When Sam Altman first told her that he’d never let OpenAI go corporate, that what he and his colleagues were building was too powerful to be driven by investors, Catherine Bracy more or less believed him.
Tech
What You’ll Find Inside a Massive Water-Cooled Intel 3000W Power Supply
A 3000W power supply often conjures up images of huge metal boxes with noisy fans pumping air over massive heat sinks, but this Intel reference unit blasts that idea out of the water, or rather keeps it cool, due to a water cooling system that keeps everything nice and clean.
Intel engineers designed this beast of a device for data centers and servers, where squeezing as much power as possible into a small space is the name of the game. It accepts a large 240-volt AC and outputs a reasonable 12 volts DC at up to 250 amps, suitable for 3000 wattage.Water flows through the back of the unit via quick-release fittings, carrying heat away without the need for a noisy internal fan or traditional heat sink fins, and the entire thing remains sealed and silent with no internal moving parts, relying on external coolant to keep things from overheating.
Sale
ASUS ROG Xbox Ally – 7” 1080p 120Hz Touchscreen Gaming Handheld, 3-month Xbox Game Pass Premium…
- XBOX EXPERIENCE BROUGHT TO LIFE BY ROG The Xbox gaming legacy meets ROG’s decades of premium hardware design in the ROG Xbox Ally. Boot straight into…
- XBOX GAME BAR INTEGRATION Launch Game Bar with a tap of the Xbox button or play your favorite titles natively from platforms like Xbox Game Pass…
- ALL YOUR GAMES, ALL YOUR PROGRESS Powered by Windows 11, the ROG Xbox Ally gives you access to your full library of PC games from Xbox and other game…
Inside, things get a little more tricky because the enclosure is a solid black box with no vents to speak of. When the screws are removed, you’ll discover two chunky circuit boards jammed together with a large cold plate crammed in between. The components all push against the cold plate using thermal pads, and the circulating fluid then transports the heat to the outside world. The configuration works well to split chores, with one board handling power factor adjustment on the input side and the other handling the primary DC-DC conversion bit.
Input protection is the first priority, with fuses, surge arrestors, metal oxide varistors, gas discharge tubes, and common-mode chokes all doing their part to keep unpleasant little shocks from the mains supply from causing issues. Following that, bulk capacitors are used to smooth out the rectified line voltage, ensuring that it is not unsteady or unpredictable. The power factor adjustment step, on the other hand, employs a neat technique known as an interleaved totem-pole topology to reduce ripple and enhance efficiency. The GaN transistors in that part are from Texas Instruments and have a reasonable 600 volt rating. They are also fast-switching (which is good) and low-loss, enabling it to achieve the unit’s 80 Plus Platinum certification
The power is subsequently transferred to the phase-shifted full-bridge section on the other board. Silicon carbide MOSFETs are the high-voltage switching components here, paire with a transformer that graciously lowers down the voltage for us. The litz wire on the main side is wound to reduce signal loss as the frequency increases, while synchronous rectifiers on the secondary side work their magic to provide even greater efficiency. The output filtering is then provided by a large inductor and 9000 microfarads of polymer capacitors, all working together to provide a clean 12 volts DC at the output.
Of course, there have to be some control circuits in there somewhere to keep things running smoothly; a Texas Instruments C2000 microcontroller manages the PFC stage, while a PIC24 monitors overall supervision. To keep things nice and safe, there are digital isolators (which are really brilliant, in my opinion) and auxiliary flyback converters that provide standby power as necessary.
Some of the design choices on show here are quite impressive, as the cold plate design allows the unit to chug out a respectable 2500 watts per liter, as that’s a whopping 250 times more power per liter than the average air-cooled supplies, which might only scrape in at around 800 watts per liter, but using advanced semiconductors like GaN and SiC really helps to keep losses to a minimum. However, it’s the water block that still proves essential at full load where losses total around 300 watts.
[Source]
Continue Reading
The Samsung Galaxy Z TriFold is already on its way out. A new report suggests that the company is killing sales for the triple foldable phone just three months after its debut, putting an end to its $2,899 experimental showcase.
But while the Galaxy Z TriFold sales are being halted, it’s apparently not the end of the road for such an ambitious smartphone.
What’s left to unfold?
Amid the TriFold’s reported phase-out, fresh rumors hint that Samsung doesn’t plan on abandoning the concept entirely. It would appear that the brand is doubling down with a better successor, which is slimmer and more refined than the original Z TriFold.
Samsung took feedback on the first-generation TriFold, and the thickness seems to be one of its biggest drawbacks. Early tri-folding designs being bulky isn’t a surprise, considering their multi-hinge structure. But Samsung could make the next version even thinner, and refine the overall form factor to make it more practical for everyday use.
Why thickness matters for tri-fold devices
One of the biggest challenges of any foldable phone is its overall width when folded, which is especially true for a triple-folding design. The multiple folding sections can make the device a lot thicker than standard foldables when folded, which can affect everything from portability to in-hand comfort.
In comparison, the notebook-style and clamshell folding flip phones are more mature in their designs. Even the first-gen Galaxy Fold had its fair share of issues, which were ironed out with each passing generation. So Samsung seems to be making a quicker move to improve the TriFold concept before pushing it further.
The chair starts at $8,995, but that doesn’t include the side table or ottoman. Add those and it costs $10,995. The model pictured above uses Alpaca wool fabric and brings the cost up to $14,995. (There are more than 300 fabrics and colors to choose from, and the swiveling table comes in various woodgrains.) The Herman Miller Eames, of which the Diffrient Lounge also takes inspiration, costs roughly $8,500 today, depending on which leather you choose.
“The Eames is obviously an iconic design—it’s timeless, it’s beautiful—but it’s not something you can work comfortably in for a long time,” Silva says.
.jpg)
Don’t let the Lounge in the name fool you. Silva assures me that every chair the company designs is built with ergonomic comfort in mind, with the adjustable work surface and headrest allowing for different postures. While traditional lounge chairs focus on style, Silva says the Lounge prioritizes comfort. In my brief time on the chair, it indeed felt enveloping and cushy yet supportive. And the mechanical levers made it easy to shift the chair into a more active sitting position or a more relaxing posture, without disrupting the ergonomics with a laptop on the table.
Diffrient had been tinkering with the idea of a lounge chair that could double as a workstation for a long time, Silva says, and believed that technology allowed people to work in different ways.
“The chair acknowledges the fact that creativity and productivity don’t necessarily happen when you’re tied to your desk,” he says. “They happen in different postures; more relaxed or moving around the office, and this chair supports those transitions.”
King recites a famous quote from Diffrient: “The best chair is a bed.” When you sit upright, your weight compresses your spine, but when you lean back, a large portion of that weight goes into the backrest, so when you’re lying down, there’s significantly less pressure on your spine. “Reclining is really healthy,” King says. “He always thought it would be a good way to work.”
Luxe Seat
How does a chair come to cost $15,000? Silva highlights Humanscale’s long-standing approach to simplicity. After all, it’s a hallmark of the original Freedom chair. While the Diffrient Lounge may not look very complex, that’s by design, cleverly masking the engineered mechanical system with clean lines and curves. There’s even some automation in the headrest. If you’re fully reclined and the headrest is in a forward position to support your head, as you come back up, the headrest will automatically go into a neutral position.
Other Folding Phones to Consider
.png)
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 for $1,056: Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip7 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) is a close second to Motorola’s Razr Ultra. I liked the camera quality from Motorola’s latest flip more than Samsung’s, a big win for the Razr, but the Flip7 captures nice photos and offers better video quality, if that’s your thing. Samsung’s latest Flip has a larger front screen, though you still have to jump through a few hoops to make it useful. For example, you need to install an app called Multistar to add any app of your choosing to the cover screen. The phone also has a lackluster battery life, struggling to last a full day; the Razr Ultra still only lasts a day, but I didn’t feel like I had to plug in as much. And it also gets a little too warm for my tastes when it’s under load. It’s a good flip phone, but I prefer Motorola’s 2025 flagship.
-SOURCE-Julian-Chokkattu.jpg){kind=tracking}
Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold for $1,250: The only reason to consider the Pixel 9 Pro Fold right now is if you see it on sale. Google’s Pixel 10 Pro Fold is the newer, better handset. The 9 Pro Fold isn’t as slim or as lightweight as the Galaxy Z Fold7, but it’s still a svelte device with a large front screen that feels like a normal phone. The 8-inch inner screen is excellent, and the triple-camera system delivers great results, though not as great as the Pixel 9 Pro series. Read our Best Pixel Phones guide for more.
.jpg)
Motorola Razr+ (2025) for $700: There is technically a third phone in Motorola’s latest Razr lineup: the Razr+ 2025. However, it’s nearly identical to the Razr+ 2024, with fresh colors and the improved IP48 rating and titanium-reinforced hinge. It sits in an awkward middle ground, though. It’s not as affordable as the standard Razr, which offers a pretty nice experience for the money. But it’s also not as flagship as the Razr Ultra. It is also the only one of the lineup without the ultrawide camera. I usually love telephoto zoom lenses, but ultrawides are so handy on flip phones for group selfies. If you’re considering this model, it’s also worth considering the Razr+ from 2024, as you’ll see some nice discounts on it throughout the year; it just lacks the reinforced hinge and IP48 rating.
.jpg)
Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6 for $899: Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip6 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) from 2024 might be a better buy than Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip7 FE—the new “budget” folding flip phone the company introduced alongside the flagship Flip7 and Fold7. That’s because the Flip7 FE is a reskinned Flip6 with a Samsung Exynos processor instead of a Qualcomm chip. We haven’t tested the FE yet, but you can probably find a decent deal on the Flip6 that might make it a better value than the Flip7 FE. Performance could even be a smidge better.
Xiaomi Mix Flip for $899: Xiaomi’s first flip phone has a lovely design with excellent displays inside and out, long battery life with fast charging, and flagship-level performance, which makes a nice change, as flip phones often have middling specs. It also boasts a solid dual-lens camera, opting for telephoto instead of ultrawide alongside the capable main shooter, which is more useful for most folks. The software lets the party down a little; there’s no IP rating, and it is pricey, but I had fun with this flip phone. —Simon Hill
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.
When I searched online to see if it’s possible to pop popcorn in an air fryer, I ran into a dead end. Some websites say that you can and even encourage air-fried popcorn, while others caution against it. Unable to find a clear answer, I felt it was my duty as a devoted popcorn lover to go straight to the source for us all, which is why I reached out to an actual air fryer manufacturer and professional chefs to get a final answer.
Experts weigh in on air fryer popcorn
I reached out to Ninja, makers of the Ninja Crispi, CNET’s pick for the best air fryer overall. While the air fryer is a versatile appliance that can even roast a whole chicken, it can’t pop popcorn — yet.
Well, technically it can, but that doesn’t mean it should.
“At Ninja, we’re always testing the boundaries of what our technology can do, and popcorn in an air fryer is something our culinary and product development teams have explored. However, we advise against trying to make popcorn in an air fryer,” a Ninja Kitchen representative tells CNET. “Air fryers circulate heat differently than traditional popcorn makers, which means kernels don’t reach the sustained heat needed in the required time.”
Because popcorn is lightweight, Sharniquia White, chef and registered dietitian, explains that if you try to make it in an air fryer, it can fly up into the device’s heating element, get stuck near the fan, burn from uneven airflow and leave you with a frustrating amount of unpopped kernels. All cons, no pros.
Given the safety hazards and unsatisfying results, you’ll want to avoid using an air fryer for popcorn. At least until the technology catches up.
While air fryers such as the Ninja Crispi Pro can roast an entire chicken, they can’t pop popcorn just yet.
The best way to make popcorn, according to pro chefs
Since the air fryer is out for popcorn, I asked my chef sources for their recommendations on making the best popcorn.
White says that the stovetop wins every time if you want a fluffy texture, rich flavor and full expansion of your kernels. She provides these handy instructions for getting the best results:
- Heat 2-3 tablespoons of oil in a large, heavy-bottom pot over medium heat.
- Add 2-3 kernels to test if the oil is hot enough. When they pop, add ½ cup kernels.
- Cover and gently shake the pot occasionally.
- Remove from heat when popping slows.
- You control the oil, the salt and the outcome.
However, if you make popcorn all the time, plant-based chef Shauna McQueen, MS, RD, founder of Food School, recommends purchasing a low-cost pan with a lid you can crank to move the popcorn kernels around.
“The other option is automatic and will self-stir the kernels,” McQueen adds. “I’ve used both and have had to replace both within a few years of use, but find the automatic one most convenient.”
As for the healthiest way to make popcorn…
“If you’re reaching for the air fryer because you want to use less oil, you’re thinking in the right direction,” White says. “However, an inexpensive air popper or a measured stovetop method is more reliable and safer. Popcorn is already a whole-grain, fiber-rich snack. The goal isn’t to eliminate oil entirely; it’s to be intentional about how much you use and what you add.”
Whether you pop it on the stove or buy a device that air-pops your popcorn, it’s best to avoid microwave popcorn. According to McQueen, it may contain additives like TBHQ, which is used to extend the shelf life of processed foods. While the FDA considers it safe in appropriate amounts, it has been linked to potential health issues.
If you want less oil on your popcorn, consider investing in an air popper or being more intentional about the toppings you use.
The healthiest popcorn toppings
If extra flavor is what you’re after, McQueen suggests the following anti-inflammatory toppings: curry powder, cayenne, garlic powder or chili powder. For a cheesy flavor plus B-vitamins, opt for nutritional yeast. Her favorites include a curry-style popcorn made with curry powder, garlic powder and a small amount of nutritional yeast; chili powder with lime and za’atar; or everything bagel seasoning.
As for White, she likes adding smoked paprika, cinnamon with a pinch of salt, fresh lime zest and sea salt or dried dill, “for an unexpected herb twist.”
The bottom line
Though it’s tempting, you shouldn’t make popcorn in your air fryer. Instead, use what you already have on hand and prepare it on the stovetop.
If you can’t get enough of the stuff and make it all the time, consider these options that are under $50: a stovetop popcorn maker or an oil-free air popper.
Either way, to keep your popcorn as healthy as possible, go light on the oil, butter and salt. Personally, I’ll be topping mine with chili powder, lime and za’atar next time my popcorn craving strikes, which will likely be in a few minutes after writing this tasty piece.
Most cars on the road today use an inline engine. You’ll find them in everything from economy hatchbacks to performance models. In fact, the inline six engine has been making a comeback in recent years, with several manufacturers ditching V6 layouts in its favor.
In inline engines, all cylinders sit in a single row, one behind the other. That’s different from the other V engines, where cylinders are arranged in two separate angled banks. The debate between inline engines and V engines is as old as time, but what doesn’t get enough attention is the inline versus flat engines debate. It’s an interesting one, because both sit at completely opposite ends of the engine design spectrum, and yet, both claim to deliver a smoother ride than the V.
What are flat engines, actually? In flat engines, the cylinders are laid out horizontally, with each pair facing the other on opposite sides of the crankshaft. When one piston fires outward, the one across from it fires at the same time in the opposite direction — kind of like how two boxers throw punches at each other. In fact, that’s where their alternate name, boxer engine, comes from, and it’s a different mechanism from inline engines where all pistons move straight up and down in a single row and take turns firing. Whether it’s actually better than traditional inlines is a different argument altogether, and it doesn’t exactly have a definitive answer.
How do they compare?
Before we get started, there’s a subtle important distinction worth knowing. While people use flat and boxer interchangeably, they’re technically not the same. While every boxer engine is a flat engine, not every flat engine is a boxer — and it’s all to do with differences in the crankshaft. In a true boxer, each piston gets its own individual crankpin, so opposing pistons mirror each other’s movements perfectly. Meanwhile, in a non-boxer flat engine, opposing pistons share a single crankpin.
The main advantage offered by a boxer engine is balance. Because the horizontally opposed pistons constantly counteract each other, vibration basically cancels itself out. Horizontally sitting cylinders also mean the engine has a flatter profile, which is also why they’re called flat engines, and that profile allows the engine to sit lower in the car. As a result, the car’s center of gravity drops, giving the driver noticeably better handling and stability around corners. There’s a safety angle too; in a frontal collision, the low mounting position lets the engine slide underneath the cabin. In inlines, it can get pushed into the cabin.
Non-boxer flat engines aren’t being produced anymore, so every flat engine you’ll find in a new car today is, in fact, a boxer. Even so, they aren’t exactly the most popular engine design when compared to an inline. In fact, Subaru and Porsche are the only two major manufacturers that still use them today.
The practicality angle
Inline engines win on practicality, though. Their single-row cylinder arrangement doesn’t need the extra components a boxer engine requires, like two separate cylinder heads and two valve trains. This translates to less complexity and, in turn, lower manufacturing costs. They also tend to produce stronger torque, thanks to the longer stroke.
Boxers also lose out on accessibility. Working on them can be a pain because the cylinder heads sit right up against the sides of the engine bay. As a result, repairs tend to run costlier. Even something as simple as swapping spark plugs can turn into a whole project. Moreover, the wider profile of any flat engine can also limit where it fits in a vehicle’s architecture. Inline engines don’t have that problem. They’re slimmer, more straightforward to service, and their parts are generally cheaper to replace.
Of course, boxer engines are known for their reliability too, so you won’t need to get under the hood very often. If driving feel is what matters most to you, the low centre of gravity and natural balance of a boxer are hard to match, and it’s a big part of why Porsche has stuck with the flat-six engine for so long. So there isn’t really a definitive winner here. It just depends on what matters to you most. That could either be the driving dynamics or the long-term cost of ownership.
If you have launched a AAA game on your PC recently, you know how long it can take to start. You are often left staring at the “Compiling Shaders” screen without knowing what is happening.
In the most basic terms, shaders are specialized programs running on the GPU that determine how objects appear on the screen. Because PC hardware configurations vary widely, developers leave shaders uncompiled, meaning they are compiled on the fly when you launch a game, hence the wait.
Intel’s latest Arc graphics driver update is here to fix that, and it’s part of a much bigger effort from Microsoft to solve one of PC gaming’s most annoying problems.
What exactly is Intel doing here?
The new driver introduces Intel’s Graphics Shader Distribution Service, which delivers pre-compiled shaders directly to your PC rather than making your GPU compile them on the spot.
If you have played on a gaming console, you know that you never face compilation wait time. It’s because developers have to target only a few devices, and they can optimize the code for those devices. Microsoft is trying to do the same for PC gaming.
Microsoft has achieved this by launching an API that lets apps identify themselves directly to D3D12 (Microsoft’s graphics API) and the graphics drivers in a standardized way. This way, Microsoft can deliver pre-compiled shaders for games across various display adapters and hardware manufacturers.
The result? First load times that are up to 2x faster on Intel Arc B-series GPUs, as well as Core Ultra Series 2 and 3 processors with built-in Arc graphics. The update includes pre-compiled shader support for big titles, including Cyberpunk 2077, Black Myth: Wukong, God of War Ragnarok, Hogwarts Legacy, Starfield, and Oblivion Remastered, among others.
Why does it matter for you?
As more and more developers start supporting this new Graphics Shader Distribution Service, it will greatly reduce the game launch time. Microsoft demonstrated this earlier on the ROG Xbox Ally, cutting load times in games like Avowed by up to 85%.
You will also experience fewer stutters during games when a cut scene appears, or you move between different parts of the maps. So, update your drivers and enjoy playing games instead of watching them prepare to be played.
Rotel’s Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier marks the latest expansion of its luxury Michi lineup, a range that has steadily positioned itself as a serious contender in the upper tier of two-channel hi-fi. While Rotel has long enjoyed a strong reputation for well-engineered audio components, the Michi sub-brand represents its push into a more ambitious category of design, performance, and pricing.
Over the past few years, the Michi family has evolved into one of the more compelling alternatives to established high-end integrated systems. That progression has included the Michi Q5 Transport DAC (2024), the Series 2 amplifiers and preamplifiers (2023), and our earlier review of the Michi X3 Integrated Amplifier (2022). Taken together, the lineup has demonstrated that Rotel is serious about competing well above its traditional price brackets.
More importantly, the Rotel Michi range has proven capable of going head-to-head with some very established names, including the Cambridge Audio Edge Series, flagship integrated amplifiers from Marantz, the upper tier of Naim Audio’s Uniti Series, and even entry-level systems from McIntosh. That is not a small claim in a category where heritage brands have dominated for decades.
With the introduction of the Rotel Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier, Rotel appears intent on pushing that challenge even further into territory normally reserved for some of the most recognizable names in high-end audio.
Michi: Rotel’s Luxury Hi-Fi Components
The Michi line is intended to provide a clear entry point into Rotel’s most ambitious high-end audio components, built around the same design discipline, power-supply architecture, and manufacturing standards expected from true reference-level audio. It represents the company’s effort to push beyond its traditional value-focused reputation and compete directly in the upper tier of two-channel hi-fi.
Drawing on more than 60 years of amplifier and circuit development, Michi models aim to deliver a thoroughly modern listening experience defined by effortless dynamics, exceptional clarity, and the kind of long-term reliability Rotel has built its reputation on. The easiest way to think about it is simple: Michi is Rotel operating without a price ceiling.
For 2026, the brand is expanding the Michi lineup with two new Prestige Series components: the Prestige Q430 CD Player ($3,999) and the Prestige X430 Stereo Integrated Amplifier ($4,999). The visually matched combo also establishes a new design ethos within the existing Michi lineup featuring an anodized aluminum faceplate, top cover, and knurled volume knob, along with a glass front panel and high-resolution color display.
Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier Overview
Class A/B Power
The Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier is a high-power Class A/B design engineered to deliver 210 watts per channel into 8 ohms and 340 watts per channel into 4 ohms, providing the current and headroom required to properly control demanding loudspeakers.
The X430’s high-current output stage is supported by an exceptionally low-noise architecture built around an oversized custom toroidal transformer manufactured in-house by Rotel, paired with multi-stage voltage regulation that reduces noise and ripple throughout the circuit. Optimized power and signal paths further minimize distortion, helping the amplifier maintain stability, clarity, and dynamic authority even when driving more demanding loudspeaker loads.
The result is what Rotel describes as an “acoustically transparent silent background” which claims a lower noise floor that allows subtle musical details to emerge more clearly. In practical terms, that means quieter silences, improved separation between instruments, and a more convincing sense of depth and soundstage, qualities that tend to stand out most with vocals and acoustic recordings where spatial cues and microdetail matter most.
High-resolution DAC
The X430’s digital section includes a PC-USB input supporting PCM up to 32-bit/384 kHz and DSD256 (4x) via DoP, along with coaxial and optical S/PDIF inputs capable of handling LPCM signals up to 24-bit/192 kHz.
For digital conversion, the amplifier employs the ESS SABRE ES9039Q2M DAC, chosen for its ability to preserve fine detail and micro-dynamics. The result is improved clarity, imaging, and sonic texture, with more air and space around instruments, cleaner transient edges without harshness, and greater realism when playing high-resolution streaming or other digital sources.
HDMI ARC & Digital Audio Connections
The X430 provides a wide range of digital audio connections designed to integrate easily into modern two-channel systems.
HDMI ARC allows users to route television audio directly through the amplifier with a single cable while maintaining convenient volume control from the TV remote.
Additional coaxial, optical, and PC-USB inputs support connections to streamers, disc players, and computers. The result is a cleaner, more impactful TV and music setup without the complexity or clutter of a surround sound receiver.
Bluetooth
In addition to its physical inputs, the X430 also includes Bluetooth connectivity for streaming music from smartphones, tablets, and other compatible source devices. It supports the aptX HD and AAC codecs, enabling higher-quality wireless playback than standard Bluetooth.
It’s worth noting, however, that the amplifier does not support newer high-bitrate codecs such as aptX Lossless or LDAC. For listeners seeking the highest possible streaming quality, the X430’s Roon support and wired digital inputs remain the better path to extracting maximum performance from modern streaming sources.
System Flexibility
For both modern and legacy analog sources, Balanced XLR and RCA analog inputs are provided along with Moving Magnet Phono compatible inputs for connecting Turntables.
In addition, dual subwoofer outputs and A/B speaker switching make the X430 easy to integrate and upgrade over time.
Premium Build
The X430 features a precision-machined chassis, a knurled aluminum volume control, and a large color display that immediately conveys the Michi brand’s premium design ethos. The display offers selectable VU meter and spectrum analyzer views, adding a visual element to the listening experience that many owners will appreciate every time the system powers up.
Physically, the X430 measures 431 x 148 x 422 mm (17 x 6 x 16.5 inches) with a front panel height of 132 mm (5.25 inches) and a net weight of 16.9 kg (37.3 lbs). Compared with the larger Michi Series 2 components, the X430 is smaller, lighter, and more compact, making it easier to integrate into a wider range of systems and furniture without sacrificing the brand’s signature build quality.
Comparison
| Michi Prestige X430 (2026) |
Michi X5 Series 2 (2023) |
Michi X3 Series 2 (2023) |
|
| Product Type | Integrated Amplifier | Integrated Amplifier | Integrated Amplifier |
| Price | $4,999 | $7,999 | $5,799 |
| Amplifier Type | Class A/B | Class A/B | Class A/B |
| Analog Inputs | 3 x RCA 1 x XLR 1 x Phono (MM) |
4 x RCA 1 x XLR 1 x Phono (MM/MC) |
3 x RCA 1 x XLR 1 x Phono (MM) |
| Analog Outputs | 2 x Preamp 2 x Subwoofer |
2 x Preamp 2 x Subwoofer |
2 x Preamp 2 x Subwoofer |
| Speaker Outputs | A, B, A+B | A, B, A+B | A, B, A+B |
| Digital Inputs | 3 Coaxial 3 x Toslink Optical PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) 1 x HDMI ARC |
3 Coaxial 3 x Toslink Optical PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) |
3 Coaxial 3 x Toslink Optical PC-USB (PCM 32-bit/384kHz.DSD 256/4X with DoP) |
| Bluetooth | aptX HD / AAC | aptX HD / AAC | aptX HD / AAC |
| Maximum Power Per Channel | 340 watts @ 4 ohms | 600 watts @ 4 ohms | 350 watts @ 4 ohms |
| Continuous Power Per Channel | 210 watts @ 8 ohms | 350 watts @ 8 ohms | 200 watts @ 8 ohms |
| Total Harmonic Distortion | < 0.03% | < 0.009% | < 0.008% |
| Intermodulation Distortion (60 Hz: 7 kHz, 4:1) | < 0.03% | < 0.03% | < 0.03% |
| Frequency Response | Phono Input: 20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, -0.5 dB)
Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.5 dB) |
Phono Input: 20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, -0.2 dB)
Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.6 dB) |
Phono Input: 20 Hz-20k Hz (+0 dB, +0.2 dB)
Line Level Inputs: 10 Hz-100k Hz (+0 dB, -0.4 dB) |
| Damping Factor (20 Hz – 20kHz, 8 ohms) | 260 | 350 | 350 |
| Input Sensitivity / Impedance | Phono Input (MM): 5.56 mV / 47k ohms
Line Level Inputs (RCA): 356 mV / 100k ohms Line Level Inputs (XLR): 743 mV / 50k ohms |
Phono Input (MM) 5.7 mV / 47k ohms
Phono Input (MC) 570 uV/ 100 ohms Line Level Inputs (XLR) 580 mV / 100k ohms |
Phono Input (MM) 5.2 mV / 47k ohms
Line Level Inputs (RCA) 40 mV / 100k ohms Line Level Inputs (XLR) 540 mV / 100k ohms |
| Input Overload | Phono Input (MM): 66 mV
Line Level Inputs (RCA): 4V Line Level Inputs (XLR): 10V |
Phono Input (MM):197 mV Phono Input (MC) 19 mV Line Level Inputs (RCA): 12.5 V Line Level Inputs (XLR): 12.5 V |
Phono Input (MM):60 mV
Line Level Inputs (RCA): 3.5 V Line Level Inputs (XLR): 5.5 V |
| Signal to Noise Ratio (IHF “A” weighted) | Phono Input (MM) > 80 dB
Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 105 dB Line Level Inputs (XLR): > 100 dB |
Phono Input (MM, MC): > 80 dB
Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 102 dB |
Phono Input (MM, MC): > 80 dB
Line Level Inputs (RCA) : > 102 dB |
| Preamplifier Output Level / Impedance | 1.92 V / 100 ohms | 1 V / 470 ohms | 1.9 V / 100 ohms |
| Tone Controls | Bass: ±10 dB at 100 Hz Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz |
Bass: ±10 dB at 100 Hz Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz |
Bass: ±10 dB at 100 Hz Treble: ±10 dB at 10k Hz |
| Channel Separation | Phono Input: > 55 dB Line Level Inputs: > 55 dB |
Phono Input: > 65 dB Line Level Inputs: > 65 dB |
Phono Input: > 55 dB Line Level Inputs: > 55 dB |
| Frequency Response (Digital Section) | 10 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max) | 20 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max) | 20 Hz – 20k Hz (+0,-0.4 dB, Max) |
| Signal-to-Noise Ratio (IHF “A” weighted) (Digital Section) | > 110 dB | > 112 dB | > 102 dB |
| Input Sensitivity/Impedance (Digital Section) | 0 dBFs / 75 ohms | 0 dBFs / 75 ohms | 0 dBFs / 75 ohms |
| Preamplifier Output Level (Digital Section) | 1.15 V (at -20 dB Volume Position) | 1.2V (at -20 dB Volume Position) | 1.3V (at -20 dB Volume Position) |
| Digital to Analog Converter (Digital Section) | ESS ES9039Q2M DAC | ESS SABRE ES9028PRO DAC | ESS SABRE ES9028PRO DAC |
| Coaxial/Optical Digital Signals (Digital Section) | SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit) | SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit) | SPDIF LPCM (up to 192kHz 24 bit) |
| PC-USB (Digital Section) | (up to 384kHz 32-bit) 0 Driver installation required
Support DSD (up to 4X, 11.2MHz) and DoP (up to 2X, 5.6MHz) Roon Tested |
USB Audio Class 1.0 (up to 96kHz 24-bit) USB Audio Class 2.0 (up to 384kHz 32-bit)* *Driver installation required DSD and DoP support MQA and MQA Studio support Roon Tested |
USB Audio Class 1.0 (up to 96kHz 24-bit)
USB Audio Class 2.0 (up to 384kHz 32-bit)* *Driver installation required DSD and DoP support MQA and MQA Studio support Roon Tested |
| HDMI (Digital Section) | Support CEC with the ARC function 2-channel PCM only (up to 48 kHz, 24-bit) |
N/A | N/A |
| Control | Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232 | Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232 | Wireless Remote, 12V Trigger In/Out, RS232 |
| Power Requirements | Europe 230 V, 50 Hz
USA 120 V, 60 Hz |
Europe 230 V, 50 Hz
USA 120 V, 60 Hz |
Europe 230 V, 50 Hz
USA 120 V, 60 Hz |
| Power Consumption | 520 watts | 850 watts | 500 watts |
| Standby Power Consumption | Normal < 0.5 watts
Network Wakeup < 2 watts |
Normal < 0.5 watts
Network Wakeup < 2 watts |
Normal < 0.5 watts
Network Wakeup < 2 watts |
| BTU (4 ohms, 1/8th power) | 1476 BTU/h | 2194 BTU/h | 1303 BTU/h |
| Dimensions (WHD) | 431 x 148 x 422 mm
17 x 6 x 16 1/2 ins |
485 x 195 x 452 mm
19″ x 7 5/8″ x 17 3/4″ |
485 x 195 x 452 mm
19″ x 7 5/8″ x 17 3/4″ |
| Front Panel Height | 132 mm / 5 1/4 ins | 177 mm / 7.” | 132 mm / 5 1/4″ |
| Weight (net) | 16.9 kg, 37.3 lbs | 43.8 kg, 96.56 lb | 28.9 kg, 63.7 lb |
| Finish | Black | Black | Black |
The Bottom Line
At $4,999, the Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier lands in an increasingly competitive segment of the high-end integrated amplifier market. What makes it stand out is the combination of serious Class A/B power (210W into 8 ohms), premium build quality, a modern ESS SABRE DAC, HDMI ARC connectivity, and Rotel’s in-house power supply design, all wrapped in a chassis that is smaller and lighter than the Michi X3 and X5 Series 2 models. In practical terms, it offers robust power delivery, clean industrial design, and a strong digital section at an approachable price point.
There are trade-offs. The X430 drops support for MQA decoding and Moving Coil phono cartridges, and its power output is slightly lower than the larger Michi integrated amplifiers. But the addition of HDMI ARC and a newer DAC platform makes it better aligned with how many listeners actually use their systems today—combining streaming sources, digital playback, and television audio in a single two-channel setup.
The X430 is clearly aimed at listeners who want reference-level integrated amplifier performance without stepping into five-figure territory. It should appeal to owners of demanding loudspeakers, two-channel purists who still want strong digital connectivity, and anyone looking for a serious alternative to integrated amplifiers from Cambridge Audio’s Edge Series, Marantz’s top-tier models, the upper end of Naim’s Uniti lineup, or even entry-level McIntosh—all while staying just under the psychological $5,000 barrier.
Price & Availability
The Michi Prestige X430 Integrated Amplifier will initially be available through Authorized Dealers in North America beginning March 2026 for $4,999. Global availability is expected to follow early in the second quarter of 2026 with pricing set at €4,999 or £4,499.
For more information: rotel.com/product/x430
Related Reading:
The conversation took place in 2022, when Bracy, CEO and founder of the social mobility-focused nonprofit TechEquity, was interviewing Altman for a book she was writing about the dangers of venture capital. It was before Altman’s mysterious firing and unfiring a year later, after which he mostly stopped responding to Bracy’s texts.
And ever since then, OpenAI — which was initially founded as a nonprofit in 2015 to “advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return” — has been publicly trying to escape the confines of its charitable roots. Today, OpenAI contains both a corporate arm focused on building and selling AI and a nonprofit arm with a stated mission of ensuring that AI benefits people.
During the controversial process of trying to fully sever the two in 2024, OpenAI lost about half of its AI safety staffers and much of its senior leadership. That was followed by an intensified scrutiny from state attorneys general, nonprofit legal experts, competitor companies, effective altruists, Nobel Prize winners, vast swaths of California’s philanthropic community, and one of its original funders, Elon Musk. Different sides had different interests, but the overall argument was that shifting to a for-profit model would create a fiduciary duty to investors that would inherently clash with its original mission of safety and public benefit.
Is OpenAI’s new foundation a $180 billion distraction?
- Last October, OpenAI agreed to make its nonprofit arm very rich. The OpenAI Foundation is now worth about $180 billion and it has two main objectives:
- Helping the world adapt to and benefit from AI by giving money to charity.
- Acting as a moral compass for OpenAI the company, especially when it comes to safety and security decisions.
- The foundation has already given away about $40.5 million so far, a small fraction of the billions it plans to eventually donate. But critics see the donations as a distraction.
- While OpenAI says its foundation has the final say on security and safety-related decisions, the company has come under scrutiny in recent months for striking a deal with the Pentagon, fighting against statewide AI legislation, and testing ads for free users.
- Even if the foundation does eventually give away billions of dollars, it may never be enough to make up for what the public lost in allowing OpenAI to go corporate.
Nonetheless, OpenAI did finally strike a contortive restructuring deal last October. Essentially, the for-profit arm became what is known as a public benefit corporation (PBC), called the OpenAI Group. The original nonprofit became the OpenAI Foundation, which has a 26 percent stake currently worth $180 billion in the PBC, plus a sliver of exclusive legal control over certain major decisions.
One effect of the transition was that it essentially required OpenAI to put a number on what it owed the public for converting what had been a project for all humanity into something that most directly benefits the company’s investors. The resulting stake of the OpenAI Foundation is big enough to instantly make it one of the wealthiest charities in the country, or in OpenAI’s words, the “best-equipped nonprofit the world has ever seen.” On paper, at least, the foundation is now significantly richer than the entire country of Luxembourg. Even the Gates Foundation has only $77.6 billion in assets, less than half of what the OpenAI Foundation can draw from, though it’s important to note that most of the wealth of the OpenAI Foundation is locked in fairly illiquid shares within the still private company, which limits how quickly any money can be given away.
Still, its sheer size means that the OpenAI Foundation stands to eventually be a transformative presence on the philanthropic stage, one way or another. But while OpenAI says the foundation will eventually give out many billions of dollars in philanthropy to ensure that “artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity,” it’s uncertain that a socially beneficial philanthropy can exist side by side with a company that is fighting an existential battle over who will dominate the AI industry.
“The unspoken truth here is that they’re never going to make a decision that is bad for the company,” Bracy said. “These two entities cannot live under the same roof” where “the mission is in control.” (Disclosure: Vox Media is one of several publishers that have signed partnership agreements with OpenAI. Our reporting remains editorially independent.)
The foundation’s first gifts came in the form of $40.5 million in no-strings-attached grants to over 200 community nonprofits, like churches, food banks, and afterschool programs. Notably, most grantees had little to no connection to AI or technology — and just as notably, several of these early grantees just so happen to be members of EyesOnOpenAI, a coalition of California nonprofits critical of OpenAI’s privatization that formed in 2025.
But there are signs the foundation will soon pivot into grantmaking that’s more obviously relevant to the company’s original charter, which aimed to ensure that the benefits of AI are broadly distributed while also prioritizing long-term safety in the technology’s development. On Feb. 19, OpenAI — the company, not the foundation — announced a $7.5 million grant in conjunction with Microsoft, Anthropic, Amazon, and other major tech companies for a new, international project aimed at researching how to make AI systems safer.
“The unspoken truth here is that they’re never going to make a decision that is bad for the company.”
— Catherine Bracy, TechEquity founder and CEO
The real questions around the OpenAI Foundation have less to do with how much it is giving and to whom than whether it is actually able to carry out its contractual oversight role. In theory, the foundation should be ensuring that OpenAI is the standard-bearer for ethical decision-making at the frontier of AI development. That would be a unique contribution to the field — and an embodiment of OpenAI’s original mission — that no amount of grantmaking could replace. Yet, a series of troubling recent decisions by the company hardly seems to bear out that vision.
OpenAI has begun its new corporate journey by debuting ads on its free tier service, firing an executive who raised safety concerns about a soon-to-come NSFW mode for ChatGPT on charges of sexual discrimination against a male colleague, and burning cash while its president funnels millions of dollars into Donald Trump’s super PAC. OpenAI President Greg Brockman has also teamed up with the private equity firm Andreessen Horowitz and Palantir’s co-founders to fund a $125 million super PAC aimed at promoting AI-friendly policies. Along with Google, xAI, and Anthropic, OpenAI has also come under scrutiny in recent weeks for its defense contracts with the Pentagon.
When OpenAI succeeded in its campaign to cede its foundational new technology from nonprofit control, it opened the door for many of these decisions. Even $180 billion in charity might not be enough to make up for the difference.
How OpenAI shed its nonprofit skin
Corporate charity is ubiquitous in the tech world, especially among the biggest players. Microsoft plans to donate $4 billion in cash and AI cloud technology to schools and nonprofits by 2030. Google gives away some $100 million annually, often to organizations focused on artificial intelligence and technology.
But from the beginning, OpenAI was different. Rather than making money and giving some of it to charity, OpenAI was the charity. It was founded as a nonprofit research lab with about $1 billion in start-up donations, mostly from tech titans like Altman, Brockman, and Elon Musk.
There are some structural advantages to being a charity. You can’t accept investments, but you can accept donations and you don’t have to pay most taxes. What’s more, in those early days, OpenAI’s stated mission — to build safe AI without the pressures of financial incentive — gave it a major boost when it came to recruitment for rarified talent. Machine learning prodigy Ilya Sutskever told Wired in 2016 that he chose to leave Google to become OpenAI’s chief scientist “to a very large extent, because of its mission.”
But there were limits to being a fully nonprofit entity. In pursuit of financing amid the rising computing costs of cutting-edge AI, OpenAI created its capped-profit subsidiary in 2019 to manage a new $1 billion investment from Microsoft. Three years later, ChatGPT took the world by storm. Sutskever, and other members of OpenAI’s board, tried and ultimately failed to oust Altman amid accusations of dishonesty in 2023. (Altman denied those accusations.) In 2024 — one year after Sutskever and other members of OpenAI’s board tried and ultimately failed to oust Altman amid accusations of dishonesty — the organization announced its intention to go fully corporate and splinter off the nonprofit into its own fully independent entity.
The transition to for-profit “just didn’t smell right,” said Orson Aguilar, head of LatinoProsperity, an economic justice nonprofit and Bracy’s co-leader at EyesOnOpenAI. He wasn’t alone: By early 2025, a dozen former OpenAI employees filed an amicus brief aimed at stopping the conversion because it would “fundamentally violate its mission.” And more than 60 nonprofit, philanthropy, and labor leaders, many of them based in OpenAI’s home state of California, agreed that the attempt to privatize felt unfair given the extent to which the company benefited from its tax-free status during its early development.
To grasp what this all means, try thinking of OpenAI’s for-profit arm as an angsty tween and the nonprofit as her well-meaning, but often powerless parent. For years, the tween had been allowed to do her own thing, but only within certain limits — she still had to do her homework and get home by a certain time. Now imagine, she’s sick of having a curfew. “Nobody else has one!” She still lives in her mother’s house, but she wants to follow her own rules.
That’s kind of what happened here. Up until now, OpenAI’s for-profit subsidiary had a capped-profit model, meaning there were limits on how much money investors could make. But this new deal paved the way for the for-profit to become a full-time corporate girlie, charitable bylaws be damned. And while OpenAI’s new public benefit corporation still technically exists under the original nonprofit’s control, it mostly follows its own rules. It can raise as much money as it wants and eventually, it will likely go public.
But California history did provide some hope that the public might at least get some meaningful benefit from the transition. Back in the 1990s, California’s branch of the health insurer Blue Cross Blue Shield — then a nonprofit called Blue Cross of California — decided to privatize. After some haggling with state regulators, the company agreed to forfeit all of its assets, worth $3.2 billion, to a pair of independent nonprofits in exchange for going private. The result was the California Endowment, which is now the state’s largest health foundation.
Many nonprofit leaders in California hoped that OpenAI, which is headquartered in the state, would strike a similar deal, ceding a majority of its assets to a fully independent nonprofit. And those assets were and are enormous.
Gary Mendoza, a former state official who oversaw the Blue Cross deal, estimated the OpenAI nonprofit’s rightful assets at over $250 billion, or half the company’s $500 billion worth. “Anything short of 50 percent,” he told the San Francisco Examiner last year, “is a missed opportunity.” And beyond money for the public, assuming the nonprofit kept its shares, it would add up to enough influence to really shape OpenAI’s corporate decision-making at a key moment for the future of artificial intelligence.
Given that the OpenAI Foundation ended up with little more than a quarter of the final company, this is obviously not what happened. But EyesOnOpenAI’s years-long lobbying effort was not a total bust. The criticism proved powerful enough that last May, OpenAI was forced to give up on an initial plan to restructure away its nonprofit assets into a new organization wholly disconnected from OpenAI, which would have left the nonprofit with no legal control over the for-profit arm.
On paper, the new deal includes some meaningful concessions. It contractually requires the nonprofit mission to come first on safety and security issues, with no regard to shareholder interests. The memorandum also calls on OpenAI to “mitigate risks to teens” specifically. It made the foundation the controlling shareholder of the corporation, affording it the right to appoint corporate directors and oversee critical decisions like a sale.
If OpenAI abided by all of its terms and eventually started giving away billions of dollars of philanthropy each year, then the world — or at least California, where many of OpenAI’s grants have been concentrated — could stand to greatly benefit from it.
Random acts of corporate kindness
And this brings us to the $40.5 million that OpenAI gave to over 200 nonprofits toward the end of last year.
Many of these charities applied to the grant with sophisticated ideas around how to help their communities integrate or adapt to AI, though they can ultimately use the grants however they see fit. Among them were public libraries, Boys and Girls Clubs, churches, food banks, and legal aid nonprofits. Coming at a moment when the majority of the country’s nonprofits face existential funding cuts, “it was just the perfect timing,” said Thomas Howard Jr, head of Kidznotes, a North Carolina nonprofit focused on music education that received $45,000 in OpenAI’s first round of grants.
“There’s nothing I’ve seen that gives me reassurance that they’ll catch the important safety issues when they come up — or that they’ll be doing a thorough investigation of the grantmaking opportunities.”
— Tyler Johnston, Midas Project executive director
So civil society’s fight over the OpenAI transition won at least enough concessions to help these worthy organizations and retain some semblance of nonprofit control over some of the for-profit’s activities. So why do so many people in the philanthropic community remain so negative about the foundation?
“I’m all for nonprofits getting money,” said Bracy, the head of TechEquity. “I don’t begrudge any organizations that took the money, but I don’t think it’s some indication that OpenAI is living up to the mission of the nonprofit.”
$40.5 million, of course, is only 0.02 percent of the OpenAI Foundation’s on-paper $180 billion windfall. How the foundation will eventually spend the other 99.98 percent remains to be seen, though the foundation has said that at least $25 billion will ultimately go to scientific research and what it’s calling “technical solutions for AI resilience.” The company plans to announce a second wave of grants directed at organizations using AI to work across issues like health in the coming months.
“We are doing the important work of engaging with experts, learning from communities, and shaping a point of view of where Foundation investments can make the greatest difference,” the OpenAI Foundation’s board of directors said in response to a request for clarity on where future funding will go. “We look forward to sharing more soon.”
But so far, critics remain skeptical. OpenAI has done little to prove that its newfound philanthropy is more than just “a smoke and mirrors show,” argued one member of the Coalition for AI Nonprofit Integrity (CANI) — a coalition composed largely of AI insiders, including former OpenAI employees, furiously opposed to the restructuring. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared retaliation from OpenAI, which has accused CANI of being a front funded by Musk. (CANI has denied receiving any such funds — though not for lack of trying. If you scroll to the bottom of OpenTheft, a website created by CANI, you’ll find a direct plea to Musk for donations.)
While a spokesperson for OpenAI said that the foundation is in the process of building a dedicated team, and has sought the input of both nonprofit leaders and experts in how society can adapt to AI, the company has yet to make any major staffing announcements for its grantmaking arm. For now, with the exception of Zico Kolter, the head of the nonprofit’s safety committee, the foundation board still shares the same members as the corporate board, including CEO Sam Altman. The idea is that these board members can put on different hats when meeting about nonprofit versus corporate priorities, asserting the foundation’s oversight when needed. But it has created the appearance of a conflict of interest.
When asked for mechanisms and examples for how the foundation has responded to situations where its mission conflicts with shareholder interests, given the overlapping board membership, the spokesperson said that OpenAI has conflict-of-interest policies and governance procedures in place to ensure its directors only consider the mission when they meet, as they regularly do, about nonprofit issues.
The company also said the foundation board constantly exercises its oversight role, including for all new major product releases, like the release of GPT‑5.3‑Codex, an advanced agentic coding model, last month. The AI watchdog group the Midas Project, a frequent thorn in OpenAI’s side, accused the company of violating safety standards, an allegation that OpenAI fervently denied.
In any case, since the OpenAI Foundation is not a separate entity with its own independent board, some critics have compared it to other feel-good corporate social responsibility ventures, like the McDonald’s Ronald McDonald House, Walmart’s healthy foods program, and Home Depot’s work with veterans.
Corporate social responsibility has its place, and it can do real good. But Bracy believes that based on the OpenAI Foundation’s structuring and how they’ve conducted their grantmaking so far, it will probably never fund anything “they see as a threat to the growth of the company,” said Bracy, despite the fact that the need for guardrails on unrestricted AI development featured prominently in the company’s original mission. “They’re going to do what’s best for the bottom line of the for-profit.”
Critics like Bracy also doubt the OpenAI Foundation’s other main prerogative, which is to govern all safety and ethics-related issues for the broader organization, including the responsibility to review new products.
“Instead of a vehicle to serve humanity, it’s become a vehicle to serve one individual and a few of his friends and investors.”
— Anonymous member of CANI
While the nonprofit and its mission do legally retain control over the OpenAI corporation — particularly when it comes to safety issues — that may add up to little, given that the OpenAI Foundation doesn’t seem to be an independently governed foundation. It is not, in fact, even technically a foundation, but a public charity, which means it is not required to pay out a certain percentage of its assets each year under IRS requirements.
And while the nonprofit retains significant oversight powers on paper — including the authority to halt AI releases it deems unsafe — in practice, critics say, it’s unclear whether it would ever use them.
Increasingly, OpenAI has also been wading into political lobbying efforts that seem at odds with its mission to promote long-term safety in AI development. When California lawmakers were debating SB 53, a law requiring transparency reports from leading AI companies, OpenAI lobbied against it. And the company has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks for its contract with the Pentagon, which has blacklisted its rival company Anthropic for raising ethical concerns about the use of its technology.
Why the fight is not over
OpenAI’s new corporate arrangement is very, very new. It’s still possible that OpenAI’s grantmaking arm really does staff up, and the nonprofit builds an independent board that has the power to enforce hard ethical decisions for the company, even when it hurts investors’ returns.
“They have a lot of freedom to continue to do good,” said Tyler Johnston, executive director of the Midas Project, but that would require them to “actually shake things up” and “show that they’ve created the scaffolding that will enable them to actualize their mission.”
But so far, “there’s nothing I’ve seen that gives me reassurance that they’ll catch the important safety issues when they come up,” he said. “Or that they’ll be doing a thorough investigation of the grantmaking opportunities.”
If OpenAI does not abide by the terms of its new contract — if the company, for example, tries to thwart an attempt to roll back a dangerous new tool — then California’s attorney general does have the power to demand answers from the company, and in theory, revisit the agreement’s terms.
Beyond the agreement, there are a few quite public means by which OpenAI’s former lovers, skeptics, and nemeses are still trying to press rewind on the restructuring.
Chief among them is Elon Musk, OpenAI’s most prominent original donor and co-founder. In between trading embarrassing jabs with Altman on X, Musk took OpenAI to court last year over claims that he was “assiduously manipulated” into donating tens of millions of dollars to a nonprofit research lab that turned into an “opaque web of for-profit OpenAI affiliates.”
A judge has found enough cause for the case to proceed to trial this April. Musk is suing for up to $134 billion in damages, though OpenAI has told its investors that it believes it would only be on the hook for Musk’s $38 billion in original donations. OpenAI, for its part, has accused Musk of an “unlawful campaign of harassment.”
Meanwhile, CANI is still holding out hope that it can convince the people of California to vote for a hyperspecific ballot measure, the California Charitable Assets Protection Act, which could reverse the decision to allow OpenAI — or any other “organizations developing transformative technologies” — to go corporate.
“They’re cutting corners on safety because of the race to artificial general intelligence that they just want to win,” said the member of CANI. “Instead of a vehicle to serve humanity, it’s become a vehicle to serve one individual and a few of his friends and investors.”
So maybe the fight over OpenAI’s restructuring isn’t completely over — but it’s probably on its last legs. And if they continue on the same path, it’s unlikely that the public will ever really benefit in the way they ought to, given the charitable benefits OpenAI enjoyed in its early days. At the very least, $40.5 million is just not going to cut it. Even $180 billion might fall far short.
“I think it’s them saying, ‘Listen, I dare you to enforce this,’” said Bracy, who believes OpenAI is “banking on the fact that they’re worth almost a trillion dollars, and they have endless resources — and the state of California does not.”
AT&T is releasing a new app on Wednesday, replacing the MyAT&T app previously used to manage account options for both mobile and broadband customers. It incorporates a new AI-based chat assistant, parental controls and more details about call and data usage.
Typically, an app release isn’t newsworthy on its own. But carriers’ apps are becoming the central way that people interact with their wireless and home internet services, from checking and paying their bills to troubleshooting connection problems. Verizon has enlisted Google Gemini for front-line support in its app, and T-Mobile uses its T-Life app to stay on top of weekly perks and even encourages potential customers to switch carriers.
AT&T’s new app — simply, if confusingly, called just AT&T — brings together its mobile and home internet features for what the company calls “converged” customers who subscribe to both. It also has a cleaner design and feels faster overall.
I tried a beta version of the app before launch, and one of the first things I noticed compared with the MyAT&T app was the removal of a long-standing annoyance. Sometimes when you’re looking up information, the app displays it in a web browser within the interface. I’m shown the right content, but it feels like I’ve been handed off to something else, which is disjointing.
“Our data shows that if there is friction in [customers’] experiences, people just drop off,” said Andrew Solmssen, assistant vice president of Digital Customer Growth at AT&T. “So we worked really hard on” the design and performance.
AI-powered converged assistant
The new AT&T app includes the buttons and menus you’d expect to navigate to view your bill, explore other plans and services, and shop for phones and accessories. But Solmssen said the development teams recognized that those structures don’t work for everyone, which is why a major new feature is a generative-AI assistant named Andi.
“We’re finding in our testing that people find [these tasks] to be a little easier to do directly through a conversation,” Solmssen said.
That also allows customers to change context without having to start over or navigate to a new section. If they’re checking whether an International Day Pass is available, for example, and then switch to wanting to know the day pass rates, it’s a matter of asking a follow-up question in the same chat, he said.
“The focus here is serving the customer in the best way that the customer wants to be served,” said Jeff Dixon, AT&T assistant vice president of Digital Product Management and Development.
The feature is built using components from licensed LLMs such as Google’s Gemini and OpenAI’s models. Customer data remains with AT&T and isn’t shared with outside companies. “Our data is all sequestered,” Dixon said. “There’s extensive red-teaming… [and] quite a lot of rigorous work just to make sure everything’s safe.”
In my limited testing with the beta app, getting information from the AI assistant was hit-or-miss. When I asked Andi how long it had been since I last used data on my Apple Watch, it showed me prices to buy a new watch. And when I asked it to recommend a plan for my account, it suggested the AT&T Unlimited Premium PL, which was retired last week in favor of the new Premium 2.0 plan.
I next asked it to compare Premium 2.0 with my current plan, but it couldn’t access it. So, in this interaction at least, it’s not pulling customer information into the conversation. But when I asked it to compare the Unlimited Elite plan with the Premium 2.0 plan, it gave me bulleted lists of features and a numbered summary of their differences.
I thought my expectations might be too high, but I realized they aren’t really my expectations: Chatbots like this are meant to be conversational to give you an experience more like talking to a real person. If I walked into an AT&T store and chatted up one of the employees, they could pull up my account and answer questions with that information at hand.
“It’s early enough days that we’re going to have to see how customers use it, how customers like it,” Solmssen said, adding that it still includes the option of going into a store to work with an AT&T representative or contacting phone support.
The new AT&T app has an AI-based chat (left) and controls for pausing devices or groups of devices (right).
Parental controls, detailed data and improved messages
Another new feature in the app lets you pause devices or sets of devices connected to your accounts. In the example Solmssen gave, if parents want to ensure some time away from phones during dinner or a family activity, they can pause each device for 30 minutes, 2 hours or 24 hours. That can be done on an individual level or in a group that includes each kid’s phone. While taking a phone time-out for family dinner is a benign scenario, others — including parental control that temporarily turns off kids’ phones wherever they are — could be overbearing.
If the family is a converged customer with both mobile and home internet on the same account, they can also pause Wi-Fi access to the devices using the same feature.
Groups can also be set up with downtime schedules, such as being offline during hours when the kids (or even the parents) should be sleeping.
A couple of other features stand out. The app shows more detailed usage statistics, such as for data being used by each device on the account, calls and texts and hotspot data.
“Even customers who are on unlimited wireless and unlimited internet are really curious about the data they’re using,” Solmssen said. “Being able to see that your child’s devices were using a ton of data at 4 a.m. is incredibly valuable.”
AT&T has also cleaned up the Messages interface. Hopefully, this means no more notifications that show up and then disappear into the ether if you dismiss them before reading.
The app is available to download now, and is also being rolled out gradually over the next few weeks to customers who have automatic app updates enabled on their iPhone or Android phones.
Looking for the most recent Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands puzzles.
Today’s NYT Connections puzzle is pretty tricky, but musicians might find the blue group easy. Read on for clues and today’s Connections answers.
The Times has a Connections Bot, like the one for Wordle. Go there after you play to receive a numeric score and to have the program analyze your answers. Players who are registered with the Times Games section can now nerd out by following their progress, including the number of puzzles completed, win rate, number of times they nabbed a perfect score and their win streak.
Read more: Hints, Tips and Strategies to Help You Win at NYT Connections Every Time
Hints for today’s Connections groups
Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.
Yellow group hint: Time between two things, maybe.
Green group hint: That smarts!
Blue group hint: Rockers know these well.
Purple group hint: You might write one out to pay a bill.
Answers for today’s Connections groups
Yellow group: Interval.
Green group: React to a stubbed toe.
Blue group: Guitar effects pedals.
Purple group: ____ check.
Read more: Wordle Cheat Sheet: Here Are the Most Popular Letters Used in English Words
What are today’s Connections answers?
The completed NYT Connections puzzle for March 18, 2026.
The yellow words in today’s Connections
The theme is interval. The four answers are patch, period, spell and stretch.
The green words in today’s Connections
The theme is react to a stubbed toe. The four answers are curse, hop, wince and yell.
The blue words in today’s Connections
The theme is guitar effects pedals. The four answers are delay, reverb, wah and whammy.
The purple words in today’s Connections
The theme is ____ check. The four answers are blank, coat, rain and reality.
Toughest Connections puzzles
We’ve made a note of some of the toughest Connections puzzles so far. Maybe they’ll help you see patterns in future puzzles.
#5: Included “things you can set,” such as mood, record, table and volleyball.
#4: Included “one in a dozen,” such as egg, juror, month and rose.
#3: Included “streets on screen,” such as Elm, Fear, Jump and Sesame.
#2: Included “power ___” such as nap, plant, Ranger and trip.
#1: Included “things that can run,” such as candidate, faucet, mascara and nose.
Crypto World43 seconds ago
Crypto Cards Aren’t The Future, But Onchain Credit Is
Entertainment2 minutes ago
Why Brian Austin Green Was Fired From NBC’s My Two Dads
Politics3 minutes ago
The House Article | To truly enhance our democracy, we must reform the electoral system
-
Crypto World4 days agoHYPE Token Enters Net Deflation as HyperCore Buybacks Outpace Staking Rewards
-
Fashion5 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Addict Lip Glow
-
Tech3 days agoYour Legally Registered ‘Motorcycle’ Might Not Count Under Proposed US Law
-
Sports4 days ago
Why Duke and Michigan Are Dead Even Entering Selection Sunday
-
Sports7 days agoPWHL, Senators discussing plan to keep Charge in Ottawa
-
NewsBeat7 days agoResidents reaction as Shildon murder probe enters second day
-
Business3 days agoSearch for Savannah Guthrie’s Mother Enters Seventh Week with No Arrests
-
Business4 days agoUS Airports Launch Donation Drives for Unpaid TSA Workers as Partial Government Shutdown Enters Fifth Week
-
Tech20 hours agoAre Split Spacebars the Next Big Gaming Keyboard Trend?
-
Crypto World4 days ago
Coinbase and Bybit in Investment Talks: Could Bybit Finally Enter the US Crypto Market?
-
NewsBeat7 days agoI Entered The Manosphere. Nothing Could Prepare Me For What I Found.
-
Business4 days agoCountry star Brantley Gilbert enters growing non-alcoholic beer market
-
Business2 days agoAustralian shares drop as Iran war enters third week
-
Crypto World2 days agoCrypto Lender BlockFills Enters Chapter 11 with Up to $500M in Liabilities
-
Sports5 days agoCollege Basketball Best Bets: Conference Tournament Semifinal Picks
-
Crypto World6 days agoThree Binance Charts May Be Hinting at Bitcoin’s Next Move
-
Politics3 hours agoThe House | The new register to protect children from their abusers shows Parliament at its best
-
Business6 days agoTrump demands Powell cut rates as Iran conflict raises energy prices
-
Crypto World6 days agoSenate Votes to Include CBDC Ban in Bipartisan Housing Bill
-
Fashion2 days ago25 Celebrities with Curly Hair That Are Naturally Beautiful
You must be logged in to post a comment Login