Tech
It’s hot out there, but please stop putting your warm phones in the fridge
Every summer, social media rediscovers the same “life hack”: if your phone gets too hot, stick it in the fridge for a few minutes. It sounds logical. Refrigerators are cold. Phones are hot. Problem solved. Except it isn’t. Repair technicians, smartphone manufacturers, and safety experts all agree this is one of the worst things you can do to an overheating phone. While the trick might cool the exterior temporarily, it can quietly create a much bigger problem inside the device – one that could permanently damage components or shorten the life of its battery.
According to a new BBC report, the latest warning comes from a UK phone repair shop, but it’s one experts have been repeating for years.
Your phone isn’t overheating because it needs a fridge
According to a report by the BBC, Jamie Farnell, who runs Shropshire Phone Repairs in Wem, says his shop has been inundated with devices suffering heat-related issues during the recent heatwave. Many customers admitted they had tried cooling their phones by putting them inside a fridge or freezer after seeing the advice circulate on social media.
Farnell says that’s exactly what people shouldn’t do. The problem isn’t the cold itself – it’s what happens when a warm electronic device is exposed to a cold, humid environment. Rapid temperature changes create condensation, allowing moisture to form inside the phone. Unlike the water you might notice on the outside of a cold drink, condensation inside a smartphone can reach the display, charging port, logic board, or battery connectors. That moisture can lead to corrosion, short circuits, or expensive repairs.
Farnell also pointed out another familiar internet myth that refuses to die: putting wet phones in rice. He says that trick is just as ineffective as the refrigerator hack, despite both continuing to circulate widely online. The warning comes after an alarming incident at his repair shop, where an iPad with a swollen lithium battery reportedly burst into flames during June’s heatwave. Swollen batteries are often a sign of excessive heat stress and should never be ignored.
Apple and Samsung say the same thing: let the phone cool naturally
This isn’t simply one repair technician’s opinion. Apple says iPhones are designed to protect themselves when they become too hot by dimming the display, slowing charging, reducing performance, or temporarily disabling certain features until temperatures return to normal. The company’s advice is straightforward: move the phone to a cooler environment out of direct sunlight and allow it to cool naturally. Apple does not recommend exposing the device to sudden temperature extremes.
Samsung offers similar guidance for Galaxy devices. If a phone displays a “Device cooling down” warning, users should stop using it, unplug it from charging, remove any protective case, close background apps, and simply let it cool on its own. The phone automatically reduces performance and pauses charging to protect its internal components while it sheds heat.
Even the Associated Press, citing guidance from Apple, Samsung, Google and UK electronics retailer Currys during last summer’s heatwave, warned against placing phones in refrigerators or freezers because of condensation risks. If your phone genuinely feels too hot to hold, there are safer ways to help it recover. Turn it off if possible, remove the charging cable, close demanding apps, lower the screen brightness, take off thick protective cases, and keep it somewhere shaded with good airflow. Avoid charging while gaming or recording long videos, especially in direct sunlight.
Modern smartphones already contain sophisticated thermal management systems designed to slow themselves down before permanent damage occurs. The temporary performance hit may be annoying, but it’s considerably cheaper than replacing a moisture-damaged motherboard. As tempting as the refrigerator trick may seem during a heatwave, your phone doesn’t need a blast of cold air. It just needs a little patience.
Tech
OpenAI And Anthropic Models Went On A Hacking Spree When Tested By The UK’s AI Research Institute
Both OpenAI and Anthropic recently admitted that their models escaped from their testing environments and hacked into outside organizations on their own. Now, the UK’s AI Security Institute (AISI) has released a report, detailing how the companies’ models also acted independently and “engaged in sustained, potentially harmful activity directed at real people and organizations” during its own tests.
The institute, which operates under the UK’s Department for Science, evaluates frontier AI models. Part of those evaluations is to see whether they can be misused for cyberattacks. As such, the institute deliberately tests them under permissive conditions, with access to the internet and even with some safeguards disabled. The models didn’t exploit vulnerabilities to access the internet this time, but they did act beyond the scope of their testing parameters.
To be particular, the incidents took place during a single test that challenged AI agents to solve a cyber security problem. AISI ran the test 122 times across several models, and it found irregularities in 10 of those runs. Of the 19 instances the institute found wherein an agent went rogue, Anthropic’s Mythos 5 was responsible for 17, while OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 Sol was involved in two.
The institute found out that the models were acting on their own and engaging in harmful activities on the morning of July 28, when its security monitoring system flagged data leaving its testing environments through Tor. Its testers quickly reviewed the models’ activities and discovered the incidents, which occurred between July 25 and July 28.
In the most notable case, an AI agent tried to inject malicious code into an open-source GitHub project as part of a supply-chain attack. It resorted to social engineering techniques, researching the project’s human maintainers and then creating multiple sock puppet accounts to get one of them to approve the code. After a human reviewer denied its request, the agent edited its earlier activity and adopted a new identity to continue. It was because the agency used Tor to bypass GitHub’s restrictions that the institute was notified about its activities.
The agent also tried to contact real people directly by sending them messages or files, persuading them to run malicious code. Some of those messages and files carried malware, while others were attempts at social engineering. One agent even left public messages on GitHub, inviting other agents stumbling upon them to work on the same challenge. It left instructions on how to reuse the accounts and other output it had left behind to continue its activities. Other agents did discover those messages later and followed the instructions in them.
AISI explains in its post that the AI agents were never given instructions to act in a deceptive behavior. But in searching for ways to solve difficult problems, some of the solutions they found involved deceiving real people. The institute admits that agents could be forced to be more “creative” when tasked to solve near-impossible issues. However, it argues that it doesn’t fully explain the behaviors of the agents it was testing. In some of the instances it discovered, the agent went straight to choosing the harmful way to accomplish the task, even when it had the instructions on how to solve it as intended.
The institute clarifies that there are no clear indications that the same activity would occur outside of testing scenarios at the moment. It also can’t say whether the AI agents were aware that they were acting in the real world, so to speak, and not in a testing environment anymore. All the same, it’s advising organizations to adopt more robust cybersecurity measures and to be more cautious when verifying outside contributions. “As AI models become more capable and accessible, what we have seen during this incident could become more common,” it says.
In its response on X, Anthropic says it’s working with AISI to get a clearer picture of Claude Mythos’ “understanding of its situation,” which will help the company identify why it acted the way it did during evaluation.
The UK’s @AISecurityInst (AISI) has published a report on their recent cybersecurity evaluation of Anthropic’s Claude Mythos 5 and OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 Sol. The models attempted to complete an assignment in a setup where their normal safeguards were removed and they were deliberately…
— Anthropic (@AnthropicAI) August 4, 2026
The new tech looks impressive, but most of it will be gobbled up by AI data centers.
It used to be nice when Samsung announced its latest 3D memory or V-NAND storage, as we could all look forward to our PCs booting faster and files loading quicker. Now, the company has just announced its new next-gen memory and storage, and while the new tech looks impressive, it’s depressing knowing that most of it will be gobbled up by AI data centers.
At the Future of Memory and Storage (FMS) show in Santa Clara, Samsung unveiled the first concept models for zHBM, based on HBM memory used primarily in data centers, AI accelerators and a small number of high-end GPUs. zHBM is a new memory architecture that vertically stacks HBM directly above AI accelerators (rather than alongside them as before), helping boost performance up to eight times. It also uses next-generation wafer bonding tech, allowing over 10 times the memory density of current HBM5 tech while increasing energy efficiency threefold.
Samsung also unveiled a new type of V-NAND memory used in SSDs, memory cards and other types of storage. Called V10 BV-NAND, it uses the company’s new bonding V-NAND architecture to stack more than 400 layers of memory cells. This increases memory density by around 58 percent over the previous V9 generation, while boosting read, write and I/O performance.
The company also introduced zNAND-O, a next-gen V-NAND solution combining “high space efficiency, improved I/O performance and low latency, aimed at edge AI environments. Finally, Samsung showcased LPDDR5X-PIM, the industry’s first LPDDR memory with processing-in-memory technology, built to perform data processing within the memory itself to improve efficiency.
Alongside SK Hynix, Samsung is one of two companies who control the majority of memory production. As Engadget’s readers well know, both companies are failing to keep up with demand for memory created by the current AI bubble. That in turn is leading to insane prices for electronics of all kinds, ranging from gaming consoles to smartphones to laptops.
Netflix subscribers with compatible Windows 11 PCs can finally stream in 4K through Google Chrome, although the hardware requirements remain demanding and the complete Premium experience still requires another app or device.
Related Reading:
Netflix has finally allowed Google Chrome to do something most Windows users probably assumed it could already do: stream Netflix in 4K.
Chrome version 117 or later can now deliver Netflix at up to 2160p on compatible Windows 11 computers. Until now, Windows users who wanted browser-based 4K playback generally had to use Microsoft Edge or open the Netflix app. Chrome was limited to 1080p, regardless of how much subscribers paid or how capable their computers and displays were.
This is progress. It is also 2026, so perhaps Netflix should not expect a parade.
Why Netflix 4K in Chrome Matters
For users who spend most of their day inside Chrome, the benefit is primarily convenience. They no longer need to switch to Edge or launch a separate Windows app simply because Netflix imposed a lower resolution ceiling on their preferred browser.
The move also makes Chrome more practical for Windows laptops and desktop computers connected to 4K monitors, projectors, or televisions. A compatible 4K stream can reveal finer textures, cleaner edges, and more detail than a 1080p presentation, particularly on larger screens or when the viewer sits relatively close.
Netflix does not deliver every movie and series in 4K, and playback quality can still fall below 2160p when bandwidth fluctuates. The service may also begin playback at a lower resolution before increasing quality once the connection stabilizes.
Chrome support therefore removes one obstacle. It does not remove the other 17 hoops that PC owners may need to jump through.
What Do You Need to Watch Netflix in 4K Through Chrome?
Netflix lists the following requirements for Ultra HD playback on a Windows computer:
- A Netflix plan that includes 4K Ultra HD
- Video playback quality set to Auto or High
- Windows 11 with the latest updates
- Google Chrome version 117 or later
- A steady internet connection of at least 15Mbps
- A 4K display operating at 60Hz
- HDCP 2.2 support when using an external monitor, projector, or television
- Current graphics drivers
- The HEVC video extension, which may need to be purchased from the Microsoft Store on some Windows 11 systems
The computer must also include compatible graphics hardware. Netflix currently lists the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 or newer, AMD Radeon RX 400 series or newer, Intel seventh-generation Core processors or newer, and AMD Ryzen processors.
There is one more potential headache: if multiple displays are active, every connected display must meet Netflix’s requirements. An older secondary monitor can therefore prevent 4K playback even when the primary screen is fully compatible.
That is the kind of charming PC quirk that makes a $40 streaming stick feel like advanced civilization.
Which Computers Support Netflix 4K in Chrome?
The new support applies primarily to qualifying Windows 11 desktops, laptops, and tablets running Chrome 117 or later.
Netflix also lists 4K support through Chrome on compatible Chromebooks, although those systems must meet separate Ultra HD hardware requirements.
Support remains considerably more limited on other operating systems:
- Windows 10: Netflix will run, but Netflix’s current Ultra HD requirements specify Windows 11.
- macOS: Chrome remains limited to 1080p. Safari 14 or later can deliver up to 4K on Macs running macOS 11 or newer.
- Linux: Chrome, Firefox, and Edge are limited to 720p. Opera can reach 1080p.
- Firefox and Opera on Windows: Both remain limited to 1080p.
The result is an improvement for Windows 11 users, not universal 4K Chrome support.
What Is Still Missing?
Netflix’s Windows support chart lists Chrome as capable of 4K, but it does not include HDR support.
Microsoft Edge and the Netflix Windows app are still listed as supporting 4K with HDR on compatible systems. Netflix also limits Dolby Atmos playback on Windows to supported content played through Edge or the Windows app.
That means Chrome users are still missing:
The difference matters. Resolution determines how much spatial detail an image can contain, while HDR expands brightness, contrast, and color reproduction. A 4K SDR stream can look sharper than 1080p, but it does not offer the complete visual impact available from properly mastered HDR content.
Dolby Atmos is similarly important for viewers using compatible headphones, soundbars, AV receivers, or surround systems. Chrome may now provide the pixels, but it is still leaving the more immersive audio experience at the door.
Should You Use Chrome or a Streaming Device?
Chrome is now a more credible option for watching Netflix on a Windows 11 PC, especially for viewers using a 4K computer monitor and conventional stereo audio.
A dedicated streaming device or smart TV app remains the better option for most home theater systems. Apple TV 4K, Roku, Fire TV, Google TV, compatible game consoles, and television apps generally make it easier to access 4K, HDR, Dolby Vision, HDR10+, and Dolby Atmos without navigating Windows codecs, graphics drivers, HDCP requirements, and browser restrictions.
They are also controlled from the sofa rather than with a wireless mouse balanced on someone’s stomach, which feels like an important design advantage.
The Bottom Line
Netflix deserves credit for finally bringing 4K playback to Chrome on Windows 11. Users can remain inside their preferred browser, take greater advantage of 4K monitors and televisions, and avoid opening Edge solely because Netflix told them to.
The restrictions, however, make this a partial upgrade rather than full feature parity. Chrome still lacks HDR and Dolby Atmos, while the hardware, display, codec, and copy-protection requirements remain more complicated than they need to be.
Netflix has finally unlocked 4K in the browser many Windows users actually open. It only took long enough for the streaming era to require its own reboot.
Related Reading:
Tech
This civic activist used AI to assess how state Supreme Court candidates might rule on the millionaires’ tax
The tradition of using new technology to shape political discourse goes back centuries in America, to the printing presses that enabled the spread of early publications like Common Sense and the Federalist Papers. Just imagine what Thomas Paine and Alexander Hamilton could have done with access to LLMs and a modest budget of AI tokens.
It might have looked something like Culliton2026.org.
No, a website that uses artificial intelligence to assess Washington state’s Supreme Court races won’t go down in history alongside the publications that helped launch a revolution and ratify a constitution. But at a basic level, its creator is attempting the same thing: reaching people at a key moment of decision, using the most powerful tools of the day.
The modern-day pamphleteer is Viet Nguyen, a veteran Seattle-based technology communications executive and former political campaign manager.
He built the interactive website using AI to give voters a sense of how each candidate for the state’s high court — starting with those in the Tuesday, Aug. 4, primary — might rule on the state’s new “millionaires’ tax.” Its core feature lets visitors swap in different judicial candidates to see how the outcome could tip the court in either direction, depending on who’s elected.
The site is named after Culliton v. Chase, the 1933 ruling that struck down a graduated income tax in Washington state. The new tax, which some tech and business leaders have warned could drive high earners and businesses out of state, may test that precedent.
Nguyen opposes the new tax — which would apply a 9.9% statewide levy on income above $1 million — and wrote a Seattle Times op-ed calling it unconstitutional. (He noted that he has run political campaigns on both sides of the aisle, and wouldn’t owe the tax himself.)
For each of the 16 candidates across the five races, the site gives a one-line read: likely to keep the landmark ruling, likely to scrap it, or too close to call. The analysis uses four criteria: who appointed the candidate, what they did before reaching the bench, how they describe their own judicial approach, and anything they’ve said or written about Culliton or the new tax.
“People don’t understand who their Supreme Court justices are,” Nguyen said, describing his motivation. “There’s just zero knowledge about where judges stand on a particular issue.”
A faulty premise? But that very proposition — that anyone or anything can forecast how a judge will rule — is exactly what critics dispute. In a fact-check published last week, Andrew Villeneuve of the Northwest Progressive Institute (NPI), which supports the tax, described Nguyen’s Culliton2026.org as “speculation dressed up as a voter’s guide.”
Judicial-ethics rules bar candidates from saying how they would rule on a case that could come before them. Hugh Spitzer, a retired University of Washington law professor and a leading authority on Culliton, told Villeneuve it isn’t possible to predict how the justices would rule.
“Rather than examining and scoring the candidates on a rubric of qualifications or issues, Nguyen has organized his whole project around attempting to guess how each candidate would rule in a single legal challenge that is not yet before the justices,” wrote Villeneuve, the organization’s founder and executive director, in the article.
NPI runs its own guide to the 2026 Supreme Court elections — the Washington State Supreme Court Elections Visualizer — which sorts candidates by their endorsements and voter-pamphlet statements, but does not make any guess at how they’d rule.
Culliton2026.org is described on its About Page as independent and nonpartisan. It says it doesn’t endorse candidates, isn’t affiliated with any campaign, and isn’t telling people how to vote.
Despite the site’s flagship feature — the “Balance of power” tool that lets visitors swap in candidates and watch the projected ruling shift — the About Page asserts that the site is “not a vote predictor” when it comes to how future Supreme Court justices might rule.
That disclaimer “seems like a tacit acknowledgment that his whole premise is faulty,” Villeneuve wrote in the NPI piece.
The response: Asked about the article, Nguyen called the feedback helpful and said he made a series of updates to address some of the issues raised by Villeneuve in the piece.
For example, he added a “note on the foundations” to the site’s case explainer, granting that Culliton rests on federal precedents the U.S. Supreme Court has since abandoned, and citing Spitzer’s own argument that a future court should weigh the question fresh.
“Reasonable people will disagree on the project’s premise, and that’s fine,” he wrote to Villeneuve in an amicable exchange that he shared with GeekWire.
The article describes Nguyen as right-wing, but he said he tries to stay “in the moderate lane.”
He said he wanted the site “to be less political and more educational, applicable to any voter wishing to know more about the judicial candidates.” In fact, it could be used just as easily by people wanting to align their ballots with the likelihood of upholding the new tax.
How he built it: Nguyen, who is not a software developer, used agentic AI to research the public records and build the entire site from scratch, directing it to rely on sources he considered legitimate (including court opinions, official filings, and news coverage) rather than random blog or Reddit posts.
He also set up a vetting process to fact-check entries before publication.
@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Roboto+Slab:wght@500&display=swap’);@media (max-width:768px){.gw-pq{display:none!important}}
Nguyen uses Perplexity Computer, an agentic tool that operates a computer on its own (browsing the web, using software and building files) and divides a job among multiple AI agents working in parallel. He’s on the $200 a month Perplexity Max plan.
A sophisticated website or app like this might have required a small team and thousands of dollars in the past. Nguyen built it over the course of a few hours, for about $100 in AI tokens. He says it has attracted “a few hundred thousand page views” since its launch this spring.
“This is where agentic AI steps in and offers a whole roster of skills that I don’t have,” he said. “I would never be able to imagine that I could put something like this together.”
Legal landscape: The Legislature passed the 9.9% tax and Gov. Bob Ferguson signed it in March 2026. It applies to income earned starting in 2028, with the first payments due in 2029.
Culliton2026.org’s assessment is that six of the nine current justices on the court lean toward upholding the tax, two toward striking it down, and one is too uncertain to call.
Five of the court’s nine seats are on the ballot this year, four of them contested in Tuesday’s primary, with the top two in each race advancing to November. Three of the seats on the ballot are held by sitting justices seeking to stay on the court; the other two are open.
A case filed in Klickitat County Superior Court in April, led by former state Attorney General Rob McKenna and former state Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge, argues the tax is an unconstitutional income tax and is expected to reach the state Supreme Court. The number of contested seats means the election could reshape the court before the case arrives.
Voters will also weigh in directly in November. Initiative 645, backed by Let’s Go Washington — the group founded by hedge-fund manager Brian Heywood — would repeal the tax before it takes effect in 2028. It qualified for the ballot in July with more than 500,000 signatures.
Nguyen’s background: He arrived in Washington as a 17-month-old refugee from Vietnam in 1975, studied political science at the UW, and got his start in 1996 volunteering on Gary Locke’s campaign for governor, as he noted in the Seattle Times piece.
He ran local races before spending nearly two decades at Microsoft, T-Mobile and 5G Americas, the wireless industry trade group that he led until it wound down this year.
Culliton2026.org is just one of the civic sites Nguyen has built the same way. His Washington Accountability Registry catalogs 87 state and local government cases it labels fraud, conflicts of interest or oversight failures, and, like the Culliton site, calls itself independent and nonpartisan.
Others are more explicit in taking a side: a dashboard about the King County homelessness authority is headlined “One verdict: wind KCRHA down,” and an emergency-clause tracker titled “Locked Out” flags 19 bills the Legislature made “referendum-proof.”
He has also dabbled in AI-generated music videos, including one about Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson with the hook, “Hey Katie, get it together, the city’s falling apart.”
“All AI generated,” Nguyen said of his projects. “We live in a new world.”
Or, as Paine put it in Common Sense, “The birthday of a new world is at hand.”
saas
Tribunal to explore how £270 million reseller case intersects with multibillion-pound class action
ValueLicensing (VL) has been invited to attend a case management conference in a related multibillion-pound collective action against Microsoft, according to the reseller’s boss, Jonathan Horley.
VL sued Microsoft for £270 million in 2021, alleging that the software giant restricted the supply of surplus Office licenses available for resale. Barrister Alexander Wolfson is the proposed class representative in a separate claim filed in 2025 on behalf of more than two million UK customers. That action seeks between £1.3 billion and £3.5 billion in compensation.
Both cases are before the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) and concern Microsoft’s alleged efforts to restrict the market for pre-owned software licenses.
Case management conferences (CMCs) are used to set timetables and decide procedural questions as a case progresses.
According to Horley, ValueLicensing has a CMC concerning disclosure listed for September 14, followed the next day by an invitation to another in the Wolfson proceedings.
The September 15 CMC could address how the two proceedings interact, including whether the Wolfson action should be stayed pending judgment in the more advanced ValueLicensing case. There is also the possibility that the claims could eventually be heard together, although the tribunal has yet to indicate what course it will take.
ValueLicensing’s case is considerably further ahead of Wolfson’s. The Court of Appeal dismissed Microsoft’s appeals on issues including copyright in July, although Microsoft can seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Kate Pollock, head of competition litigation at law firm Stewarts, said of the Wolfson case earlier this year: “Microsoft’s conduct has had a profound and costly impact on millions of individuals and private and public sector organizations that rely on its software for daily business operations.
“We believe that Microsoft abused its market dominance by imposing restrictive licensing practices that effectively shut down competition and inflated prices.”
Closer procedural links between the cases could complicate Microsoft’s defence against two claims arising from similar allegations. The Register asked the Windows behemoth to comment, but it declined.
VL’s Horley told The Register: “Following on from the judgment at the Court of Appeal we are pleased to have a hearing listed for September 14 to progress further disclosure. ValueLicensing has also been invited to the first hearing of the Alexander Wolfson class action on September 15. That will deal with the next steps for certification and the interactions between the two claims.”
Horley said the move was “very significant” and showed the progress ValueLicensing had made in terms of the competition and copyright law aspects.
“ValueLicensing are experts in the pre-owned Microsoft market with significant evidence and experience of the operation of the market during the relevant period in which the abuse is alleged to have occurred,” he said.
“Given that both claims relate to the pre-owned Microsoft market, that the ValueLicensing claim is so advanced and Mr Justice Turner is Chair for both, it is logical for ValueLicensing to be invited. ValueLicensing is happy to assist the Tribunal in determining the next procedural steps for both actions.”
Microsoft declined to comment. A spokesperson for the Alexander Wolfson class action has yet to comment. ®
from the good-deals-on-cool-stuff dept
Explore the incredible world of documentaries with a Curiosity Stream Standard Plan subscription. This top-tier streaming service offers unlimited access to thousands of films, series, and shows to satisfy your thirst for knowledge. Whether you’re a science enthusiast, history buff, or technology geek, Curiosity Stream has something for everyone. Unleash the power of on-demand streaming that allows you to choose what you want to watch, when you want to watch it, and where you want to watch it. From the comfort of your living room to the remote corners of the globe, your favorite documentaries are just a click away. It’s on sale for $112.50 with the code AUG25.
Note: The Techdirt Deals Store is powered and curated by StackSocial. A portion of all sales from Techdirt Deals helps support Techdirt. The products featured do not reflect endorsements by our editorial team.
Filed Under: daily deal
If you’re perusing Apple’s latest wares, such as the iPhone 17, which has been one of the best-selling phones of 2026, or the latest M5 MacBook Air, you may find yourself wondering how to best protect that investment. Or you may be faced with the existential dilemma of deciding whether or not to buy into extended coverage. For Apple products, it’s very much an ecosystem; you may start with an iPhone 17 Pro, but can quickly find yourself with AirPods and an iPad to go with it. Once you have a smattering of Apple devices, keeping them working is important.
Understanding Apple’s legal warranty, consumer rights, extended coverage options, and how they fit into Apple’s support chain will help you make an informed decision. Apple hardware comes with a one-year limited warranty, which covers manufacturing defects, workmanship, and hardware failures that are not due to user damage or normal wear and tear.
What’s excluded is accidental damage, cosmetic damage, loss or theft, or anything that can be attributed to normal wear and tear. Apple will also not cover any modification or damage done by a third party, or any repair or damage done by a non-Apple Authorized Service Provider. Apple also notes that coverage only applies when the products are used in accordance with Apple guidelines, which you can learn more about at Apple’s legal page.
How to check warranty status and get service
Though Apple publishes warranty guidance for each product, the warranties are all essentially the same, in that they broadly have the same inclusions and exclusions. The limited warranty starts from the original purchase date, but this is in addition to any country-specific consumer laws that may apply.
For instance, Canada recently amended its Consumer Protection Act, which changes the scope of legal warranties on several products, including cell phones. Under Canada law beginning in October 2026, cell phone warranties will have a three-year duration. You can find out more about Apple and specific consumer laws here.
There are several ways to check your Apple warranty status and see warranty coverage. You can visit Apple’s coverage and benefits page and enter the serial number for your device, or you can also go to mysupport.apple.com and sign in with the appropriate Apple account. On certain devices like iPad, iPhone, and Macs, you can also navigate to Settings > General > AppleCare & Warranty and view warranty status for devices. If you need warranty service on an eligible device, you can start a claim at Apple’s Service and Repair page.
You can also take your device to an Apple store for carry-in service, or you can find an Apple Authorized Service Provider. Apple also provides a Self-Service Repair page, where you can access repair manuals and buy Apple parts — provided you have the skill and experience to make the repair. Apple announced Self Service Repair in 2021, largely after world governments became more interested in repair laws.
AppleCare+ vs AppleCare One: is it worth the money?
AppleCare is Apple’s extended coverage service, which you should think of as additional to the one-year warranty and any other coverage you may have under law. AppleCare comes in two options: AppleCare+ or AppleCare One. It’s also worth noting that Apple changed the pricing structure of AppleCare+ to a subscription model and moved away from allowing customers to buy two years of coverage up front.
The difference is AppleCare+ can be applied to devices individually, a la carte style, with subscription prices varying based on the device. AppleOne allows you to bundle up to three devices for a flat $19.99/month, with the ability to add extra devices at $5.99/month per device. Some notable perks include same-day service at Apple Stores, Express Replacement Service for certain devices while you wait on a repair, and battery replacement if your battery falls below 80 percent of its capacity. AppleCare+ and AppleCare One have service fees and deductibles, on top of the subscription costs.
Whether or not this is worth it is a personal decision. If you’re someone who upgrades frequently or yearly, then paying for extra coverage probably doesn’t make sense. But if you intend to keep your devices for several years, the AppleOne bundle can be practical, depending on your devices. Paying roughly $20 per month for three devices –- like an iPhone, a MacBook, and a pair of AirPods –- isn’t a bad value if you rely on them daily and they tend to travel a lot with you. On the other hand, it doesn’t make much sense to buy extra coverage for something like an AppleTV or HomePod that tend to be stationary.
I snore. Not politely, either. More like a diesel generator trying to restart in January, which means my wife occasionally wakes up at 3:00 a.m. weighing two options: hold a pillow over my head and see whether Trenton State Prison has decent Wi-Fi, or find an actual solution.
The $279 Ozlo Sleepbuds 2 are designed for the second option. Developed by former Bose engineers, these tiny sleep-focused earbuds mask snoring, traffic, hotel noise, barking dogs, and other overnight disturbances without relying on active noise cancellation.
Related Reading:
What Makes the Ozlo Sleepbuds 2 Different?
These are not conventional true wireless earbuds that have been made slightly smaller and given a rain-sounds playlist.
Ozlo says the Sleepbuds 2 are the smallest earbuds designed specifically for sleep. Their low-profile silicone housings sit flush inside the ear, while secure-fit wings are intended to keep them in place throughout the night. That matters most for side sleepers, who already know that pressing a normal wireless earbud into a pillow can become uncomfortable rather quickly. Each earbud weighs a reported 1.6 grams.
The Sleepbuds 2 also avoid active noise cancellation. Instead, they combine passive isolation with continuous noise-masking sounds intended to cover unpredictable interruptions such as snoring, barking dogs, traffic, roommates, and whatever the people upstairs are apparently building at 2:00 a.m.
Users can select from more than 30 built-in soundscapes and masking sounds, or stream music, podcasts, and audiobooks over Bluetooth. The earbuds can automatically switch from streamed content to a stored masking sound when the user falls asleep, after a timer expires, or when the streamed program ends.
Five customizable Sleep Modes determine how audio behaves during the night, while the new Sleep Shield feature blocks incoming calls, alerts, notifications, and unexpected Bluetooth audio. A private in-ear alarm can wake the wearer without disturbing anyone sleeping beside them.
What Has Improved?
Battery life increases from roughly 10 hours on the original model to up to 14 hours, based on Ozlo’s testing at 50 percent volume. The Smart Charging Case holds enough power for another two or three nights, although actual performance will depend on volume, Bluetooth streaming, enabled features, and battery condition.
Ozlo has also redesigned the Bluetooth system to improve connection reliability and range. That is an important upgrade because bedtime is a particularly bad moment for pairing problems, firmware drama, or an earbud deciding that it needs some personal space.
A physical button on the Smart Case provides phone-free access to basic functions, including starting a stored sleep sound and snoozing the alarm. Initial setup and streaming still require the Ozlo app and a compatible phone, but stored sounds can be configured to begin without an active Bluetooth connection.
The earbuds monitor movement and breathing, while sensors in the Smart Case measure bedroom sound, light, and temperature. The Ozlo app combines that information into sleep-pattern and environmental insights designed to help users identify what may be disturbing them during the night.
Who Might Actually Need Them?
The strongest candidates are light sleepers, side sleepers, shift workers, frequent travelers, apartment dwellers, and anyone sharing a bedroom with a partner whose snoring resembles a diesel generator trying to start in January.
They also make sense for people who already fall asleep to podcasts, audiobooks, meditation programs, or ambient sound but find ordinary earbuds too bulky or uncomfortable for overnight use.
They make less sense for someone who needs versatile everyday earbuds for calls, workouts, commuting, and serious music listening. There is no ANC, and the sound system has been optimized for masking noise and reproducing spoken content at low volume rather than delivering subterranean bass or an audiophile listening experience.
And at $279, they are not an impulse purchase. But for someone whose sleep is regularly interrupted by environmental noise, the real comparison may not be against another pair of earbuds. It may be against another exhausted morning, an increasingly annoyed partner, or a hotel-room air conditioner that sounds like it survived the Korean War.
Ozlo Sleepbuds 2 Specifications
- Battery life: Up to 14 hours
- Charging case: Two to three additional nights
- Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.3
- Weight: 1.6 g per earbud
- Sound library: More than 30 masking sounds and soundscapes
- Compatibility: iOS 17 or newer; Android 12 or newer
- Included: Smart Charging Case, four sizes of silicone ear tips, and USB-C cable
Where to buy:
Related Reading:
Disney+ has found a way to restore 4K UHD on selected TVs and streaming devices following a European patent injunction, but HDR10, Dolby Vision, 3D, Apple TV 4K, Samsung TVs, and game consoles remain on the outside looking in.
Disney+ has found a way to put some of the missing pixels back, but affected Premium subscribers in Europe should probably hold the fireworks.
Only days after Disney confirmed that a court ruling had forced it to remove 4K UHD and HDR streaming in parts of Europe, the company has begun restoring 4K through an alternative video technology. The good news is that selected subscribers can once again watch Disney+ content at 4K resolution. The bad news is that device support remains limited, and HDR has not returned.
Premium, apparently, is still a work in progress.
Related Reading:
Disney+ Switches From HEVC to VP9
According to German publication Heise, Disney+ is using the VP9 video codec for its temporary 4K workaround rather than HEVC, the technology at the center of its ongoing patent dispute with InterDigital.
Disney has not publicly confirmed VP9 by name, but it has acknowledged adopting an alternative technology and beginning the restoration of 4K UHD. Denmark has been specifically confirmed as part of the rollout, although Disney says availability may vary by market and device.
The switch matters because VP9 support and its implementation within the Disney+ app are not universal. A television or streaming device may be technically capable of decoding VP9 video without currently receiving a compatible Disney+ 4K stream.
In other words, do not assume that a 4K logo on the box means everything will work.
Which Devices Currently Support Disney+ 4K?
Disney says its alternative 4K delivery system currently supports:
- Selected Android TV and Google TV devices, including models from Google, Philips, Sony, and other manufacturers
- Amazon Fire TV devices
- LG televisions from 2020 onward
- Sky Glass
- Sky Stream
Compatibility can vary between individual models, regions, and versions of the Disney+ app.
Several major platforms remain unsupported, including:
- Apple TV 4K
- Samsung smart TVs
- Gaming consoles
That is not a minor omission. Samsung remains one of the world’s largest television manufacturers, while Apple TV 4K and game consoles are widely used as primary streaming devices in home theater systems.
Disney says it is working to expand device support, but it has not provided a timetable.
4K Is Back but HDR Is Not
The current workaround restores resolution, not the complete Premium viewing experience.
HDR10 remains unavailable in affected markets, while Dolby Vision and Disney+ 3D content have not returned. That means compatible devices may once again receive a sharper 4K image, but without the expanded brightness, contrast, and color range provided by HDR.
Disney says it is working to restore HDR as quickly as possible but cannot confirm when it will become available.
That distinction is important. Four times the pixel count of 1080p can improve fine detail, particularly on larger displays, but HDR often contributes more to the visible impact of modern movies and television programs. A 4K SDR stream is an improvement over the recent 1080p SDR downgrade, but it is not what Premium subscribers originally paid to receive.
How Did Disney+ Get Here?
The latest disruption followed a July 23, 2026, ruling from the Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court. The court found that Disney infringed an InterDigital patent covering certain HEVC video-encoding techniques and granted an injunction spanning 11 European Union countries, including France, Germany, and Italy. Disney can appeal the decision.
It was the second UPC injunction InterDigital secured against Disney in 2026. An earlier ruling from the court’s Mannheim division involved another HEVC-related patent and led to the removal of Dolby Vision and 3D support in affected markets.
As we previously reported, some Disney+ Premium subscribers were subsequently limited to 1080p SDR while continuing to pay the full price for a tier advertised around 4K UHD and HDR playback.
Can Subscribers Request a Refund?
Affected customers who subscribe directly through Disney+ can request a partial refund for the current billing period. Subscribers billed through Apple, Google, Amazon, or another third party will need to contact that billing provider instead.
Disney has also suggested that customers who no longer want the Premium tier can switch to a less expensive plan. Downloads are reportedly unaffected by the streaming restrictions.
The Bottom Line
Restoring 4K this quickly is a meaningful step, but Disney+ has not fully solved the problem. The current VP9 workaround provides 4K playback on a limited selection of televisions and streaming devices, while some of the most widely used platforms remain unsupported. HDR10, Dolby Vision, and 3D are also still missing.
Affected subscribers are therefore receiving something closer to Disney+ Premium Lite: more pixels, fewer devices, no HDR, and the same monthly bill.
Disney says broader device support and HDR restoration are coming. Until that actually happens, the service has only repaired part of the damage.
Walt Disney built the Magic Kingdom on imagination. Disney’s new leadership appears to be testing how many Premium features can disappear before subscribers do.
Related Reading:
from the attacks-on-a-free-press dept
For much of Techdirt’s nearly three decades in existence we’ve covered attacks on the media by the rich and powerful. And sometimes we’ve been on the receiving end of such attacks ourselves. But I have never seen or heard of anything quite as extreme as what happened to Ina and David Steiner, proprietors of the website eCommerceBytes. As we and many others chronicled, the story that came out sounded impossible.
But now it’s finally concluded, with eBay and three of its former top execs agreeing to pay the Steiners nearly $49 million, plus another $7 million in charitable commitments — about $56 million total, for the horrors they put them through in response to (barely) critical reporting.
The Steiners ran a small online trade publication covering eBay, mostly focused on helping sellers on the site. For years they had a good relationship with the company itself, but in the late 2010s, the company was struggling and under new management, and its execs started to get annoyed at what they saw as critical coverage of the company by the Steiners (for example, questioning why a company that was struggling financially had decided to build a replica of an east coast bar in its headquarters).
What followed still reads like fiction. If you haven’t seen it yet, I highly recommend watching the documentary, Whatever It Takes, which tells the whole story in amazing detail, including security camera footage and getting one of the (low level) eBay employees who took part in the campaign of harassment to talk about what happened on camera.
The title of the film comes directly from a text then-CEO Devin Wenig sent to eBay’s communications boss at the time, Steve Wymer, saying that Ina Steiner needed to be taken down, “whatever it takes.” Wymer replied “we’re going to crush this lady.” According to the Steiners’ lawsuit, this was then communicated to others at the company and an operations exec, Wendy Jones, then told the company’s security boss, Jim Baugh, to take care of things “off the record,” apparently telling him she didn’t want to know any details.
This allowed Baugh to concoct an escalating campaign that started with angry DMs to Ina Steiner and moved on to shipping increasingly awful things to their home: a stack of pizzas, a preserved fetal pig, a bloody pig mask, a book about surviving the loss of a spouse followed by a funeral wreath, an envelope full of “barely legal pornography” that was (deliberately) sent to a next door neighbor. And on and on.
Multiple eBay employees also traveled to the town of Natick, Massachusetts, where the Steiners lived, repeatedly driving by their house and following the Steiners when they drove around town. They also planned to break into the garage and put a tracking device on the Steiners’ car.
As the documentary makes clear, much of this was driven by the somewhat wild imagination of Baugh, who had done private security for other tech CEOs before coming to eBay, where he moved improbably fast from the CEO’s bodyguard to running eBay’s entire global security operation. The documentary details how he pushed out most of the long-time security staff and brought in a crew of young and inexperienced female hires — at least one of whom he began a relationship with — making them watch movies about top secret operations, plying them with alcohol, and demanding total loyalty.
Bizarrely, what got them caught was the whole “going to Natick and following the Steiners around” bit, which allowed the Steiners to get a license plate which the police and FBI then used to track it back to the eBay employees. A bunch of eBay employees were arrested, all of whom eventually entered guilty pleas, and many ended up being sentenced to prison sentences, with Baugh receiving the longest at 57 months.
But the Steiners were (understandably) angry that Wenig, Wymer, and Jones were never charged. While the former execs insisted that they didn’t know this was happening, that they never would have condoned it, and that they were horrified by the news when it came out, that’s difficult to believe when so much of the evidence shows that all three were on board in a “wink, wink, nudge, nudge” way given the messages they sent between themselves and Baugh.
A few years back the Steiners filed a civil suit against eBay and those former top executives. The case was set to go to trial soon, but last week they reached a settlement, with the Steiners securing $55.7 million total — $48.7 million of it going directly to them, the rest in charitable commitments:
- The plaintiffs will receive $48.7 million in compensation, including $46.15 million from eBay, $2 million from former eBay executive CEO Devin Wenig, $500,000 from former eBay executive Wendy Jones, and $50,000 from former eBay executive Steve Wymer.
- eBay will fund $6 million in charitable contributions to various nonprofit organizations. Former eBay executive CEO Devin Wenig will contribute an additional $1 million to a charity dedicated to protecting First Amendment rights in the name of Ina Steiner.
In the end, this means that the lower level employees who did much of the dirty work ended up in jail. The top execs who set this in motion end up with small dents in their large bank accounts.
eBay’s statement on the matter is at least somewhat direct in calling what happened to the Steiners “reprehensible and should never have happened.” It also “acknowledges” what it says was “the unprofessional tone in internal communications demonstrated, to different degrees and number, by Mr. Wenig, Mr. Wymer, and Ms. Jones.” I’m not exactly sure that meets the requirements of the agreement which, according to the Steiners would include “a strongly-worded public statement regarding the conduct” of those execs from eBay.
Importantly (and kudos to the Steiners for demanding and getting this) the agreement is totally public and “contains no confidentiality provision.” This is rare in cases like this (and it’s also something we insisted on in the case we dealt with). It’s important to be able to talk about this stuff, and tragically the rich and powerful who try to take down news sites are often able to negotiate confidentiality clauses into the agreements.
For what it’s worth, Wenig and Wymer are still working in Silicon Valley, with both of them co-founding AI startups, naturally. Incredibly, Wenig’s startup supposedly provides AI tools to journalists, which is quite a pivot from directing a security goon to “take down” a journalist with “whatever it takes.” That also makes the part of the agreement of Wenig providing an additional $1 million to a charity in Steiner’s name to help protect First Amendment rights even more striking.
The fact that the defendants in this case were willing to pay so much and allow the terms of the deal to be public suggests they knew exactly how badly a public trial would make all of them look.
Kudos and congrats to the Steiners. These days especially, for most media players who are attacked by the rich and powerful for their reporting, the best you can usually hope for is to get a case dismissed. Maybe, if you’re lucky, to win an anti-SLAPP motion to get your legal fees paid. To actually win a settlement this size is almost unheard of. But the Steiners deserved it. They didn’t just face bogus SLAPP lawsuits designed to shut them down. They were legitimately terrorized in ways that have had long-lasting effects.
While the Steiners situation was extreme, it’s important to recognize that this kind of thing is the inevitable end result of the constant escalation in the past few decades of the rich and the powerful attacking the free press for daring to do accurate and critical reporting on them. The craziest bit in this story isn’t even everything that eBay employees did to the Steiners, but the fact that they were so brazen about it and so careless that they got caught doing so in a way that resulted in this kind of payout. Most attacks on the press never see the light of day, let alone allowing the media entities targeted to be able to claim restitution.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, cyberstalking, david steiner, devin wenig, free speech, harassment, ina steiner, jim baugh, journalism, steve wymer, wendy jones
Companies: ebay, ecommercebytes
Bitcoin Price Metrics Echo 2022 In Coldest Phase Since FTX Collapse
Mired in 5-game skid, Dodgers send reliable Eric Lauer vs. Cubs
OpenAI And Anthropic Models Went On A Hacking Spree When Tested By The UK’s AI Research Institute
-
Business7 days agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Fashion5 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Wit & Wisdom
-
Politics5 days agoMeta enters AI-training agreement with far-right ‘propaganda rag’ Newsmax
-
Politics7 days agoReform UK betrays West Mids residents by running from party pledges
-
Politics3 days agoZack Polanski: an incitement to murder Nigel Farage?
-
Crypto World4 days agoMicroStrategy Post-Earnings CLARITY Act Push Could Add New Catalyst for Its Stock
-
Crypto World4 days agoXRP Ledger v3.3.0 brings five institutional features
-
News Videos6 days agoBitcoin Enters the 3rd Stage of the Bear Market
-
Politics6 days agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
-
Sports5 days agoSeema Kaliramna Wins Discus Throw Bronze, Takes India’s CWG Medals Tally To 17
-
Crypto World4 days agoNew York sues Kalshi over prediction market gambling
-
Crypto World3 days agoCrypto PAC spending tops $2M in Michigan House race
-
Tech7 days agoGemini can now summarize the messiest comment threads in Google Docs
-
Business5 days agoTrump Announces Hamas Disarmament Agreement as Iran Strikes Kuwait Air Base and US Attacks Pause Overnight
-
Tech3 days agoESET tracks rise in malicious AI skills and adaptable malware
-
Business2 days agoDTCR: Deleveraging And A Hedge Fund Collapse Point To A Possible AI Bottom
-
Tech5 days agoGemini Spark can now use Chrome logins and saved passwords to run errands on your behalf
-
Tech5 days agoBuilding A Reproduction PlayStation Motherboard
-
Sports7 days agoSakshi, Arundhati Enter Boxing Semi-Finals. India Assured Of 18 Medals At CWG 2026
-
NewsBeat6 days agoFour people die trying to cross Channel in small boats
You must be logged in to post a comment Login