A new, bipartisan idea is taking Washington by storm: collective ownership of the means of production.
Tech
Trump floats government ownership of OpenAI and Anthropic
Last Friday, President Donald Trump announced that he would soon be meeting with the executives of top AI companies to discuss a financial “partnership.”
“There are concepts where pieces [of these companies] could be given to the American public, where the American public essentially becomes a partner with the companies,” Trump said. “And by doing that, they’re going to like it better.”
- President Donald Trump says the government may take ownership stakes in major AI companies and share the returns with the public — an idea pitched to him by OpenAI’s Sam Altman.
- Critics suspect OpenAI’s real aim is to insulate itself from regulation and competition by aligning its profits with the government’s interests.
- A broad, well-governed public wealth fund could genuinely help counter AI-driven inequality.
- But an informal deal between the White House and a few favored firms is more likely to breed cronyism than spread wealth.
By this, the president (seemingly) meant that the US government may take an ownership stake in major AI companies and then distribute the fruits of its investments to the general public, perhaps through universal dividend payments.
This proposal did not come to Trump via some undercover, socialist operative embedded deep within the White House — but rather, from the CEO of OpenAI.
As NOTUS reported last week, Altman first pitched Trump on the concept in early 2025 and discussions between the administration and OpenAI have heated up more recently. No deal has been finalized. But talks have centered on an arrangement in which top AI labs voluntarily donate shares to the government — an approach that might enable Uncle Sam to partially nationalize the AI industry without Congress passing any law.
Officially, OpenAI’s interest in effectively transferring wealth from its shareholders to Uncle Sam is public-spirited. The company maintains that advances in AI are likely to generate massive profits for top labs, while sowing wrenching disruptions through labor markets. Thus, to ensure that ordinary people “share in the upside” of AI-fueled economic growth, the company has called for the creation of a “Public Wealth Fund,” which would invest in “both AI companies and the broader set of firms adopting and deploying AI,” and then send a portion of the returns to every American. In other words, it would pay out a universal basic income (another popular idea in Silicon Valley).
Yet many suspect OpenAI’s motives are more self-interested: By giving the US government a direct stake in its success, the company may be trying to insulate itself from stringent regulation or open competition. Moreover, whatever Altman’s intentions, skeptics argue that the government getting into cahoots with individual AI companies is a recipe for cronyism and conflicts of interest. (Disclosure: Vox Media is one of several publishers that have signed partnership agreements with OpenAI. Our reporting remains editorially independent.)
These concerns seem well-founded. A narrow partnership between the federal government and select AI companies would plausibly do more to generate corruption than redistribute income.
Yet there is a real risk that artificial intelligence will shift massive amounts of income away from workers and towards capital. And a highly diversified, scrupulously managed public wealth fund could help mitigate that hazard. Unfortunately, the Trump administration has evinced little interest in that approach to social ownership (or in scruples more broadly).
Why is OpenAI trying to get itself nationalized?
Companies don’t typically cook up schemes for reducing the value of their own shares. And yet, on its face, OpenAI’s reported proposal amounts to precisely that: If the company donates equity to the government, it will dilute the value of all its existing stock.
This invites the question: What’s in it for them?
There are multiple plausible answers. OpenAI may be trying to limit its exposure to regulation. In opinion polls, a supermajority of Americans express concern for where AI is taking their society — and support for more heavily regulating the industry.
Turning every American into an OpenAI shareholder could theoretically reduce the company’s susceptibility to onerous new rules in a couple of different ways. First, doing so may simply soften the AI industry’s image and buy it some goodwill from the American electorate (Trump seemed to reference this when saying that his arrangement would make Americans like AI better).
Second, such an arrangement would more closely align the public’s interests with those of OpenAI. After all, regulations that reduce the firm’s profitability would now also cut government revenue and/or, Americans’ dividend payments (such payouts might be small at first, but could become substantial over time, particularly if the government cuts deals with other major AI labs). Voters might be less inclined to protest a noisy data center if they think they’re directly profiting from it.
Similarly, accepting partial nationalization could boost OpenAI’s odds of securing a federal bailout if its revenues do not grow fast enough to cover its debts (a scenario that some analysts consider quite likely). There is a long history of governments shielding state-owned enterprises from market discipline. Thus, the progressive economist Dean Baker fears that an AI wealth fund would “end up being a mechanism to shovel yet more money” at billionaires aligned with the administration.
It is also possible that, by donating shares to the government, individual AI firms might buy themselves an advantage over their competitors. For its part, the Trump administration has displayed no shyness about rewarding businesses that curry its favor, and retaliating against those who do not.
Indeed, the White House has already tried to sabotage OpenAI’s chief rival. In February, Anthropic refused to sign a contract that would have authorized the Pentagon to use its AI for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons systems. The Defense Department responded by declaring Anthropic a “supply chain risk” — a designation that would restrict the capacity of government contractors to do business with the AI company. If a federal judge had not blocked that move, it could have done serious damage to Anthropic’s business — while benefiting both OpenAI and xAI, which is owned by Trump megadonor Elon Musk.
If the government took a stake in OpenAI but not Anthropic — or in all the major AI labs but not in more recent startups — the Trump administration might have further incentive to intervene on behalf of its favored firms.
Separately, the White House could use a public wealth fund to unduly influence AI labs’ decision-making. The government’s shares could give it the power to vote on companies’ internal policies — or else, seek to deter certain decisions with threats of selling off the firm’s stock.
These risks are amplified by the reportedly informal and ad-hoc nature of the public wealth fund being contemplated. Without congressionally authorized rules governing the fund’s management and investment decisions, the administration could have wide latitude to use its newfound financial power in self-interested ways.
“It would be good for OpenAI to have every American underwriting them,” Samuel Hammond, Director of Artificial Intelligence Policy at the Foundation for American Innovation, told me. “But in America’s political context, we’re likely to get a corrupted version of a state enterprise that is used for personal enrichment and the partisan motives of whoever’s in charge.”
The case for having a little communism, as a treat
Although Trump’s (reported) version of a public wealth fund seems to invite more risks than benefits, this would not necessarily be true of all such funds.
As a general concept, combating AI-induced inequality by increasing public ownership of corporations has much to recommend it.
Artificial intelligence could greatly increase investors’ share of national income at workers’ expense: If companies replace much of their high-skill workforce with AI, their shareholders could reap the benefits, even as white-collar laborers lose their jobs and bargaining power.
And if the technology truly takes off, generating an explosively productive economy run by software and robots instead of people, the AI giants could end up harvesting profits of mind-bending scale.
At the very least, this is what a lot of investors are seemingly betting on. Despite myriad economic headwinds, stock prices are hovering near record highs, due largely to the sky-high valuations of AI stocks. Meanwhile, Anthropic and OpenAI’s impending initial public offerings are expected to be among the biggest in history, and Musk could soon become a trillionaire.
The government could seek to share this wealth through traditional tax and transfer policies: If investors and tech firms are raking in cash, Congress can raise rates on capital gains, inheritances, and corporate income, then use the proceeds to fund more generous social programs or cash benefits for ordinary Americans.
Conventional taxes are surely part of the solution. As an approach to redistributing business income, however, a public (or “social”) wealth fund has some advantages over corporate taxes.
The corporate income tax applies only to the profits a company reports, which firms have considerable latitude and incentive to minimize. Large enterprises spend vast sums of money each year on finding innovative ways to defer or relocate their profits, so as to reduce their liabilities. The government then must dedicate its own resources to auditing these practices. This system not only enables corporations to weasel out of their obligations but also generates tremendous waste: All the skilled labor and entrepreneurial energy currently devoted to tax avoidance could otherwise be deployed towards creating actual value for consumers.
A public wealth fund circumvents these problems. Suppose that, instead of taxing corporate profits at 25 percent, the government required each firm to hand over newly issued shares equal to 25 percent of its total stock. From then on, whenever the company paid a dividend or bought back shares, the government would automatically collect a quarter of the payout. With this approach, a business’s profits have nowhere to hide: A company can shift its earnings to a subsidiary in Dublin or a mailbox in Singapore. Regardless, if that corporation wants to reward its shareholders, Uncle Sam will get his cut. And even if the company hoards its cash, when its operations get more profitable, its stock will rise — and the government’s portfolio will gain value.
Separately, a public wealth fund could have political advantages over traditional tax-and-transfer programs. Once voters get accustomed to the idea that they collectively own a share of their society’s financial wealth, dividends paid out of those assets may be seen more as an entitlement than a handout.
The Alaska Permanent Fund is a case in point. In the 1970s, Alaska used royalties on its oil resources to seed a financial fund owned by all its residents in common. This year, it will pay out $1,200 to each Alaskan. Critically, despite Alaska’s conservative bent — and Americans’ general skepticism toward unconditional cash welfare — the permanent fund is overwhelmingly popular among Alaskans, and no serious effort has been made to restrict eligibility for dividends.
“There’s this notion that we all own this,” Matt Bruenig, founder of the People’s Policy Project and a leading advocate for social wealth funds, said. “So, there’s this attitude of: Maybe I disapprove of you or speculate that you’re going to blow your dividend on a snow machine or whatever. But it’s not my business. It’s your money.”
It’s possible that this consensus reflects the particular origins of Alaska’s fund: The idea that everyone has some entitlement to their state’s oil reserves — which no human being brought into existence — may be more intuitive than the notion that we all deserve a share of corporate profits writ large.
Yet American companies’ value derives in large part from inherited technologies, knowledge, and institutions that no living person created — as well as public goods that all US workers and taxpayers help to sustain.
And artificial intelligence may make the social origins of private profits more readily apparent: As Bernie Sanders recently noted, when AI generates useful code, images, or writing, it does so by synthesizing vast corpuses of data that humanity collectively produced.
Granted, America would probably screw this up
To be sure, a broad social wealth fund would present some of the same risks as the rumored Trump-Altman proposal.
Although a fund that invested in all corporations would be less likely to fuel government favoritism towards select firms or industries, such a policy would still align the government’s interests with those of corporate shareholders: Any new regulation that reduced the corporate sector’s profitability — whether by increasing its labor costs, environmental responsibilities, or some other mechanism — would simultaneously reduce the government’s revenue and potentially, voters’ dividend payments. Some on the left oppose social wealth funds on these grounds.
And yet, the government already has a stake in corporate profitability: When firms earn less profit, they pay less in taxes. A public wealth fund might make this reality more apparent. But the alignment of interest between the state and corporate shareholders is inherent in capitalism. And democratic governments have nonetheless constrained businesses’ profits in myriad ways, for better and worse.
This said, a public wealth fund would undoubtedly risk centralizing economic power and thus, abetting corruption: The government could theoretically leverage its status as a mega-shareholder to micro-manage the internal operations of private businesses. A world in which the Trump administration and its allies exercised influence over every corporate news outlet — rather than just some — would be less than favorable for democratic freedom.
This threat is also manageable in principle. One approach would be to simply have the public wealth fund hold exclusively nonvoting shares, which would limit the government’s role in corporate decisionmaking. Another would be to establish transparent, technocratic, and bipartisan rules for how the public wealth fund will exercise its voice in corporate affairs, as Norway has already done for its own fund.
Of course, many things are possible in principle but not in today’s United States. A rule-bound, universal social wealth fund might help ordinary Americans share in the fruits of AI-fueled economic growth. A voluntary partnership between the Trump administration and select AI firms, by contrast, seems more likely to help the president’s favorite companies limit their investors’ downside risks.
If so, Trump’s wealth fund would be less of a bold reform for unprecedented times than a new spin on an age-old tradition: Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
Tech
Scanwheel: A Pocket-Sized POV TV

When you hear the word TV, you probably think of a big LED screen, maybe even the old CRT TVs, but in either case it’s something large and fairly complicated. However, thanks to the persistence of vision, it doesn’t have to be. In this handheld-sized project from [Ancient], the Scanwheel is born, a miniature mechanical TV that uses a spinning disk and some LEDs to produce an image.
The electronics of the Scanwheel are pretty straightforward. The smarts come from a Raspberry Pi Pico, an A4988 motor driver, a couple of LEDs, and a small 21-02485 stepper motor. The Raspberry Pi Pico is used to command the motor speed as well as coordinate the LEDs to turn on at the right time. The case is 3D printed; the base includes space for the various support electronics as well as some small light baffles to ensure the LEDs don’t bleed over outside their intended area. The top of the case is a disk that includes 20 small holes spaced evenly around the perimeter at varying heights, allowing light to only leave the disk when one of these holes is in front of the LEDs.
When you put all these pieces together, spin the motor up to roughly 900 RPM, and turn the LEDs on in a precise order, you end up with a really cool result: a miniature TV. And due to the five different LEDs in this build, you actually have a color 20×20 pixel display in the center and, on either side of that, two more 20×20 black-and-white displays capable of showing different images. Thanks [Ancient] for sharing this awesome build that takes advantage of the persistence of vision effect to create a unique display. Be sure to check out the video below as well as the instructions on how to build your own. And if you enjoy this sort of thing, check out some of our other persistence-of-vision projects as well.
Tech
Yeast Turns Sugar Into Liquid Power in a Paintball Bottle

Yeast spends its days chewing through sugar and splitting the leftovers into alcohol and carbon dioxide. Most people chasing homemade ethanol treat the second half of that reaction as pure waste and let the gas drift away. One maker decided the gas was too useful to ignore and set out to trap every molecule, dry it, chill it, and pack it into the same kind of high-pressure bottles that drive paintball markers and soda siphons.
The numbers appear almost too clean, since 4 kilograms of ordinary sugar dissolved in 14 liters of water already gives a solution that is nearly 22% sugar. If the yeast performs its job and converts everything, the process should result in little more than 2 kg of CO2. That’s enough liquid to fill nearly four 20-ounce paintball cylinders. The problem is that the gas comes out of the fermenter wet and diluted, making the first job (gathering it) difficult, as does maintaining the pressure up and preventing air from entering the system.
Sale
Airmoto Tire Inflator Portable Air Compressor for Cars, Bikes and Bicycles
- QUICK & ACCURATE: Built with the highest quality materials, Airmoto is a portable tire inflator for car, trucks, SUVs, motorcycles, and bicycles…
- AUTO SHUT OFF: Use the “+” and “-” control buttons on the Airmoto to easily select your desired pressure, simply connect the air hose to your…
- MAIN HIGHLIGHTS: Easily change between PSI, kPa, BAR, and KG/CM pressure units with a push of a button; Easy to read large LCD; Digital Tire Pressure…
A 5-gallon water jug serves as a fermentation tank. The carbon dioxide is routed out via an airlock tube and into a recycled water-filter canister. The works is stuffed with silica-gel beads, which reduces moisture slightly, but we later discovered that the dew point remains too high, causing ice to form inside the valves. The next step is to transfer the gas to a beach ball. It takes a few days, but the ball eventually fills up with hundreds of gallons of CO2. It serves the purpose of providing some extra room to keep the pressure near the proper level while the yeast is still active.

The major issue is turning the squishy substance into liquid. At room temperature, the CO2 must be compressed to roughly 64bar before it can condensate. The problem is that standard shop compressors can only reach a fraction of that capacity. The solution is to simply leave it in the air box. To cool a copper coil, a DIY system makes use of propylene as a refrigerant. This lowers the temperature to roughly -33 degrees Celsius and reduces the condensation pressure to about 13 bar absolute, which is well within the capabilities of a severely modified oil-less air compressor with its over-pressure cut-out switch disabled.

That copper coil is a 2-inch pipe, approximately 2 feet long, with a thinner copper coil within to convey the propylene. The CO2 from the beach ball enters at the top, meets the chilly surface, and condenses into a liquid that gathers at the bottom. A second coil (the same as the first) is housed in a 96% ethanol-lined thermos. A paintball tank sits in that bath, keeping the metal cool. Once some liquid has accumulated in the coil, a valve opens and the liquid flows into the chilled tank.

An typical oil-free compressor can move the gas, but only at a very sluggish rate; at 17 bar, it moves like a snail. Switching to a refrigerated compressor provides the necessary pressure, 400 psi or greater, and reduces fill time to 10 or 15 minutes. But now we have a new problem: oil separation. Any lubricant that gets into the tank degrades the purity. Then there’s water, which still freezes inside the tank valve while we pump it out, and this can jam the nozzle until the metal heats up again.

After filling the bottle to capacity, the scales read 1312 grams with the valve still connected. When the contents were drained, 974 grams remained, indicating that 338 grams of liquid carbon dioxide had been trapped inside. The container wasn’t even full to the brim, but that liquid was unmistakable, and when that valve was opened quickly, the temperature of the tank dropped to the point where it iced over. If you discharge it completely and quickly, you could bring it down to the temperature of dry ice.

That small charge of ours already has some substantial practical power behind it. By connecting it to a short-stroke pneumatic actuator, he was able to elevate the back end of a full-size pickup approximately 200 millimeters off the ground. The same gas, linked to a vane motor, was able to power a small generator for a few minutes, but you can probably predict where this is going: the intense chill that comes in as the liquid boils away causes the pressure to drop and the motor to turn off.
[Source]
Tech
Most accelerators make startups worse. What do the good ones do?
Every accelerator makes a version of the same offer: capital, mentorship, a network, three months of support, and materially better odds of survival. Evidence suggests that little of it actually works.
In April, Youn Baek and Deepak Hegde of NYU Stern published a working paper through the National Bureau of Economic Research examining nearly 750,000 American startups across 329 programs. Between 60 and 80 percent of accelerators, they found, leave the companies that join them worse off than if they had never applied. A smaller group does the opposite, raising funding, growth and exit rates by a wide margin. Among them, Y Combinator, Techstars and Endless Frontier Labs.
The study establishes which programs work, but it does not explain why. For that, we asked founder and product-market fit expert Yann Goarin.
Goarin spent a decade at Google and YouTube, where he launched more than twenty products in Europe and the United States, and has since led product and marketing at several venture-backed startups. He founded Zag Labs in 2023, an advisory firm that has helped more than a hundred early-stage companies go to market and accelerate their path to product-market fit. He developed the “PMF System”, a method that treats product-market fit as a problem-solving process rather than an event or a vibe. He is currently Founder in Residence at AAXIS, where he leads the enterprise technology firm’s venture-building work. He also mentors and judges at five accelerator programs across the US (Techstars, gener8tor, FoundersBoost, Expert Dojo, and USC’s Iovine and Young Academy), which gives him a unique perspective on how different programs support their founders.
Most accelerators take equity in exchange for a check and three months of support, and their return depends on whether a few companies in each cohort raise at scale or exit. What they offer founders is leverage in several forms: capital, introductions to investors and customers, brand recognition, and knowledge.
Like top universities, the best accelerators attract and select the best founders. Even so, the odds of success are very low. Building a category-defining, venture-backed company is incredibly difficult, and luck and timing decide a great deal of it. But it is not magic. There is a method to the madness, and that method, Goarin claims, is either not taught or not taught well.
Research shows that knowledge is the form of leverage that appears to matter most. Susan Cohen, Benjamin Hallen and Christopher Bingham, who spent years studying the original American accelerator programs, found that where accelerators do improve their companies, the primary driver is what those companies learned inside them. But it is also the hardest to scale.
Goarin remembers one client engagement, a seed-stage AI startup that had built a video production platform. Its founders had come through one of the world’s most selective accelerators. It raised $4 million and within twelve months passed $1.2 million in annual recurring revenue. However, churn was running above 30 percent. The response was to sell harder and build faster, adding features as customers asked for them, and investors supported that on the view that revenue was the number that mattered most.
What the founders failed to realize was that the three segments they were selling to (small marketing agencies, independent video creators, and boutique production companies) were not a cohesive market. While they appeared to need faster and cheaper video production, they differed in how much video they produced, how polished it had to be, how it fit in their workflow, and where it was distributed. The product tried to stretch across all three, and served none of them well. Customers left faster than sales could replace them. After cutting half the team and pivoting, they failed to secure a bridge round and ran out of runway.
Goarin came in near the end, too late to change the outcome. “I assumed that founders coming out of a program like that would be better at testing their assumptions and diagnosing their issues. I was wrong. They were just as clueless as most of the others I advise.”
Around that time he started mentoring at Techstars. That’s where he saw an opportunity to address the problem at scale. From inside a program, it becomes clear how knowledge actually reaches founders, and what never does.
The programs that do teach tend to teach in fragments: a product expert teaches product, a sales executive covers sales, someone who has raised four rounds helps with fundraising. Founders are expected to assemble them into a working company. Most fail. There is something odd in that, viewed from outside. Accelerators and venture funds spend enormous effort on selection, screening thousands of applicants to find the few worth backing, and then just hope they figure it out.
What goes untaught is product-market fit itself, i.e., the correct assembly of these fragmented pieces that ultimately leads to widespread demand for something people badly need, delivered profitably every time. There are two reasons it does not appear on syllabuses. Product-market fit is not understood as a discipline in its own right, so there is no settled body of practice to teach from. And the mentorship model recruits subject matter experts by function, so PMF, which sits between and over the functions, isn’t owned by anybody. Until now.
What Goarin teaches in these programs runs end-to-end, and his objective is straightforward: avoid building something nobody wants.
“Accelerators give founders access and funding, and of course that matters,” says Goarin. “But where they can have an even bigger impact is teaching first-time founders to operate like second-time founders. That means going beyond the surface-level material and breaking down the mechanics of startups.”
User experience went through the same thing. Usability testing, information architecture and interaction design were practiced separately for years before the field recognized them as one discipline and created roles for people who worked across all of them. Naming it is what made it possible to teach.
The case for teaching product-market fit as its own subject is getting stronger. As technology levels the playing field on building and execution, what separates companies is judgment: Is this problem worth solving? Is this the right customer segment? Can I deliver my solution repeatably and profitably? Is it time to pivot? None of those questions can be answered well without knowing what to look at, and that is what Goarin focuses on.
“In the early days only three things matter,” Goarin claims. “Speed of learning, speed of decision-making, speed of execution. A startup is a learning machine before it is anything else, and learning is the part founders struggle with the most. Building is fast and cheap now, so the temptation is to ship something and see if it sticks. But that’s how you end up with a product in search of a problem. That’s how you end up in pivot hell.”
His work has been expanding. He was a Lead Mentor at Techstars for the Spring 2025 and Spring 2026 cohorts and a judge in Mentor Magic, the program’s week of back-to-back mentoring and evaluation sessions. He has advised two gener8tor cohorts and judged USC’s Venture Showcase. He is in discussions with other top programs in the United States and Europe.
Top accelerator entry requirements have been rising. Joshua Lu, who runs Speedrun, told TechCrunch this year that because AI has made building and testing so much faster, the program now expects market validation or early traction before it will admit a company. That created a new market of programs beneath the accelerators. The best of them are focusing on education, and have invested accordingly. FoundersBoost, one of the world’s best pre-accelerators, brought Goarin in to strengthen its programming and asked him to teach its last two cohorts.
The gap is about to matter more. AI is accelerating a trend already underway, in which smaller and smaller teams, working alongside swarms of agents, can perform like much larger companies. That does not reduce the value of knowing what to build. Rather, it concentrates it. Judgment, pattern recognition, knowing what to focus on and when, the confidence to make a decision and move: these have always been the unfair advantage, but are ever more critical in the AI age.
“Fundraising used to be something most founders didn’t understand,” says Goarin. “Now every program teaches it. Product-market fit is more complex, but it is a subject, and I expect it will be taught the same way before long.”
Baek and Hegde could not say what separates the accelerators that work from the ones that do not. If the answer is what they teach, the programs that work it out first will be the ones worth applying to.
Tech
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: a bang-for-your-buck 4K security camera with local storage
Why you can trust TechRadar
We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit: One-minute review
The TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit is a feature-packed 4K outdoor security camera that delivers many of the perks usually reserved for pricier models, including solar charging, pan-and-tilt coverage, color night vision and local microSD storage.
That last feature means you won’t need to pay for a subscription for video playback and download, but there are still some great (but non-essential) features in the paid Tapocare subscription, especially if you plan to expand your home’s security with more than a single camera.
The Tapo app is also easy to use, and the C660 Kit will slot in alongside other Tapo smart home gear like lights, plugs and more to form its own smart home ecosystem. On the other hand, if you have other smart devices in the mix and would prefer a hub to control them all, Alexa has the strongest support, while Google Home only works with voice commands and video streaming to smart displays and TVs. There’s no native support for Apple HomeKit.
Latest Videos FromTechRadar
While it doesn’t necessarily stand out in a crowded market with its design, the white casing looks sleek and stylish, and the IP65 waterproof rating means the C660 Kit is dust-tight and can withstand low-pressure water jets from any direction (aka rain, splashes or hose spray).
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: Price and availability
- Starts at $169.99 / £179.99 / AU$299 for a single camera unit
- Available in multipacks of 2, 3 and 4-camera bundles
- Optional Tapocare subscription plans start at $3.49 / £2.99 / AU$3.99 per month
The Tapo C660 Kit costs $169.99 / £179.99 / AU$299 for a single camera unit, although multipacks of 2-, 3- and 4-camera kits are available either as set bundles or as part of a build-your-own package option directly from Tapo as well as through third-party retailers like Amazon.
While you may not need a subscription package, especially if you use a single camera unit, Tapocare might well be worthwhile for some users. It offers cloud storage, extended video clip history for up to 30 days and enhanced notifications, with plans starting at $3.49 / £2.99 / AU$3.99 per month for one camera on the Basic Tapocare tier. Prices increase as you add more cameras.
You can also buy the camera on its own without the solar panel under the TP-Link Tapo C560WS name for $99.99 / £109.99 / AU$199.
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: Specs
|
Price |
$169.99 / £179.99 / AU$299 |
|
Megapixels |
8MP |
|
Resolution |
4K / 3840 x 2160 pixels |
|
Field of view |
105º |
|
Pan/tilt |
360º horizontal rotation, 90º vertical |
|
Storage |
microSD up to 512GB (not included) |
|
Smart home |
Alexa, Google Home, Siri Shortcuts; no HomeKit |
|
Battery |
10,000mAh |
|
Connectivity |
2.4GHz / 5GHz Wi-Fi 4 |
|
IP Rating |
IP65 |
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: Design and installation
- Sleek black and white color scheme
- Straightforward installation with easy-to-follow instructions
- Recommended mounting height is between 2.5m and 3m (8-10 feet)
The Tapo C660 Kit has a sleek white plastic body with black accents around the lens, with IP65 rating for dust ingress protection and resistance to low-pressure water jets from any direction. This means water from rain, splashes or hose spray will be fine, but it won’t withstand immersion and pressure washing.
The solar panel is just the right size relative to the camera — it isn’t small and subtle by any means and it’s definitely noticeable once installed, but it isn’t too imposing either. As mentioned above, there is a rubber flap underneath the camera lens concealing the power button, a reset button and a microSD card slot.
Installing the Tapo C660 Kit is straightforward thanks to the easy-to-follow instructions included in the box. You start by drilling holes where you want to mount the base plate, then slot the camera in. The solar panel is screwed on top, then plugged into the camera’s USB-C port located on the bottom.
It’s worth taking some time to think about where you want the camera placed before you install it, though. While the Tapo C660 Kit can pan and tilt the camera, getting the full view of an entire space isn’t guaranteed if it’s mounted too low since it doesn’t tilt upward. TP-Link recommends mounting it between 2.5m and 3m (8-10 feet) and in a location where the solar panel gets the most sunlight throughout the year.
TP-Link also recommends that the camera shouldn’t point at swaying trees and other moving objects like vehicles and pedestrians to prevent an avalanche of notifications, but if it’s unavoidable, the C660 lets you set motion detection zones via the app to reduce or minimize notifications of movement within those zones.
One thing to note about the installation is that the camera has a manual power button tucked away beneath a flap under the lens. Unlike other security cameras that power up automatically when plugged into a power source (like the solar panel or a USB-C cable), this button needs to be switched on before mounting (especially when it’s in a hard-to-reach height) and pairing with the Tapo app.
Pairing the camera to the app is quick and straightforward, with only a few setup options at the beginning, like Wi-Fi connection type (2.4GHz for longer range or 5GHz for better video streaming quality, both using the Wi-Fi 4 standard), assigning the camera’s location and even the icon you want displayed in the Tapo app home screen.
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: Software and smart home support
- Tapo app is intuitive and easy to use
- Alexa has full support, while Google Home is limited
- Motion detection zones move with the camera instead of a fixed area
TP-Link’s Tapo C660 Kit natively integrates with the Tapo smart home app, allowing the camera to slot into any existing Tapo smart home ecosystem that might include lights, plugs, switches, robot vacuums, door locks and more.
If you have devices from other brands and use a smart assistant to consolidate them into one interface, the camera supports Amazon Alexa and Google Home. Alexa supports both live footage playback and voice commands, while Google Home only supports voice controls and video streaming on select devices. Apple HomeKit isn’t supported, but alerts and automations can still be done through Siri via iOS shortcuts enabled through the Tapo app.
The app works well, with an intuitive interface using tiles to show all your Tapo devices, with dedicated tabs for the different gadget categories (like cameras, vacuums and ‘Smart’ for automations). You can play the live feed and adjust settings by tapping on the tile for the camera (or cameras if you have more).
Camera settings include two-way audio, a toggle for the built-in spotlight and adjustments for panning and tilting the camera. There’s also an option to ‘save’ a set camera position via ‘Viewpoints’ and easily access those positions without manually adjusting each time. Those views can be used for automations, too.
To try out the feature, I set the camera to monitor the rear of the house instead of the driveway and front stairs for just a few hours during the day, and it would activate as scheduled each time. Patrol Mode also lets you move the camera between those set positions, but the Tapo app warns that this mode may impact the camera motor’s longevity.
One annoyance I found with the Viewpoints feature was that the motion detection zone that I set also moved with the camera and there’s no option to lock it to a specific spot. Thankfully, I didn’t have to move my camera too often for that to personally impact me, but I can see it being inconvenient for some users.
Adding to the motion tracking is a setting subject detection like person, pet or vehicle, and it can also be set for different motion detection zones as well.
TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit review: Performance
- Crisp 4K image quality from 8MP lens
- Built-in spotlight provides color at night
- Solar panel keeps the unit running 24/7
The Tapo C660 Kit captures videos through its 8MP lens with 4K (3840 x 2160 pixels) resolution, with a frame rate of 15 or 20 frames per second. The recorded video clips were crisp and detailed when viewing live or when playing back previously recorded footage. It was clear enough for me to see details like faces, vehicle license plates and larger text from further away, while the 18x digital zoom provided more detail than lower-resolution cameras.
It managed to retain detail in brighter areas and the video wasn’t washed out, like when direct sunlight was hitting the driveway. There’s built-in wide dynamic range to prevent overexposure in bright sunlight or underexposure in dark shadows.
Motion tracking was responsive, and the C660 Kit could track me moving when I was walking quickly, running or cycling (although I wouldn’t necessarily call myself a fast runner or cyclist to try and avoid the tracking). I also liked that the camera automatically reverts to the original position after detecting movement, so I didn’t have to adjust it manually as some security cameras require you to do.
At night, the f/1.6 aperture takes in enough light to provide a clear image, and the built-in spotlight adds more low-light visibility. There’s also an infrared sensor as an alternative to color night vision. While I found both modes were able to detect movement almost instantly, the image quality isn’t as crisp as daytime mode, but it was still decent enough to be clear and fully visible.
The built-in microphone produced clear audio and was loud enough for a conversation even when I wasn’t at home.
The solar panel kept the battery topped up, with the camera almost always running at 100% apart from some overcast days. It was only when I switched on 24/7 Capture (which frankly most people won’t need) that the solar panel struggled to keep the camera charged, and I eventually had to bring it indoors (it can be removed from its base plate easily) for a top-up via a USB-C cable.
In a different test, I tried running the camera without the solar panel plugged in, and the camera ran uninterrupted for just over 2 weeks before it needed charging.
The Tapo C660 Kit isn’t necessarily the cheapest 4K security camera, but having local storage via a microSD card makes it a great value option compared to others that require a subscription to access cloud storage for recorded footage. It supports up to 512GB, though you’ll need to purchase the microSD card separately as it doesn’t come with one in the box.
TP-Link says that’s enough for around 16 complete days of recording, which is plenty for most people. Local storage means you can also back up those recordings to your home computer or another drive for redundancy. The Tapo app also lets you password-protect the microSD card for an extra layer of security.
Accessing footage from the card is easy through the app, and notifications reliably link to recordings with almost no delay after the camera detects motion. Video playback is also very smooth in the app. If you prefer cloud storage, you can opt for the aforementioned Tapocare subscription and choose a plan based on the number of connected cameras you plan to have.
Other features in Tapocare include 30 days of encrypted video storage for events, rich notifications and video summaries.
Should I buy the TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit?
|
Attribute |
Notes |
Score |
|
Value |
You get some premium features like 4K resolution and 360º views for an affordable price, while on-device storage means you don’t have to pay for a subscription. |
5/5 |
|
Design |
It features a clean, sleek white design that’s relatively sturdy, and the solar panel that helps to extend its battery life is a proportionate fit. |
5/5 |
|
Software |
The Tapo app is clean and intuitive, with plenty of adjustments to fine-tune the settings. Alexa has the strongest support for smart home integrations, with Google Home at a distant second. |
4/5 |
|
Performance |
It captures crisp 4K footage well, and also performs reasonably well in low-light situations thanks to a built-in spotlight. |
4/5 |
Buy it if
Don’t buy it if
How I tested the TP-Link Tapo C660 Kit
I installed the Tapo C660 Kit to a porch post on my property for a few months to get a sense of both its recording capabilities and whether its solar panel would keep the camera’s battery charged.
I tested all the settings, but had the alarm and spotlight mostly turned off to avoid disturbing neighbors, only doing one-off tests to see if they perform as advertized. I would also check captured footage whenever I got a push notification.
The smart home integrations were tested with smart displays (a 2nd-gen Google Nest Hub and an Amazon Echo Show 5) in addition to the Alexa and Google Home mobile apps.
First reviewed July 2026
Tech
Man gets six years for hacking 750 women’s Snapchat accounts
An Illinois man was sentenced on Tuesday to 76 months in prison and three years of supervised release for hacking the Snapchat accounts of over 750 women to steal nude photos, which he later traded or sold online.
After being charged in December, 26-year-old defendant Kyle Svara admitted in February to having used various social engineering tactics to phish Snapchat access codes from over 750 women.
Between May 2020 and February 2021, he targeted more than 4,500 victims while posing as a representative of Snap Inc and using anonymized phone numbers.
After stealing the victims’ credentials, Svara accessed approximately 517 women’s Snapchat accounts without permission to download nude or semi-nude photos and activated two-factor authentication to lock them out of the compromised accounts.

The investigators also found that Svara distributed child sexual abuse material (CSAM), finding approximately 530 images and 600 videos depicting CSAM in his Mega account.
“When Svara was interviewed by investigators, he falsely stated that he did not know anything about hacking Snapchat,” the Justice Department said in February.
“Additionally, he falsely stated that had no interest in child pornography and had never actively sought out or accessed child sexual abuse material (CSAM). Contrary to these statements, the defendant collected, distributed and solicited CSAM.”
According to court documents, he also advertised his “services” online, trading the stolen images, offering to “get into girls snap accounts,” and asking potential clients to reach out through the Kik encrypted messaging app.

Steve Waithe, a former Northeastern University track and field coach and one of his clients, hired Svara to hack the Snapchat accounts of students at Northeastern and members of the women’s track and field and soccer teams.
After being found guilty of targeting at least 128 women and stealing thousands of explicit photos from more than 100 women, Waithe was sentenced in March 2024 to five years in prison for cyber fraud, cyberstalking, and sextortion.
Between paid hacking jobs, Svara also independently hacked into the accounts of many women in Plainfield, Illinois (including neighbors, family friends, classmates, his own personal friends), as well as students at Colby College in Waterville, Maine.
Security teams log 54% of successful attacks and alert on just 14%. The rest move through your environment unseen.
The Picus whitepaper shows how breach and attack simulation tests your SIEM and EDR rules so threats stop slipping by detection.
Tech
Some Kids Will Never Think AI Is Cool
Forget cheating on homework and chatbot friends. Some kids are getting in on a new AI trend: thinking it sucks.
In the four years since chatbots went mainstream, and their marketing campaigns went into overdrive, young people have grown increasingly skeptical of the hype around LLMs. Yes, many of them still use the tech for school assignments and companionship, but according to market research firm YPulse, 37 percent of teens aged 13 to 17 cringe when they see AI content like music and videos, and more than half worry about misinformation and deepfakes.
The polling on youthful AI attitudes shows a great deal of contradiction. Adoption rates are high, with a majority of America’s teens reporting they use chatbots, but enthusiasm is mixed. A recent Pew Research report found that while many teens think AI will be good for them personally, over a fourth of their cohort believe AI will have a negative impact on society in the next 20 years, citing job loss, the decline of critical thinking skills, and environmental impacts as concerns.
Young people typically adopt new consumer technology eagerly, but Melanie Green, a communications professor at the University at Buffalo, says AI is different. This time, the moral panic isn’t coming from older generations—in fact, kids are turned off by the way AI is being pushed on them by adults and tech corporations. They’re also, Green says, “acutely aware that whatever disruption happens, their generation is going to be bearing the brunt of it.”
Ergo, the eye-rolls. On Bluesky, parents bond over their kids’ distrust of AI, with many claiming that their children come home saying “that’s AI” to mean “that’s BS.” On Reddit, educators share that students—even those who use AI—worry about its consequences and can’t stand the art it produces. WIRED spoke to young people, their parents, and their teachers to find out why some kids don’t want to be on the AI bandwagon.
Tech
SpaceX just about nails Starship test flight 13
science
Super Heavy booster had a super heavy landing, but other reusability tech did the trick
The 13th flight of SpaceX’s Starship made it off the launchpad on Friday and ticked off just about everything on the company’s to-do list.
After delays and engine replacements, Elon Musk’s colosso-launcher took to the skies at beer-o’clock on Friday evening – 5:51PM Texas time.
One hour, five minutes and 21 seconds later, Starship made a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean, where it floated after landing.
SpaceX says it was able to gather critical data on the performance of Starship’s heatshield, and that the craft made “a dynamic banking move to mimic the trajectory that future missions returning to Starbase will fly.”
Gathering data on Starship’s heatshield performance will help SpaceX ensure the craft is re-usable. Simulating missions that land at Starbase, SpaceX’s Texas home, builds toward future missions that launch and land at the same facility, speeding turnarounds for re-usable hardware.
The test flight also saw SpaceX test a new routine for de-orbiting the Super Heavy booster used to hoist Starship into space. “The booster successfully completed the high thrust portion of the boostback burn with all 33 engines, the first time with a Super Heavy V3, before ending the burn early,” SpaceX said. “It attempted to relight its engines for the landing burn, with a subset successfully igniting before experiencing a hard splashdown in the Gulf.”
That part of the mission didn’t go perfectly, as SpaceX hoped for a softer landing and more engines lighting to make it possible.
Once Super Heavy and Starship separated, the latter vehicle used its six Raptor engines to reach desired speed and orbit. It then deployed 20 Starlink V3 satellites. SpaceX crew verified the sats worked and half a dozen of them got a look at Starship’s heatshield. While the satellites were functional, SpaceX did not intend them to form part of the Starlink constellation and allowed them to re-enter Earth’s atmosphere. Or as the company’s mission report put it, the satellites “demised upon reentry approximately 20 minutes after deployment.”
Starship performed one more trick on its way back to Earth, by starting one of its Raptor engines while coasting through space. The success of that test again demonstrated tech that will be needed for future missions, in this case flights that push Starship into sustainable orbit – or allow it to reach a trajectory capable of reaching the Moon, as NASA envisages will be the case for future Artemis missions that land humans on Earth’s permanent natural satellite.
SpaceX boss Elon Musk said he hopes the next Starship test flight will see the Super Heavy booster caught by robot arms at Starbase, another step towards improved reusability and turnaround times between flights. ®
Tech
LG StanbyME 2 Max Rolls In With a 32-inch 4K Touchscreen TV and a Better Reason to Follow You Around
Televisions spent decades getting larger, thinner and increasingly difficult to move without a second person, a furniture dolly and a brief argument about who scratched the wall.
LG took a different approach with StanbyME: put the display on wheels, add a battery and let it follow you between rooms without requiring an electrician or a marriage counselor.
The original idea was clever, but the 27-inch StanbyME 2 still felt more like an oversized tablet than a television. LG’s new StanbyME 2 Max moves the concept considerably closer to being a legitimate secondary TV with a 32-inch 4K touchscreen, improved wireless connectivity and the same $1,299.99 launch price as its smaller predecessor.
That is still a lot of money for 32 inches of LCD real estate, but conventional televisions cannot follow you into the kitchen, rotate into portrait mode for a workout or detach from their stands when you need the screen on a desk.
Bigger Screen, Sharper Picture

The most important upgrade is the display itself. StanbyME 2 Max increases the screen size from 27 to 32 inches while jumping from QHD resolution to full 4K UHD at 3840 x 2160 pixels. It remains an edge-lit LCD panel with a native 60Hz refresh rate, so nobody should confuse it with one of LG’s premium OLED TVs. Mobility, not reference-level black performance, is the reason this exists.
LG has equipped the new model with its Alpha 8 AI Processor Gen3, including AI Picture Pro, AI Super Upscaling and Dynamic Tone Mapping Pro. Dolby Vision HDR is supported, while Dolby Atmos and LG’s AI Sound Pro processing can create a virtual 11.1.2-channel presentation through the built-in side-firing 2.0-channel speaker system.
A 32-inch television is never going to replace a proper home theater system, but that is not really the assignment. StanbyME 2 Max is intended for recipes, exercise videos, casual streaming, gaming, video calls and those moments when somebody else has taken control of the main television and refuses to surrender the remote.
More Tablet Without Becoming an Actual Tablet

The touchscreen can rotate 90 degrees in either direction for landscape or portrait viewing, tilt up to 25 degrees and swivel as much as 90 degrees. The display also detaches from the rolling stand and can be placed on a table using the included one-click tabletop stand. A small magnetic remote clips directly to the enclosure, which should reduce the likelihood of it disappearing into the sofa cushions within the first 48 hours.
The screen weighs approximately 12.3 pounds on its own, while the complete display and rolling stand weigh 44.8 pounds. In other words, roll the complete unit between rooms and save the lifting for when the display is detached.

Battery life has increased slightly from four to a claimed 4.5 hours, which should cover two average-length films or approximately one modern streaming drama whose director was never told that editing exists. The screen can also be powered or charged over USB-C, including through a compatible external battery.
Connectivity represents another meaningful improvement. The previous StanbyME 2 was saddled with Wi-Fi 5, which felt dated on a premium wireless display. The Max moves to Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.3, while supporting Apple AirPlay, Google Cast and mobile-device screen mirroring. LG also includes HDMI, USB and dual USB-C connectivity, with USB-C DisplayPort Alt Mode supported for compatible computers and mobile devices.

LG’s webOS platform provides access to streaming applications and more than 400 free LG Channels in the United States. Gallery+ can turn the display into a mobile digital-art frame, while Mood Maker, touchscreen board games and the generative AI-powered Let’s Draw application provide something to do when another season of television about wealthy people behaving badly begins to feel repetitive.
There is an important distinction, however: StanbyME 2 Max runs a television operating system rather than iPadOS, Android or Windows. It offers touch controls and tablet-like flexibility, but it is not a general-purpose tablet capable of running every mobile productivity or creative application.
LG Is No Longer Rolling Alone

Samsung’s closest rival is the 27-inch Movingstyle, which offers a QHD touchscreen, 120Hz refresh rate, HDR10+, Dolby Atmos, a detachable display and approximately three hours of battery life for a $1,199.99 MSRP. Samsung has the advantage for gaming and faster motion, but LG provides a larger 4K screen, longer battery life and Dolby Vision for an additional $100.
Samsung also sells the 32-inch Movingstyle M7 for $699.99. It provides a 4K display and rolling stand at nearly half the price of the LG, but it requires continuous AC power and lacks both touchscreen operation and the ability to detach the display for portable use. It is closer to a smart monitor on wheels than a battery-powered personal screen.
The more serious threat might be the Hisense S6 FollowMe, which combines a 32-inch 4K touchscreen with an anti-glare panel, Wi-Fi 6, an integrated camera and a claimed battery life of up to 10 hours. Hisense announced U.S. availability for May 2026, but its official launch materials still did not provide pricing, which is an effective way to win a specifications comparison without asking anyone to open their wallet.
What makes the StanbyME 2 Max different is not any single feature. It is the combination of a 32-inch 4K touchscreen, detachable battery operation, a mature smart TV platform, Dolby Vision and Atmos support, extensive wired and wireless connectivity and confirmed U.S. pricing in one relatively polished product.
The Bottom Line
At $1,299.99, the LG StanbyME 2 Max will never win a dollars-per-inch contest. The same money can purchase a substantially larger conventional 4K TV with better picture quality, greater brightness and possibly enough left over for a soundbar.
That television will not roll next to a treadmill, rotate vertically for a recipe, detach for use on a desk or operate for more than four hours without an electrical outlet.
LG has addressed the two most obvious limitations of the previous model by increasing the screen size and resolution, while Wi-Fi 6 fixes a networking specification that should never have been missing from a premium wireless display.
The edge-lit panel, 60Hz refresh rate and high price still require some perspective. This is not the television for someone building a dedicated home theater or chasing premium HDR performance. It makes far more sense for apartments, bedrooms, kitchens, home offices, workout spaces and households where a flexible secondary screen would actually move throughout the day.
The StanbyME concept is no longer unique, but the 2 Max may be its most convincing execution so far. LG did not reinvent television. It simply gave one better resolution, a battery and permission to leave the living room.
Price & Availability
The LG StanbyME 2 Max, model 32LX6BWGA, is priced at $1,299.99 in the United States. LG opened preorders on June 29, 2026, with initial shipments expected to begin during the week of July 26, 2026.
Where to buy:
Related Reading:
Tech
Apple Upgrade installment program set to go live on Tuesday
Apple Upgrade, the company’s new installment program, will be going live on July 28, coinciding with the ending of sign-ups for the iPhone Upgrade Program.
On July 21, a report surfaced claiming that the iPhone Upgrade Program was on borrowed time, and was due to be replaced. It seems that the replacement, Apple Upgrade, will be arriving very soon.
Posted as part of Sunday’s “Power On” newsletter for Bloomberg, Mark Gurman writes that Apple Upgrade will launch on Tuesday. At the same time, Apple will stop new enrollments for the iPhone Upgrade Program.
Consumers already on the iPhone Upgrade Program can continue to use it, but new plans will not be set up.
While a leasing program at its core, Apple Upgrade differs from the iPhone Upgrade Program in a few ways.
The first big change is that it’s not just limited to iPhones. Consumers will be able to sign up for an iPhone, iPad, Mac, or Apple Watch.
Plans will last 24 or 36 months, depending on the product, and subscribers will be allowed to upgrade early to newer models instead of completing the entire term.
Not every model will be available either, with budget-oriented options like the Apple Watch SE and the MacBook Neo apparently off-limits. Business and education purchases will not be able to use the facility, either.
A second variation from the old program is that there won’t be AppleCare included in the plan. The iPhone Upgrade Program included it as standard, but now consumers have to pick it up separately.
Lastly, the backer of the program is different. The iPhone Upgrade Program was backed by Citizen Bank, but now Apple Upgrade will be handled financially by Klarna.
Tech
NYT Strands hints and answers for Monday, July 27 (game #876)
Looking for a different day?
A new NYT Strands puzzle appears at midnight each day for your time zone – which means that some people are always playing ‘today’s game’ while others are playing ‘yesterday’s’. If you’re looking for Sunday’s puzzle instead then click here: NYT Strands hints and answers for Sunday, July 26 (game #875).
Strands is the NYT’s latest word game after the likes of Wordle, Spelling Bee and Connections – and it’s great fun. It can be difficult, though, so read on for my Strands hints.
Want more word-based fun? Then check out my NYT Connections today and Quordle today pages for hints and answers for those games, and Marc’s Wordle today page for the original viral word game.
SPOILER WARNING: Information about NYT Strands today is below, so don’t read on if you don’t want to know the answers.
Latest Videos FromTechRadar
NYT Strands today (game #876) – hint #1 – today’s theme
What is the theme of today’s NYT Strands?
• Today’s NYT Strands theme is… Let the journey begin
NYT Strands today (game #876) – hint #2 – clue words
Play any of these words to unlock the in-game hints system.
- BRINK
- CHART
- TIME
- STANK
- TICK
- PLAIT
NYT Strands today (game #876) – hint #3 – spangram letters
How many letters are in today’s spangram?
• Spangram has 12 letters
NYT Strands today (game #876) – hint #4 – spangram position
What are two sides of the board that today’s spangram touches?
• First side: left, 8th row
• Last side: right, 8th row
Right, the answers are below, so DO NOT SCROLL ANY FURTHER IF YOU DON’T WANT TO SEE THEM.
NYT Strands today (game #876) – the answers
The answers to today’s Strands, game #876, are…
- PLATFORM
- TRACK
- TICKET
- COUNTER
- KIOSK
- BENCH
- SPANGRAM: TRAINSTATION
- My rating: Easy
- My score: Perfect
Another Spangram First for me today, although it did come in two parts as I saw “station” before making the connection for TRAINSTATION.
From here it was a case of collecting the more obvious railway-related words — PLATFORM, TRACK, TICKET — before connecting the less obvious like KIOSK.
A nice, easygoing start to the week.
Yesterday’s NYT Strands answers (Sunday, July 26, game #875)
- GURU
- MAVEN
- PUNDIT
- EXPERT
- AUTHORITY
- SPECIALIST
- SPANGRAM: BIGBRAIN
What is NYT Strands?
Strands is the NYT’s not-so-new-any-more word game, following Wordle and Connections. It’s now a fully fledged member of the NYT’s games stable that has been running for a year and which can be played on the NYT Games site on desktop or mobile.
I’ve got a full guide to how to play NYT Strands, complete with tips for solving it, so check that out if you’re struggling to beat it each day.
-
Fashion3 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Crypto World6 days agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
NewsBeat6 days agoHow a former Blue Peter presenter stunned America’s Got Talent judges
-
Tech6 days agoSail Virtually Aboard The “Itanic” With IA-64 Emulator
-
Tech6 days ago
Turtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
NewsBeat7 days agoUnregistered fitter used Gas Safe logo on business flyers
-
Tech7 hours agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Business5 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Entertainment6 days agoJohnny Depp’s R-Rated Gothic Cult Classic Gets New Release Ahead of Sydney Sweeney Remake
-
Tech7 days agoWatch Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley discuss the future of surveillance at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026
-
Crypto World4 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
NewsBeat6 days agoShanghai science forum photos show China’s AI and robotics advances in rivalry with US
-
Crypto World7 days agoCircle’s President Sold Over 360,000 Shares, The Filings Explain Why
-
Sports11 hours agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
News Videos4 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Sports3 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
Politics19 hours agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
Fashion3 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
Crypto World6 days agoAndrew Cuomo joins OKX board as crypto exchange expands in U.S.
-
Tech7 days agoThe 35 Best Board Games for Family Game Night





You must be logged in to post a comment Login