor instead of a Qualcomm chip. We haven’t tested the FE yet, but you can probably find a decent deal on the Flip6 that might make it a better value than the Flip7 FE. Performance could even be a smidge better.

Advertisement

Xiaomi Mix Flip for $899: Xiaomi’s first flip phone has a lovely design with excellent displays inside and out, long battery life with fast charging, and flagship-level performance, which makes a nice change, as flip phones often have middling specs. It also boasts a solid dual-lens camera, opting for telephoto instead of ultrawide alongside the capable main shooter, which is more useful for most folks. The software lets the party down a little; there’s no IP rating, and it is pricey, but I had fun with this flip phone. —Simon Hill


Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

This Is What Will Happen if You Try to Make Popcorn in an Air Fryer

Published

on

When I searched online to see if it’s possible to pop popcorn in an air fryer, I ran into a dead end. Some websites say that you can and even encourage air-fried popcorn, while others caution against it. Unable to find a clear answer, I felt it was my duty as a devoted popcorn lover to go straight to the source for us all, which is why I reached out to an actual air fryer manufacturer and professional chefs to get a final answer.

Experts weigh in on air fryer popcorn

I reached out to Ninja, makers of the Ninja Crispi, CNET’s pick for the best air fryer overall. While the air fryer is a versatile appliance that can even roast a whole chicken, it can’t pop popcorn — yet. 

Well, technically it can, but that doesn’t mean it should.

Advertisement

“At Ninja, we’re always testing the boundaries of what our technology can do, and popcorn in an air fryer is something our culinary and product development teams have explored. However, we advise against trying to make popcorn in an air fryer,” a Ninja Kitchen representative tells CNET. “Air fryers circulate heat differently than traditional popcorn makers, which means kernels don’t reach the sustained heat needed in the required time.”

Because popcorn is lightweight, Sharniquia White, chef and registered dietitian, explains that if you try to make it in an air fryer, it can fly up into the device’s heating element, get stuck near the fan, burn from uneven airflow and leave you with a frustrating amount of unpopped kernels. All cons, no pros. 

Given the safety hazards and unsatisfying results, you’ll want to avoid using an air fryer for popcorn. At least until the technology catches up. 

Advertisement
The Ninja Crispi Pro air fryer on a countertop roasting a whole chicken.

While air fryers such as the Ninja Crispi Pro can roast an entire chicken, they can’t pop popcorn just yet.

Ninja

The best way to make popcorn, according to pro chefs

Since the air fryer is out for popcorn, I asked my chef sources for their recommendations on making the best popcorn. 

White says that the stovetop wins every time if you want a fluffy texture, rich flavor and full expansion of your kernels. She provides these handy instructions for getting the best results:

  1. Heat 2-3 tablespoons of oil in a large, heavy-bottom pot over medium heat.
  2. Add 2-3 kernels to test if the oil is hot enough. When they pop, add ½ cup kernels.
  3. Cover and gently shake the pot occasionally.
  4. Remove from heat when popping slows.
  5. You control the oil, the salt and the outcome.

However, if you make popcorn all the time, plant-based chef Shauna McQueen, MS, RD, founder of Food School, recommends purchasing a low-cost pan with a lid you can crank to move the popcorn kernels around. 

“The other option is automatic and will self-stir the kernels,” McQueen adds. “I’ve used both and have had to replace both within a few years of use, but find the automatic one most convenient.”

Advertisement

As for the healthiest way to make popcorn…

“If you’re reaching for the air fryer because you want to use less oil, you’re thinking in the right direction,” White says. “However, an inexpensive air popper or a measured stovetop method is more reliable and safer. Popcorn is already a whole-grain, fiber-rich snack. The goal isn’t to eliminate oil entirely; it’s to be intentional about how much you use and what you add.”

Whether you pop it on the stove or buy a device that air-pops your popcorn, it’s best to avoid microwave popcorn. According to McQueen, it may contain additives like TBHQ, which is used to extend the shelf life of processed foods. While the FDA considers it safe in appropriate amounts, it has been linked to potential health issues.

A close-up of popcorn.

If you want less oil on your popcorn, consider investing in an air popper or being more intentional about the toppings you use.

Advertisement

Jonathan Knowles/Getty Images

The healthiest popcorn toppings

If extra flavor is what you’re after, McQueen suggests the following anti-inflammatory toppings: curry powder, cayenne, garlic powder or chili powder. For a cheesy flavor plus B-vitamins, opt for nutritional yeast. Her favorites include a curry-style popcorn made with curry powder, garlic powder and a small amount of nutritional yeast; chili powder with lime and za’atar; or everything bagel seasoning. 

As for White, she likes adding smoked paprika, cinnamon with a pinch of salt, fresh lime zest and sea salt or dried dill, “for an unexpected herb twist.”

The bottom line

Though it’s tempting, you shouldn’t make popcorn in your air fryer. Instead, use what you already have on hand and prepare it on the stovetop. 

If you can’t get enough of the stuff and make it all the time, consider these options that are under $50: a stovetop popcorn maker or an oil-free air popper.

Advertisement

Either way, to keep your popcorn as healthy as possible, go light on the oil, butter and salt. Personally, I’ll be topping mine with chili powder, lime and za’atar next time my popcorn craving strikes, which will likely be in a few minutes after writing this tasty piece. 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Are Inline Engines Better Than Flat Engines?

Published

on





Most cars on the road today use an inline engine. You’ll find them in everything from economy hatchbacks to performance models. In fact, the inline six engine has been making a comeback in recent years, with several manufacturers ditching V6 layouts in its favor.

In inline engines, all cylinders sit in a single row, one behind the other. That’s different from the other V engines, where cylinders are arranged in two separate angled banks. The debate between inline engines and V engines is as old as time, but what doesn’t get enough attention is the inline versus flat engines debate. It’s an interesting one, because both sit at completely opposite ends of the engine design spectrum, and yet, both claim to deliver a smoother ride than the V.

Advertisement

What are flat engines, actually? In flat engines, the cylinders are laid out horizontally, with each pair facing the other on opposite sides of the crankshaft. When one piston fires outward, the one across from it fires at the same time in the opposite direction — kind of like how two boxers throw punches at each other. In fact, that’s where their alternate name, boxer engine, comes from, and it’s a different mechanism from inline engines where all pistons move straight up and down in a single row and take turns firing. Whether it’s actually better than traditional inlines is a different argument altogether, and it doesn’t exactly have a definitive answer.

Advertisement

How do they compare?

Before we get started, there’s a subtle important distinction worth knowing. While people use flat and boxer interchangeably, they’re technically not the same. While every boxer engine is a flat engine, not every flat engine is a boxer — and it’s all to do with differences in the crankshaft. In a true boxer, each piston gets its own individual crankpin, so opposing pistons mirror each other’s movements perfectly. Meanwhile, in a non-boxer flat engine, opposing pistons share a single crankpin.

The main advantage offered by a boxer engine is balance. Because the horizontally opposed pistons constantly counteract each other, vibration basically cancels itself out. Horizontally sitting cylinders also mean the engine has a flatter profile, which is also why they’re called flat engines, and that profile allows the engine to sit lower in the car. As a result, the car’s center of gravity drops, giving the driver noticeably better handling and stability around corners. There’s a safety angle too; in a frontal collision, the low mounting position lets the engine slide underneath the cabin. In inlines, it can get pushed into the cabin.

Non-boxer flat engines aren’t being produced anymore, so every flat engine you’ll find in a new car today is, in fact, a boxer. Even so, they aren’t exactly the most popular engine design when compared to an inline. In fact, Subaru and Porsche are the only two major manufacturers that still use them today.

Advertisement

The practicality angle

Inline engines win on practicality, though. Their single-row cylinder arrangement doesn’t need the extra components a boxer engine requires, like two separate cylinder heads and two valve trains. This translates to less complexity and, in turn, lower manufacturing costs. They also tend to produce stronger torque, thanks to the longer stroke.

Boxers also lose out on accessibility. Working on them can be a pain because the cylinder heads sit right up against the sides of the engine bay. As a result, repairs tend to run costlier. Even something as simple as swapping spark plugs can turn into a whole project. Moreover, the wider profile of any flat engine can also limit where it fits in a vehicle’s architecture. Inline engines don’t have that problem. They’re slimmer, more straightforward to service, and their parts are generally cheaper to replace.

Advertisement

Of course, boxer engines are known for their reliability too, so you won’t need to get under the hood very often. If driving feel is what matters most to you, the low centre of gravity and natural balance of a boxer are hard to match, and it’s a big part of why Porsche has stuck with the flat-six engine for so long. So there isn’t really a definitive winner here. It just depends on what matters to you most. That could either be the driving dynamics or the long-term cost of ownership.



Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Intel Arc update adds pre-compiled shaders to speed up game load times by up to 3x

Published

on

If you have launched a AAA game on your PC recently, you know how long it can take to start. You are often left staring at the “Compiling Shaders” screen without knowing what is happening.

In the most basic terms, shaders are specialized programs running on the GPU that determine how objects appear on the screen. Because PC hardware configurations vary widely, developers leave shaders uncompiled, meaning they are compiled on the fly when you launch a game, hence the wait. 

Intel’s latest Arc graphics driver update is here to fix that, and it’s part of a much bigger effort from Microsoft to solve one of PC gaming’s most annoying problems.

What exactly is Intel doing here?

The new driver introduces Intel’s Graphics Shader Distribution Service, which delivers pre-compiled shaders directly to your PC rather than making your GPU compile them on the spot. 

Advertisement

If you have played on a gaming console, you know that you never face compilation wait time. It’s because developers have to target only a few devices, and they can optimize the code for those devices. Microsoft is trying to do the same for PC gaming. 

Microsoft has achieved this by launching an API that lets apps identify themselves directly to D3D12 (Microsoft’s graphics API) and the graphics drivers in a standardized way. This way, Microsoft can deliver pre-compiled shaders for games across various display adapters and hardware manufacturers.

The result? First load times that are up to 2x faster on Intel Arc B-series GPUs, as well as Core Ultra Series 2 and 3 processors with built-in Arc graphics. The update includes pre-compiled shader support for big titles, including Cyberpunk 2077, Black Myth: Wukong, God of War Ragnarok, Hogwarts Legacy, Starfield, and Oblivion Remastered, among others.

Why does it matter for you?

As more and more developers start supporting this new Graphics Shader Distribution Service, it will greatly reduce the game launch time. Microsoft demonstrated this earlier on the ROG Xbox Ally, cutting load times in games like Avowed by up to 85%.

You will also experience fewer stutters during games when a cut scene appears, or you move between different parts of the maps. So, update your drivers and enjoy playing games instead of watching them prepare to be played.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Michi Debuts Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier as Luxury Two-Channel Powerhouse

Published

on

Rotel’s Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier marks the latest expansion of its luxury Michi lineup, a range that has steadily positioned itself as a serious contender in the upper tier of two-channel hi-fi. While Rotel has long enjoyed a strong reputation for well-engineered audio components, the Michi sub-brand represents its push into a more ambitious category of design, performance, and pricing.

Over the past few years, the Michi family has evolved into one of the more compelling alternatives to established high-end integrated systems. That progression has included the Michi Q5 Transport DAC (2024), the Series 2 amplifiers and preamplifiers (2023), and our earlier review of the Michi X3 Integrated Amplifier (2022). Taken together, the lineup has demonstrated that Rotel is serious about competing well above its traditional price brackets.

More importantly, the Rotel Michi range has proven capable of going head-to-head with some very established names, including the Cambridge Audio Edge Series, flagship integrated amplifiers from Marantz, the upper tier of Naim Audio’s Uniti Series, and even entry-level systems from McIntosh. That is not a small claim in a category where heritage brands have dominated for decades.

With the introduction of the Rotel Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier, Rotel appears intent on pushing that challenge even further into territory normally reserved for some of the most recognizable names in high-end audio.

Advertisement

Michi: Rotel’s Luxury Hi-Fi Components

The Michi line is intended to provide a clear entry point into Rotel’s most ambitious high-end audio components, built around the same design discipline, power-supply architecture, and manufacturing standards expected from true reference-level audio. It represents the company’s effort to push beyond its traditional value-focused reputation and compete directly in the upper tier of two-channel hi-fi.

Drawing on more than 60 years of amplifier and circuit development, Michi models aim to deliver a thoroughly modern listening experience defined by effortless dynamics, exceptional clarity, and the kind of long-term reliability Rotel has built its reputation on. The easiest way to think about it is simple: Michi is Rotel operating without a price ceiling.

For 2026, the brand is expanding the Michi lineup with two new Prestige Series components: the Prestige Q430 CD Player ($3,999) and the Prestige X430 Stereo Integrated Amplifier ($4,999). The visually matched combo also establishes a new design ethos within the existing Michi lineup featuring an anodized aluminum faceplate, top cover, and knurled volume knob, along with a glass front panel and high-resolution color display.

Michi Prestige Q430 CD Player Stacked atop Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier Front
Michi Prestige Q430 CD Player Stacked atop Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier

Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier Overview

Class A/B Power

The Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier is a high-power Class A/B design engineered to deliver 210 watts per channel into 8 ohms and 340 watts per channel into 4 ohms, providing the current and headroom required to properly control demanding loudspeakers.

Advertisement

The X430’s high-current output stage is supported by an exceptionally low-noise architecture built around an oversized custom toroidal transformer manufactured in-house by Rotel, paired with multi-stage voltage regulation that reduces noise and ripple throughout the circuit. Optimized power and signal paths further minimize distortion, helping the amplifier maintain stability, clarity, and dynamic authority even when driving more demanding loudspeaker loads.

The result is what Rotel describes as an “acoustically transparent silent background” which claims a lower noise floor that allows subtle musical details to emerge more clearly. In practical terms, that means quieter silences, improved separation between instruments, and a more convincing sense of depth and soundstage, qualities that tend to stand out most with vocals and acoustic recordings where spatial cues and microdetail matter most.

High-resolution DAC

The X430’s digital section includes a PC-USB input supporting PCM up to 32-bit/384 kHz and DSD256 (4x) via DoP, along with coaxial and optical S/PDIF inputs capable of handling LPCM signals up to 24-bit/192 kHz.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Advertisement

For digital conversion, the amplifier employs the ESS SABRE ES9039Q2M DAC, chosen for its ability to preserve fine detail and micro-dynamics. The result is improved clarity, imaging, and sonic texture, with more air and space around instruments, cleaner transient edges without harshness, and greater realism when playing high-resolution streaming or other digital sources.

michi-x430-back

 HDMI ARC & Digital Audio Connections

The X430 provides a wide range of digital audio connections designed to integrate easily into modern two-channel systems.

HDMI ARC allows users to route television audio directly through the amplifier with a single cable while maintaining convenient volume control from the TV remote.

Additional coaxial, optical, and PC-USB inputs support connections to streamers, disc players, and computers. The result is a cleaner, more impactful TV and music setup without the complexity or clutter of a surround sound receiver.

Advertisement

Bluetooth

In addition to its physical inputs, the X430 also includes Bluetooth connectivity for streaming music from smartphones, tablets, and other compatible source devices. It supports the aptX HD and AAC codecs, enabling higher-quality wireless playback than standard Bluetooth.

It’s worth noting, however, that the amplifier does not support newer high-bitrate codecs such as aptX Lossless or LDAC. For listeners seeking the highest possible streaming quality, the X430’s Roon support and wired digital inputs remain the better path to extracting maximum performance from modern streaming sources.

System Flexibility

For both modern and legacy analog sources, Balanced XLR and RCA analog inputs are provided along with Moving Magnet Phono compatible inputs for connecting Turntables. 

In addition, dual subwoofer outputs and A/B speaker switching make the X430 easy to integrate and upgrade over time. 

Advertisement
michi-x430-internal

Premium Build

The X430 features a precision-machined chassis, a knurled aluminum volume control, and a large color display that immediately conveys the Michi brand’s premium design ethos. The display offers selectable VU meter and spectrum analyzer views, adding a visual element to the listening experience that many owners will appreciate every time the system powers up.

Physically, the X430 measures 431 x 148 x 422 mm (17 x 6 x 16.5 inches) with a front panel height of 132 mm (5.25 inches) and a net weight of 16.9 kg (37.3 lbs). Compared with the larger Michi Series 2 components, the X430 is smaller, lighter, and more compact, making it easier to integrate into a wider range of systems and furniture without sacrificing the brand’s signature build quality.

Comparison

Michi Prestige X430
(2026)
Michi X5 Series 2
(2023)
Michi X3 Series 2
(2023)
Product Type  Integrated Amplifier Integrated Amplifier Integrated Amplifier
Price $4,999 $7,999 $5,799
Amplifier Type Class A/B Class A/B Class A/B
Analog Inputs 3 x RCA
1 x XLR
1 x Phono (MM)
4 x RCA
1 x XLR
1 x Phono (MM/MC)
3 x RCA
1 x XLR
1 x Phono (MM)
Analog Outputs 2 x Preamp 
2 x Subwoofer 
2 x Preamp
2 x Subwoofer
2 x Preamp 
2 x Subwoofer
Speaker Outputs  A, B, A+B A, B, A+B A, B, A+B
Digital Inputs 3 Coaxial
3 x Toslink Optical
PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) 
1 x HDMI ARC
3 Coaxial
3 x Toslink Optical
PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) 
3 Coaxial
3 x Toslink Optical
PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) 
Bluetooth  aptX HD / AAC aptX HD / AAC aptX HD / AAC
Maximum Power Per Channel 340 watts @ 4 ohms 600 watts @ 4 ohms 350 watts @ 4 ohms
Continuous Power Per Channel 210 watts @ 8 ohms 350 watts @ 8 ohms 200 watts @ 8 ohms
Total Harmonic Distortion  < 0.03% < 0.009% < 0.008%
Intermodulation Distortion (60 Hz: 7 kHz, 4:1) < 0.03%   < 0.03% < 0.03%  
Frequency Response Phono Input:  20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, -0.5 dB) 

Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.5 dB)

Advertisement
Phono Input:  20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, -0.2 dB) 

Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.6 dB)

Phono Input:  20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, +0.2 dB) 

Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.4 dB)

Advertisement
Damping Factor  (20 Hz – 20kHz, 8 ohms) 260 350 350 
Input Sensitivity / Impedance Phono Input (MM): 5.56 mV / 47k ohms 

Line Level Inputs (RCA): 356 mV / 100k ohms

Line Level Inputs (XLR): 743 mV / 50k ohms

Phono Input (MM) 5.7 mV / 47k ohms 
Advertisement

Phono Input (MC) 570 uV/ 100 ohms 
Line Level Inputs (RCA) 380 mV / 100k ohms

Line Level Inputs (XLR) 580 mV / 100k ohms

Phono Input (MM) 5.2 mV / 47k ohms 

Line Level Inputs (RCA) 40 mV / 100k ohms

Advertisement

Line Level Inputs (XLR) 540 mV / 100k ohms

Input Overload Phono Input (MM): 66 mV 

Line Level Inputs (RCA): 4V

Line Level Inputs (XLR): 10V

Advertisement
Phono Input (MM):197 mV  
 
Phono Input (MC) 19 mV

Line Level Inputs (RCA): 12.5 V 

Line Level Inputs (XLR): 12.5 V

Phono Input (MM):60 mV   
Advertisement

Line Level Inputs (RCA): 3.5 V 

Line Level Inputs (XLR): 5.5 V

Signal to Noise Ratio (IHF “A” weighted)  Phono Input (MM) > 80 dB 

Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 105 dB

Advertisement

Line Level Inputs (XLR):   > 100 dB

Phono Input (MM, MC): > 80 dB 

Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 102 dB

Phono Input (MM, MC): > 80 dB 
Advertisement

Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 102 dB

Preamplifier Output Level / Impedance 1.92 V / 100 ohms  1 V / 470 ohms  1.9 V / 100 ohms
Tone Controls Bass:  ±10 dB at 100 Hz 
Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz
Bass:  ±10 dB at 100 Hz
Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz
Bass:  ±10 dB at 100 Hz 
Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz
Channel Separation Phono Input:  > 55 dB 
Line Level Inputs:  > 55 dB 
Phono Input:  > 65 dB 
Line Level Inputs:  > 65 dB 
Phono Input:  > 55 dB 
Line Level Inputs:  > 55 dB 
Frequency Response (Digital Section) 10 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max) 20 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max) 20 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max)
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (IHF “A” weighted) (Digital Section) > 110 dB  > 112 dB > 102 dB
Input Sensitivity/Impedance (Digital Section) 0 dBFs / 75 ohms 0 dBFs / 75 ohms 0 dBFs / 75 ohms
Preamplifier Output Level (Digital Section) 1.15 V (at -20 dB Volume Position) 1.2V (at -20 dB Volume Position) 1.3V (at -20 dB Volume Position)
Digital to Analog Converter (Digital Section) ESS ES9039Q2M DAC ESS SABRE ES9028PRO DAC ESS SABRE ES9028PRO DAC
Coaxial/Optical Digital Signals (Digital Section) SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit) SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit) SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit)
PC-USB (Digital Section) (up to 384kHz 32-bit) 0 Driver installation required 

Support DSD (up to 4X, 11.2MHz) and DoP (up to 2X, 5.6MHz) 

Roon Tested

Advertisement
USB Audio Class 1.0 (up to 96kHz 24-bit)
USB Audio Class 2.0 (up to 384kHz 32-bit)* *Driver installation required

DSD and DoP support 

MQA and MQA Studio support 

Roon Tested

Advertisement
USB Audio Class 1.0 (up to 96kHz 24-bit)

USB Audio Class 2.0 (up to 384kHz 32-bit)* *Driver installation required

DSD and DoP support 

MQA and MQA Studio support 

Advertisement

Roon Tested

HDMI (Digital Section) Support CEC with the ARC function 
2-channel PCM only (up to 48 kHz, 24-bit)
N/A N/A
Control Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232 Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232 Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232
Power Requirements Europe  230 V, 50 Hz 

USA   120 V, 60 Hz

Europe  230 V, 50 Hz 
Advertisement

USA   120 V, 60 Hz

Europe  230 V, 50 Hz 

USA   120 V, 60 Hz

Power Consumption  520 watts 850 watts 500 watts
Standby Power Consumption Normal  < 0.5 watts 
Advertisement

Network Wakeup < 2 watts

Normal  < 0.5 watts 

Network Wakeup < 2 watts

Normal  < 0.5 watts 
Advertisement

Network Wakeup < 2 watts

BTU (4 ohms, 1/8th power)  1476 BTU/h 2194 BTU/h 1303 BTU/h
Dimensions (WHD)  431 x 148 x 422 mm 

17 x 6 x 16 1/2 ins

485 x 195 x 452 mm
Advertisement

19″ x 7 5/8″ x 17 3/4″

485 x 195 x 452 mm

19″ x 7 5/8″ x 17 3/4″

Front Panel Height 132 mm / 5 1/4 ins 177 mm / 7.” 132 mm / 5 1/4″
Weight (net) 16.9 kg, 37.3 lbs 43.8 kg, 96.56 lb 28.9 kg, 63.7 lb
Finish Black Black Black
michi-x430-top-angle

The Bottom Line

At $4,999, the Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier lands in an increasingly competitive segment of the high-end integrated amplifier market. What makes it stand out is the combination of serious Class A/B power (210W into 8 ohms), premium build quality, a modern ESS SABRE DAC, HDMI ARC connectivity, and Rotel’s in-house power supply design, all wrapped in a chassis that is smaller and lighter than the Michi X3 and X5 Series 2 models. In practical terms, it offers robust power delivery, clean industrial design, and a strong digital section at an approachable price point.

There are trade-offs. The X430 drops support for MQA decoding and Moving Coil phono cartridges, and its power output is slightly lower than the larger Michi integrated amplifiers. But the addition of HDMI ARC and a newer DAC platform makes it better aligned with how many listeners actually use their systems today—combining streaming sources, digital playback, and television audio in a single two-channel setup.

Advertisement
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

The X430 is clearly aimed at listeners who want reference-level integrated amplifier performance without stepping into five-figure territory. It should appeal to owners of demanding loudspeakers, two-channel purists who still want strong digital connectivity, and anyone looking for a serious alternative to integrated amplifiers from Cambridge Audio’s Edge Series, Marantz’s top-tier models, the upper end of Naim’s Uniti lineup, or even entry-level McIntosh—all while staying just under the psychological $5,000 barrier.

Price & Availability

The Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier will initially be available through Authorized Dealers in North America beginning March 2026 for $4,999. Global availability is expected to follow early in the second quarter of 2026 with pricing set at €4,999 or £4,499.

For more information: rotel.com/product/x430

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

OpenAI built a $180 billion charity. Will it do any good?

Published

on

When Sam Altman first told her that he’d never let OpenAI go corporate, that what he and his colleagues were building was too powerful to be driven by investors, Catherine Bracy more or less believed him.

The conversation took place in 2022, when Bracy, CEO and founder of the social mobility-focused nonprofit TechEquity, was interviewing Altman for a book she was writing about the dangers of venture capital. It was before Altman’s mysterious firing and unfiring a year later, after which he mostly stopped responding to Bracy’s texts.

And ever since then, OpenAI — which was initially founded as a nonprofit in 2015 to “advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return” — has been publicly trying to escape the confines of its charitable roots. Today, OpenAI contains both a corporate arm focused on building and selling AI and a nonprofit arm with a stated mission of ensuring that AI benefits people.

During the controversial process of trying to fully sever the two in 2024, OpenAI lost about half of its AI safety staffers and much of its senior leadership. That was followed by an intensified scrutiny from state attorneys general, nonprofit legal experts, competitor companies, effective altruists, Nobel Prize winners, vast swaths of California’s philanthropic community, and one of its original funders, Elon Musk. Different sides had different interests, but the overall argument was that shifting to a for-profit model would create a fiduciary duty to investors that would inherently clash with its original mission of safety and public benefit.

Advertisement

Is OpenAI’s new foundation a $180 billion distraction?

  • Last October, OpenAI agreed to make its nonprofit arm very rich. The OpenAI Foundation is now worth about $180 billion and it has two main objectives:
    • Helping the world adapt to and benefit from AI by giving money to charity.
    • Acting as a moral compass for OpenAI the company, especially when it comes to safety and security decisions.
  • The foundation has already given away about $40.5 million so far, a small fraction of the billions it plans to eventually donate. But critics see the donations as a distraction.
  • While OpenAI says its foundation has the final say on security and safety-related decisions, the company has come under scrutiny in recent months for striking a deal with the Pentagon, fighting against statewide AI legislation, and testing ads for free users.
  • Even if the foundation does eventually give away billions of dollars, it may never be enough to make up for what the public lost in allowing OpenAI to go corporate.

Nonetheless, OpenAI did finally strike a contortive restructuring deal last October. Essentially, the for-profit arm became what is known as a public benefit corporation (PBC), called the OpenAI Group. The original nonprofit became the OpenAI Foundation, which has a 26 percent stake currently worth $180 billion in the PBC, plus a sliver of exclusive legal control over certain major decisions.

One effect of the transition was that it essentially required OpenAI to put a number on what it owed the public for converting what had been a project for all humanity into something that most directly benefits the company’s investors. The resulting stake of the OpenAI Foundation is big enough to instantly make it one of the wealthiest charities in the country, or in OpenAI’s words, the “best-equipped nonprofit the world has ever seen.” On paper, at least, the foundation is now significantly richer than the entire country of Luxembourg. Even the Gates Foundation has only $77.6 billion in assets, less than half of what the OpenAI Foundation can draw from, though it’s important to note that most of the wealth of the OpenAI Foundation is locked in fairly illiquid shares within the still private company, which limits how quickly any money can be given away.

Still, its sheer size means that the OpenAI Foundation stands to eventually be a transformative presence on the philanthropic stage, one way or another. But while OpenAI says the foundation will eventually give out many billions of dollars in philanthropy to ensure that “artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity,” it’s uncertain that a socially beneficial philanthropy can exist side by side with a company that is fighting an existential battle over who will dominate the AI industry.

“The unspoken truth here is that they’re never going to make a decision that is bad for the company,” Bracy said. “These two entities cannot live under the same roof” where “the mission is in control.” (Disclosure: Vox Media is one of several publishers that have signed partnership agreements with OpenAI. Our reporting remains editorially independent.)

Advertisement

The foundation’s first gifts came in the form of $40.5 million in no-strings-attached grants to over 200 community nonprofits, like churches, food banks, and afterschool programs. Notably, most grantees had little to no connection to AI or technology — and just as notably, several of these early grantees just so happen to be members of EyesOnOpenAI, a coalition of California nonprofits critical of OpenAI’s privatization that formed in 2025.

But there are signs the foundation will soon pivot into grantmaking that’s more obviously relevant to the company’s original charter, which aimed to ensure that the benefits of AI are broadly distributed while also prioritizing long-term safety in the technology’s development. On Feb. 19, OpenAI — the company, not the foundation — announced a $7.5 million grant in conjunction with Microsoft, Anthropic, Amazon, and other major tech companies for a new, international project aimed at researching how to make AI systems safer.

“The unspoken truth here is that they’re never going to make a decision that is bad for the company.”

— Catherine Bracy, TechEquity founder and CEO

The real questions around the OpenAI Foundation have less to do with how much it is giving and to whom than whether it is actually able to carry out its contractual oversight role. In theory, the foundation should be ensuring that OpenAI is the standard-bearer for ethical decision-making at the frontier of AI development. That would be a unique contribution to the field — and an embodiment of OpenAI’s original mission — that no amount of grantmaking could replace. Yet, a series of troubling recent decisions by the company hardly seems to bear out that vision.

Advertisement

OpenAI has begun its new corporate journey by debuting ads on its free tier service, firing an executive who raised safety concerns about a soon-to-come NSFW mode for ChatGPT on charges of sexual discrimination against a male colleague, and burning cash while its president funnels millions of dollars into Donald Trump’s super PAC. OpenAI President Greg Brockman has also teamed up with the private equity firm Andreessen Horowitz and Palantir’s co-founders to fund a $125 million super PAC aimed at promoting AI-friendly policies. Along with Google, xAI, and Anthropic, OpenAI has also come under scrutiny in recent weeks for its defense contracts with the Pentagon.

When OpenAI succeeded in its campaign to cede its foundational new technology from nonprofit control, it opened the door for many of these decisions. Even $180 billion in charity might not be enough to make up for the difference.

How OpenAI shed its nonprofit skin

Corporate charity is ubiquitous in the tech world, especially among the biggest players. Microsoft plans to donate $4 billion in cash and AI cloud technology to schools and nonprofits by 2030. Google gives away some $100 million annually, often to organizations focused on artificial intelligence and technology.

Advertisement

But from the beginning, OpenAI was different. Rather than making money and giving some of it to charity, OpenAI was the charity. It was founded as a nonprofit research lab with about $1 billion in start-up donations, mostly from tech titans like Altman, Brockman, and Elon Musk.

There are some structural advantages to being a charity. You can’t accept investments, but you can accept donations and you don’t have to pay most taxes. What’s more, in those early days, OpenAI’s stated mission — to build safe AI without the pressures of financial incentive — gave it a major boost when it came to recruitment for rarified talent. Machine learning prodigy Ilya Sutskever told Wired in 2016 that he chose to leave Google to become OpenAI’s chief scientist “to a very large extent, because of its mission.”

But there were limits to being a fully nonprofit entity. In pursuit of financing amid the rising computing costs of cutting-edge AI, OpenAI created its capped-profit subsidiary in 2019 to manage a new $1 billion investment from Microsoft. Three years later, ChatGPT took the world by storm. Sutskever, and other members of OpenAI’s board, tried and ultimately failed to oust Altman amid accusations of dishonesty in 2023. (Altman denied those accusations.) In 2024 — one year after Sutskever and other members of OpenAI’s board tried and ultimately failed to oust Altman amid accusations of dishonesty — the organization announced its intention to go fully corporate and splinter off the nonprofit into its own fully independent entity.

The transition to for-profit “just didn’t smell right,” said Orson Aguilar, head of LatinoProsperity, an economic justice nonprofit and Bracy’s co-leader at EyesOnOpenAI. He wasn’t alone: By early 2025, a dozen former OpenAI employees filed an amicus brief aimed at stopping the conversion because it would “fundamentally violate its mission.” And more than 60 nonprofit, philanthropy, and labor leaders, many of them based in OpenAI’s home state of California, agreed that the attempt to privatize felt unfair given the extent to which the company benefited from its tax-free status during its early development.

Advertisement

To grasp what this all means, try thinking of OpenAI’s for-profit arm as an angsty tween and the nonprofit as her well-meaning, but often powerless parent. For years, the tween had been allowed to do her own thing, but only within certain limits — she still had to do her homework and get home by a certain time. Now imagine, she’s sick of having a curfew. “Nobody else has one!” She still lives in her mother’s house, but she wants to follow her own rules.

That’s kind of what happened here. Up until now, OpenAI’s for-profit subsidiary had a capped-profit model, meaning there were limits on how much money investors could make. But this new deal paved the way for the for-profit to become a full-time corporate girlie, charitable bylaws be damned. And while OpenAI’s new public benefit corporation still technically exists under the original nonprofit’s control, it mostly follows its own rules. It can raise as much money as it wants and eventually, it will likely go public.

But California history did provide some hope that the public might at least get some meaningful benefit from the transition. Back in the 1990s, California’s branch of the health insurer Blue Cross Blue Shield — then a nonprofit called Blue Cross of California — decided to privatize. After some haggling with state regulators, the company agreed to forfeit all of its assets, worth $3.2 billion, to a pair of independent nonprofits in exchange for going private. The result was the California Endowment, which is now the state’s largest health foundation.

Many nonprofit leaders in California hoped that OpenAI, which is headquartered in the state, would strike a similar deal, ceding a majority of its assets to a fully independent nonprofit. And those assets were and are enormous.

Advertisement

Gary Mendoza, a former state official who oversaw the Blue Cross deal, estimated the OpenAI nonprofit’s rightful assets at over $250 billion, or half the company’s $500 billion worth. “Anything short of 50 percent,” he told the San Francisco Examiner last year, “is a missed opportunity.” And beyond money for the public, assuming the nonprofit kept its shares, it would add up to enough influence to really shape OpenAI’s corporate decision-making at a key moment for the future of artificial intelligence.

Given that the OpenAI Foundation ended up with little more than a quarter of the final company, this is obviously not what happened. But EyesOnOpenAI’s years-long lobbying effort was not a total bust. The criticism proved powerful enough that last May, OpenAI was forced to give up on an initial plan to restructure away its nonprofit assets into a new organization wholly disconnected from OpenAI, which would have left the nonprofit with no legal control over the for-profit arm.

On paper, the new deal includes some meaningful concessions. It contractually requires the nonprofit mission to come first on safety and security issues, with no regard to shareholder interests. The memorandum also calls on OpenAI to “mitigate risks to teens” specifically. It made the foundation the controlling shareholder of the corporation, affording it the right to appoint corporate directors and oversee critical decisions like a sale.

If OpenAI abided by all of its terms and eventually started giving away billions of dollars of philanthropy each year, then the world — or at least California, where many of OpenAI’s grants have been concentrated — could stand to greatly benefit from it.

Advertisement

Random acts of corporate kindness

And this brings us to the $40.5 million that OpenAI gave to over 200 nonprofits toward the end of last year.

Many of these charities applied to the grant with sophisticated ideas around how to help their communities integrate or adapt to AI, though they can ultimately use the grants however they see fit. Among them were public libraries, Boys and Girls Clubs, churches, food banks, and legal aid nonprofits. Coming at a moment when the majority of the country’s nonprofits face existential funding cuts, “it was just the perfect timing,” said Thomas Howard Jr, head of Kidznotes, a North Carolina nonprofit focused on music education that received $45,000 in OpenAI’s first round of grants.

“There’s nothing I’ve seen that gives me reassurance that they’ll catch the important safety issues when they come up — or that they’ll be doing a thorough investigation of the grantmaking opportunities.”

Advertisement

— Tyler Johnston, Midas Project executive director

So civil society’s fight over the OpenAI transition won at least enough concessions to help these worthy organizations and retain some semblance of nonprofit control over some of the for-profit’s activities. So why do so many people in the philanthropic community remain so negative about the foundation?

“I’m all for nonprofits getting money,” said Bracy, the head of TechEquity. “I don’t begrudge any organizations that took the money, but I don’t think it’s some indication that OpenAI is living up to the mission of the nonprofit.”

$40.5 million, of course, is only 0.02 percent of the OpenAI Foundation’s on-paper $180 billion windfall. How the foundation will eventually spend the other 99.98 percent remains to be seen, though the foundation has said that at least $25 billion will ultimately go to scientific research and what it’s calling “technical solutions for AI resilience.” The company plans to announce a second wave of grants directed at organizations using AI to work across issues like health in the coming months.

“We are doing the important work of engaging with experts, learning from communities, and shaping a point of view of where Foundation investments can make the greatest difference,” the OpenAI Foundation’s board of directors said in response to a request for clarity on where future funding will go. “We look forward to sharing more soon.”

Advertisement

But so far, critics remain skeptical. OpenAI has done little to prove that its newfound philanthropy is more than just “a smoke and mirrors show,” argued one member of the Coalition for AI Nonprofit Integrity (CANI) — a coalition composed largely of AI insiders, including former OpenAI employees, furiously opposed to the restructuring. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared retaliation from OpenAI, which has accused CANI of being a front funded by Musk. (CANI has denied receiving any such funds — though not for lack of trying. If you scroll to the bottom of OpenTheft, a website created by CANI, you’ll find a direct plea to Musk for donations.)

A man holds up an anti-AI sign at a protest outside of OpenAI’s headquarters. The sign says uncontrollable, unalignable, unacceptable. Ban superintelligence.

Critics of OpenAI say the company is not doing enough to ensure its technology develops safely, regardless of how much its foundation gives to charity.
Wiktor Szymanowicz/Future Publishing via Getty Images

While a spokesperson for OpenAI said that the foundation is in the process of building a dedicated team, and has sought the input of both nonprofit leaders and experts in how society can adapt to AI, the company has yet to make any major staffing announcements for its grantmaking arm. For now, with the exception of Zico Kolter, the head of the nonprofit’s safety committee, the foundation board still shares the same members as the corporate board, including CEO Sam Altman. The idea is that these board members can put on different hats when meeting about nonprofit versus corporate priorities, asserting the foundation’s oversight when needed. But it has created the appearance of a conflict of interest.

When asked for mechanisms and examples for how the foundation has responded to situations where its mission conflicts with shareholder interests, given the overlapping board membership, the spokesperson said that OpenAI has conflict-of-interest policies and governance procedures in place to ensure its directors only consider the mission when they meet, as they regularly do, about nonprofit issues.

The company also said the foundation board constantly exercises its oversight role, including for all new major product releases, like the release of GPT‑5.3‑Codex, an advanced agentic coding model, last month. The AI watchdog group the Midas Project, a frequent thorn in OpenAI’s side, accused the company of violating safety standards, an allegation that OpenAI fervently denied.

Advertisement

In any case, since the OpenAI Foundation is not a separate entity with its own independent board, some critics have compared it to other feel-good corporate social responsibility ventures, like the McDonald’s Ronald McDonald House, Walmart’s healthy foods program, and Home Depot’s work with veterans.

Corporate social responsibility has its place, and it can do real good. But Bracy believes that based on the OpenAI Foundation’s structuring and how they’ve conducted their grantmaking so far, it will probably never fund anything “they see as a threat to the growth of the company,” said Bracy, despite the fact that the need for guardrails on unrestricted AI development featured prominently in the company’s original mission. “They’re going to do what’s best for the bottom line of the for-profit.”

Critics like Bracy also doubt the OpenAI Foundation’s other main prerogative, which is to govern all safety and ethics-related issues for the broader organization, including the responsibility to review new products.

“Instead of a vehicle to serve humanity, it’s become a vehicle to serve one individual and a few of his friends and investors.”

Advertisement

— Anonymous member of CANI

While the nonprofit and its mission do legally retain control over the OpenAI corporation — particularly when it comes to safety issues — that may add up to little, given that the OpenAI Foundation doesn’t seem to be an independently governed foundation. It is not, in fact, even technically a foundation, but a public charity, which means it is not required to pay out a certain percentage of its assets each year under IRS requirements.

And while the nonprofit retains significant oversight powers on paper — including the authority to halt AI releases it deems unsafe — in practice, critics say, it’s unclear whether it would ever use them.

Increasingly, OpenAI has also been wading into political lobbying efforts that seem at odds with its mission to promote long-term safety in AI development. When California lawmakers were debating SB 53, a law requiring transparency reports from leading AI companies, OpenAI lobbied against it. And the company has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks for its contract with the Pentagon, which has blacklisted its rival company Anthropic for raising ethical concerns about the use of its technology.

Why the fight is not over

Advertisement

OpenAI’s new corporate arrangement is very, very new. It’s still possible that OpenAI’s grantmaking arm really does staff up, and the nonprofit builds an independent board that has the power to enforce hard ethical decisions for the company, even when it hurts investors’ returns.

“They have a lot of freedom to continue to do good,” said Tyler Johnston, executive director of the Midas Project, but that would require them to “actually shake things up” and “show that they’ve created the scaffolding that will enable them to actualize their mission.”

But so far, “there’s nothing I’ve seen that gives me reassurance that they’ll catch the important safety issues when they come up,” he said. “Or that they’ll be doing a thorough investigation of the grantmaking opportunities.”

If OpenAI does not abide by the terms of its new contract — if the company, for example, tries to thwart an attempt to roll back a dangerous new tool — then California’s attorney general does have the power to demand answers from the company, and in theory, revisit the agreement’s terms.

Advertisement

Beyond the agreement, there are a few quite public means by which OpenAI’s former lovers, skeptics, and nemeses are still trying to press rewind on the restructuring.

Chief among them is Elon Musk, OpenAI’s most prominent original donor and co-founder. In between trading embarrassing jabs with Altman on X, Musk took OpenAI to court last year over claims that he was “assiduously manipulated” into donating tens of millions of dollars to a nonprofit research lab that turned into an “opaque web of for-profit OpenAI affiliates.”

Elon Musk and Sam Altman speak on a panel together for Vanity Fair in 2015.

Elon Musk was a major early supporter of OpenAI a decade ago, when it was still a nonprofit lab. Now, he’s suing to get his donations back.
Michael Kovac/Getty Images for Vanity Fair

A judge has found enough cause for the case to proceed to trial this April. Musk is suing for up to $134 billion in damages, though OpenAI has told its investors that it believes it would only be on the hook for Musk’s $38 billion in original donations. OpenAI, for its part, has accused Musk of an “unlawful campaign of harassment.”

Meanwhile, CANI is still holding out hope that it can convince the people of California to vote for a hyperspecific ballot measure, the California Charitable Assets Protection Act, which could reverse the decision to allow OpenAI — or any other “organizations developing transformative technologies” — to go corporate.

Advertisement

“They’re cutting corners on safety because of the race to artificial general intelligence that they just want to win,” said the member of CANI. “Instead of a vehicle to serve humanity, it’s become a vehicle to serve one individual and a few of his friends and investors.”

So maybe the fight over OpenAI’s restructuring isn’t completely over — but it’s probably on its last legs. And if they continue on the same path, it’s unlikely that the public will ever really benefit in the way they ought to, given the charitable benefits OpenAI enjoyed in its early days. At the very least, $40.5 million is just not going to cut it. Even $180 billion might fall far short.

“I think it’s them saying, ‘Listen, I dare you to enforce this,’” said Bracy, who believes OpenAI is “banking on the fact that they’re worth almost a trillion dollars, and they have endless resources — and the state of California does not.”

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025