Welcome to the era of the big three.
Tech
What’s fueling an IPO rush from SpaceX, Anthropic, and OpenAI
We’re not talking rappers here — although according to Kendrick Lamar, it’s “just big me” — we’re talking AI companies: Anthropic, SpaceX, and OpenAI.
These three leading artificial intelligence companies are all expected to go public this year. Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which recently acquired another Musk company, xAi, is on track to open up to investors later this month. Anthropic, the company behind the chatbot Claude, just filed confidentially with the States Securities and Exchange Commission for its own initial public offering. Reports say OpenAI could also go public as soon as September. (Disclosure: Vox Media is one of several publishers that have signed partnership agreements with OpenAI. Our reporting remains editorially independent.)
SpaceX’s IPO, when it happens, could be the largest in history and mint Musk as the world’s first trillionaire. With Anthropic and OpenAI, the combined value of AI IPOs could total over $3 trillion.
But it’s not as simple as going public and raking in cash. “There’s this race that’s been going on between SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic,” Liz Lopatto, a senior writer at The Verge said. “There’s this fear that if you don’t go public at the right time or you don’t go public first, investors aren’t going to wait for you.”
To understand why some of the world’s richest men, at the helm of some of the world’s richest companies, are now courting the public’s money, Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with Lopatto.
She’s been deep in SpaceX’s public filings and has been covering the court drama between Musk and OpenAI’s Sam Altman. Her latest piece for the Verge is titled “The SpaceX IPO is great for Elon Musk and terrible for you.”
Sean and Lopatto chat about what each of the companies hope to gain from the public, why this moment could be like internet 1.0’s dot-com bubble, and whether these companies chasing shareholder profits will be good for us.
Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.
Why do [these companies] need to go public right now?
Whoever goes public first is going to scoop up better investors or have an easier time convincing investors. That is fueling this rush toward the market. So that’s thing one.
But thing two is that AI is extremely expensive. And I think that’s something that people often forget about because right now we’re sort of in, like, the early days of Uber, where you’re using this very expensive tool for free and then they’re going to try to get you hooked on it so that you’ll pay real prices later on.
In order to get the money that you need for compute, to build all of these data centers, to do all of the things that you need to do in order to have these frontier models, that’s just an incredibly capital-intensive business. One way to get capital is to go public.
Anthropic has had some better discipline than the other companies in terms of behaving like actual adults. They might actually tell us a little bit less before it happens than we’ve heard from, for instance, SpaceX.
Tell me more about behaving like adults when it comes to IPOs, which feels like a very adult thing to do.
There are sort of a lot of things that come into play with an IPO. And basically what you’re doing is you are setting out what your company is, what the company’s vision is, how you plan to make money, and what you’re going to do with all the money that you’re raising in the IPO. And for SpaceX, there’s a bunch of nonsense about Mars in there that doesn’t really feel real to me. There’s nothing about the biological risks of going to Mars, for instance, and the risk factors, which, if that were a real thing, you’d see it.
One of the things that’s been notable is that both Anthropic and OpenAI seem to have better businesses, based on what we know. Anthropic is actually about to make a profit. Anthropic in particular didn’t make any images with its AI. It stuck to text and it focused specifically on programming. It’s not a sexy business, it’s enterprise software. But you don’t have to be sexy to make money.
Just looking at the difference between like the flash we’re seeing about, like, spreading the light of human consciousness among the stars and actually making money, which is the point of a company. I would say that Anthropic seems like it’s run by adults by comparison. And then I would put OpenAI somewhere in the middle.
Why? What is Open AI doing that isn’t very adult-like behavior?
OpenAI as a business is really scattered. They created and shut down Sora, which was AI-generated videos. They have these AI image generators that have created a whole new level of headaches for them. They’re embroiled in a number of lawsuits.
Sam Altman, the CEO, was running it effectively as a startup composed of little startups within it and was like, “Well, we’ll just see which one of them wins.” And that’s maybe not the best way to run a company. It’s a fine way to run a portfolio, but a company is not a portfolio.
Liz, you’re very tapped into this world out there in Silicon Valley and you were at the trial between Altman and Musk. It sounds like these companies are all being talked about in the same breath even though two of them are very specifically AI companies and one of them wants to colonize Mars. Why is that? Is it just because they all may IPO soon?
I think that’s part of it. I also think there’s been this investment thesis that frontier AI models are effectively going to be a boom on the scale of internet 1.0, if you remember 1999.
This is sort of the moment where we’re going to find out who’s Google and who’s Amazon and who’s Pets.com, right? And so I think that’s why people are talking about them in this way, because it’s not just these three companies that are AI companies. Obviously Google has an AI arm that is very good. But then you have companies like Databricks, which you maybe haven’t heard of.
Yeah. This is a perfectly fine company. It’s got a business. But it’s not in that conversation because I don’t think people expect it to be one of the behemoths in the way that they’re looking at these three as the potential behemoths of this generation of technology.
This reminds me that when social media companies went public, they started prioritizing things like shareholder profit rather than safety. I think Facebook — Meta — is probably the most prominent example of this.
Do we want the still mostly dudes holding our future in their hands to be beholden to market forces and profits above all else?
Arguably they already are.
This is one of the arguments that has been made about OpenAI: that the reason they’ve had some of these issues around safety has been because they are motivated by chasing the market and trying to raise money. Because unlike social media, this is a very capital-intensive business.
You need to be showing investors something. You need to be proving yourself out in a way that you didn’t necessarily have to with social media right off the bat. So I think that’s part of it. But I think that going public potentially makes that worse. The chatbot will try to keep you engaged. It will give you an answer and then it will ask a tag question. And that’s an engagement tool that keeps you engaged with the AI.
You see that also with some of the sycophantic behavior you see with these AI where they’re like, “Wow, that’s such a smart question. Gee, you’re so bright.”
And is that really good for us? I don’t think it is. But it does keep people involved, and it does keep people engaged with the AI, and if you need to be showing user numbers or otherwise showing metrics to investors, those are the ones you show.
It seems almost silly to ask if being a publicly traded company could make these companies more accountable or even safer. But then again, if you think about Anthropic and their whole dustup with the Pentagon, without being publicly traded, they said, you know, you guys are crossing the red line and we have to reassess our relationship.
Do you think something about being publicly traded post-IPO could make a company like Anthropic or OpenAI a little bit more conservative in their developments and their technology?
To the degree that you can say, “Hey, like I was misled by this company as a shareholder because they told me there were these safety practices that actually were not in play and then take them to court” — that is something that can be done, sure. Unless you’re talking about SpaceX, which has a governance structure that effectively bars shareholder suits, unless you have a specific percentage of holding.
So not SpaceX, but maybe Anthropic, maybe OpenAI have this additional measure of accountability where shareholder lawsuits can potentially move the needle.
But most likely of all we just start to see a lot more ads.
I think that’s right. I think you also see prices go up for the enterprise products — and maybe for all of the other products as well.
Tech
Qobuz Mobile App Adds Synchronized Lyrics, Translations and a Smarter Player
Qobuz has never had much trouble convincing audiophiles that it sounds good. Convincing them that its app was equally polished has occasionally required a more generous interpretation of the word “polished.”
The latest Qobuz mobile update addresses that problem with a redesigned player for iOS and Android, adding synchronized lyrics, lyric translations, improved queue management and more direct access to recommendations, credits, artist biographies and album descriptions. Version 10.0 reached Apple devices this week, followed by version 10.0.1, while the same feature set is now listed through Google Play.
What Is New?
The redesigned player adds:
- Time synchronized lyrics
- Lyric translations where available
- Recommendations directly from the playback screen
- Faster access to song credits
- Artist biographies and album descriptions
- Autoplay controls
- Swipe gestures
- Simplified queue management
The new interface keeps more of Qobuz’s editorial and metadata features close to the music rather than sending listeners through several menus to discover who played bass, produced the album or wrote the review.
That may sound like routine housekeeping, but Qobuz users have waited a long time for built-in lyrics. Until now, anyone determined to follow along had to use a third-party service or remember the words, which becomes increasingly unreliable somewhere after the second verse.

Lyrics Are Not Unique, but the Context Is
Apple Music and Spotify already offer synchronized lyrics and translations, so Qobuz is not inventing a new category.
What makes the update more interesting is how lyrics now sit beside the service’s existing editorial material, detailed credits, album reviews, biographies and high-resolution playback. Qobuz is trying to create a richer listening screen rather than merely enlarging the album cover and placing another AI button underneath it.
That approach fits the platform. Qobuz has consistently emphasized human curation and music journalism, with more than 500,000 pieces of editorial content alongside a catalog of more than 100 million lossless and high-resolution tracks.
Spotify remains stronger at social discovery and algorithmic recommendations. Apple Music integrates more naturally across Apple hardware. Qobuz’s advantage is that it still behaves as though listeners may want to know something about the album beyond whether the algorithm believes it is suitable for Tuesday afternoon.
Why Should Qobuz Users Care?
The new player reduces friction.
Listeners can examine lyrics, translations, credits, biographies and recommendations without constantly leaving the playback screen. Better queue controls and visible autoplay settings should also make it easier to understand what the app intends to play next, which has not always been one of streaming software’s great acts of transparency.
The update becomes more useful when paired with Qobuz Connect. A phone or tablet can serve as the control interface while compatible streamers, amplifiers and powered speakers pull the lossless or high-resolution stream directly from Qobuz. The mobile app therefore matters even when the phone is not the device producing the sound.
Qobuz Connect now supports more than 100 hardware and software partners, making the quality of the mobile control experience far more important than it was when listeners often had to use a manufacturer’s own app.

What Is Still Missing?
The update improves playback and discovery, but it does not solve every Qobuz weakness.
The service still trails Spotify and Apple Music in social features, collaborative listening and some forms of personalized discovery. Lyric availability and translations will also depend on the underlying catalog data, so users should not expect every obscure jazz pressing or regional release to suddenly become karaoke-ready.
Qobuz has also described this as a mobile redesign. Desktop and connected television users should not assume they are receiving the same interface immediately.

The Bottom Line
Qobuz did not need another audio-quality logo. It needed a better player.
Synchronized lyrics and translations bring the service closer to feature parity with Apple Music and Spotify, while the improved queue controls, credits and editorial access play directly to Qobuz’s actual strengths.
The update is not revolutionary, but it makes the app easier to use and gives subscribers more information without turning every listening session into a conversation with an AI assistant.
For a service that charges $12.99 monthly or an effective $10.83 per month with an annual Studio Solo subscription, that is a more convincing improvement than simply raising the price and blaming licensing costs.
Availability
The redesigned Qobuz player is available now through the latest Qobuz apps for iOS, iPadOS and Android. Try Qobuz for free.
Related Reading:
Tech
Add Sensors To Everything! | Hackaday
“You can’t control what you can’t measure” goes the old chestnut. But that’s a little bit negative, in my opinion. Instead, think of the benefits of sprinkling sensors around everywhere: you gain insight where you simply didn’t have it beforehand.
We were thinking about this in the context of the recent video on pressure advance in 3D printers. Essentially, the unmelted filament acts as a springy piston, and that springiness means that the pressure built up in the melted plastic lags the feedrate of new filament. We usually calibrate this out with a guesstimate constant, but it can be different for every different filament. Measuring that pressure directly with a strain gauge in the hot end makes more sense.
But then there are knock-on benefits of having a sensor in the hot end. You can use the strain gauge as Prusa does to run the nozzle gently into the bed and set the z-axis height. Or you can use over-pressure as a sign that the nozzle is clogged. It’s quite possible that you can use it to signal other things that can go wrong as well, but you can’t tell until you put the sensor on in the first place.
Of course, you don’t want to put a pressure sensor where you want to know the temperature, or vice-versa. But as a general rule, the more you can measure, the more you can discover about the way your system is running. How many strain gauges are too many?
Tech
3D On The Playdate Handheld
The Playdate is a small handheld console with a dedicated fanbase. Among them is [Cristina Ramos], who recently decided to try and push the limits of the hardware by implementing a 3D renderer for the platform.
[Cristina] began by implementing a raycaster. This is a very simple way to do 3D on limited hardware, and this technique was used by some early games like Wolfenstein 3D. However, for [Cristina], it was more a test to get an idea of the performance limitations of the Playdate. After getting her feet wet with that, she stepped up to implementing a renderer that relied on binary space partitioning, which could load map files in the same format used by the classic Quake engine. There was naturally plenty of work to do to handle things like texture mapping and lighting, too, particularly given the vagaries of working with the Playdate’s 1-bit monochrome screen. Using a simplistic, cel-shaded like approach for textures gave things a good look while preserving visual readability on the low-resolution screen.
The 3D engine and associated game remain a work in progress for [Cristina] — we look forward to seeing where the project goes next. We’ve seen similar projects on resource-limited platforms before, too.
I was told you couldn’t do 3D on the Playdate, so I did it.Then I was told there was no way I could create exterior levels like those in Mirror’s Edge, so I proved them wrong again.
— Cristina Ramos (@saffroncr.bsky.social) 2026-07-22T08:57:09.594Z
Tech
Facebook Verified is here to confirm whether your friend is AI
Meta has announced Facebook Verified, a free badge that will be visible on a user’s profile and is designed to confirm whether that user is a real person or an AI without actually checking that a user is who they say they are.
The new badge is separate from Meta’s existing Meta Verified program and is available to eligible Facebook users who are 18 or older. Users must also be in good standing with Facebook’s community standards before they can be verified.
Alongside profiles, Facebook users will also be able to see a person’s verified status in the Marketplace, Facebook Dating, and Facebook Groups initially. However, Meta has confirmed that it intends to bring the badges to the main feed in the future.
Free, basic verification
Importantly, unlike Meta Verified, Facebook Verified doesn’t require a subscription and is available absolutely free. Users only need to complete the verification process once.
The verification process itself requires Facebook users to record a short selfie video. Facebook then uses the video to check the person’s appearance against their existing profile photos to confirm a match. The process should take just a few minutes.
However, it’s important to know what Facebook Verified actually verifies. Meta says that it means a profile belongs to a real person, not an AI.
Facebook Verified does not necessarily mean that the person is who they say they are. That’s an important distinction to remember when using Facebook from here on out.
Meta says that Facebook Verified will roll out in phases, starting with “select markets.” Unfortunately, it hasn’t confirmed which markets those are.
Tech
Malicious sites use JavaScript to build malware in browser memory
A massive malvertising campaign is using fake Solana, Luno, and TradingView webpages with malicious JavaScript that instructs browsers to assemble malware directly in memory.
The operation has been active since late 2024 and is localized to 25 languages in 12 countries, primarily in Asia Pacific and Latin America.
A filtering system ensures that only real targets (retail traders and crypto investors) land on the malicious pages, while researchers, scanners, and security bots are redirected to blank pages.
Ad security platform Confiant says that the campaign’s design stands out through its use of the web browser as “a local assembly pipeline” for the malware.
Although the fake portals feature a download button, a ReactJS library on the landing page prepares the browser for a managed download flow, a process typically used for handling various types of file transfers.

Source: Confiant
According to Confiant’s analysis, the page first registers a service worker, which acts as a download manager and helps build the malware file incrementally.
In the first stage, the page sets up a shared worker that acts as an engine that assembles the malware from components received in the next steps of the attack.
The researchers say that in the second stage “the landing page uses its SharedWorker to request itself for a ‘/config’ response” with seed and size parameters that are randomized and specific for each session.
By rotating these parameters, the threat actors make sure that the resulting malware file has a unique hash to bypass static detection.
Confiant explains that “‘/config’ is an assembly response rather than a normal download response. It returns a template and the inputs the browser needs to build the file locally.”
Remote components retrieved this way and the locally generated bytes are then used to create the malicious payload from a clean version of the Bun executable.
After building the final malware executable, the fake download page hands it to the service worker at the beginning of the process and triggers a same-origin download path.
“From the browser’s point of view, the user is downloading an executable from the landing page domain,” Confiant researchers say, and the mark-of-the-web tag is added, despite some of the components originating from a different source.
The advantage of this technique is that no finished file is transmitted over the network, making detection less likely, and analysis becomes more challenging.
Confiant says that earlier variants of the SourTrade campaign used the StreamSaver project on GitHub to deliver the malicious payload. Since April, though, the operation switched to the same-origin ServiceWorker delivery method.
While Confiant researchers do not reveal the nature of the payload, they found evidence supporting a Bitdefender report in 2025 about a resilient malvertising campaign that used StreamSaver to distribute malware.
Bitdefender found that the payload had the following capabilities:
- intercept all user network traffic (acting as a proxy)
- collect cookie and password data
- record keystrokes (keylogging) and take screenshots
- steal cryptocurrency wallet data
- establish long-term persistence
Since the SourTrade campaign targets retail traders and crypto investors, users engaged in these activities are advised to avoid downloading financial or cryptocurrency apps from social media advertisements or sponsored search results.
The researchers advise getting executable files from the company’s official website. As an added precaution, they should verify the installer’s digital signature and publisher before running it.
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
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Galaxy Z Fold 8: which foldable should you choose?
Samsung
Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra has better camera specs and a higher-capacity battery than its smaller sibling, but its dimensions aren’t as well-suited to video streaming, and it costs more.
Pros
- Includes a telephoto camera
- High-capacity 5,000mAh battery
- Big screens
Cons
- Very expensive
- Large size won’t suit everyone
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 is smaller than its Ultra counterpart and lacks a telephoto camera, but it also costs less, has just as much power, and boasts a compact display that may suit some users better.
Pros
- Lower price than the Z Fold 8 Ultra
- Top-end power
- More pocket-friendly than the Ultra
Cons
- No telephoto camera
- Smaller battery than the Ultra
Samsung has unveiled three new foldable phones — the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra, and the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 8. And while the last of that trio falls into its own category, the former two phones have a lot in common.
Aside from having similar names, they’re both book-style foldables, and they also share plenty of specs. But between very different form factors and differences in their respective camera setups, there’s lots to differentiate them, too.
So, below, we’ve compared the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 and Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra, so you can easily understand how they stack up. We haven’t reviewed either model just yet, but we have been hands-on with both, and so have been able to draw some early conclusions as to who they’re best suited to.
Latest Videos FromTechRadar
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: specs comparison
Before we look closer at the key features of these two phones, we’ve detailed their core specs below, so you can see their major similarities and differences at a glance.
| Header Cell – Column 0 |
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra |
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 |
|---|---|---|
|
Dimensions (unfolded): |
158.4 x 143.2 x 4.1mm |
161.4 x 123.9 x 4.5mm |
|
Dimensions (folded): |
158.4 x 72.8 x 8.9mm |
81.9 x 123.9 x 9.7mm |
|
Weight: |
215g |
201g |
|
Foldable display: |
8.0-inch 2256 x 2504 AMOLED, 120Hz |
7.6-inch 1828 x 2448 AMOLED, 120Hz |
|
Cover screen: |
6.5-inch 1080 x 2520 AMOLED, 120Hz |
5.5-inch 1248 x 1972 AMOLED, 120Hz |
|
Chipset: |
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 for Galaxy |
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 for Galaxy |
|
RAM: |
12GB / 16GB |
12GB / 16GB |
|
Rear cameras: |
200MP wide, 50MP ultra-wide, 10MP telephoto |
50MP wide, 50MP ultra-wide |
|
Front camera: |
10MP and 10MP |
10MP and 10MP |
|
Battery: |
5,000mAh |
4,800mAh |
|
Charging: |
45W wired, 20W wireless |
45W wired, 20W wireless |
|
Storage: |
256GB / 512GB / 1TB |
256GB / 512GB / 1TB |
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: price and availability
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra and Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 were both announced on July 22, with pre-orders opening the same day.
General availability for both phones starts on August 7, though if you pre-order, you might get them earlier — at the time of writing, we’re seeing an August 3 delivery date in the UK, for example.
As for pricing, the Galaxy Z Fold 8 starts at $1,899.99 / £1,699 / AU$2,699. The Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra is more expensive, with a starting price of $2,099.99 / £1,899 / AU$2,999. In both cases, that’s with 256GB of storage, though you can pick either model up in 512GB and 1TB configurations.
So, in other words, the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra starts at $200 / £200 / AU$300 more than the standard Galaxy Z Fold 8.
|
Storage |
US price |
UK price |
AU price |
|---|---|---|---|
|
256GB |
$2,099.99 |
£1,899 |
AU$2,999 |
|
512GB |
$2,299.99 |
£2,069 |
AU$3,299 |
|
1TB |
$2,699.99 |
£2,409 |
AU$3,899 |
|
Storage |
US price |
UK price |
AU price |
|---|---|---|---|
|
256GB |
$1,899.99 |
£1,699 |
AU$2,699 |
|
512GB |
$2,099.99 |
£1,869 |
AU$2,999 |
|
1TB |
$2,499.99 |
£2,209 |
AU$3,599 |
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: design
In some ways, the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra and Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 have similar designs — after all, they’re both foldable phones that fold and unfold horizontally like a book. However, their shapes and dimensions differ a lot.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra looks a lot like the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7, with a tall, narrow design, leading to dimensions of 158.4 x 143.2 x 4.1mm when unfolded, 158.4 x 72.8 x 8.9mm when folded, and a weight of 215g.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8, on the other hand, is shorter and wider, looking more like a passport than a book, with dimensions of 161.4 x 123.9 x 4.5mm when unfolded, 81.9 x 123.9 x 9.7mm when folded, and a weight of 201g.
Both phones, though, have an IP48 rating, meaning they’re water-resistant to depths of 1.5 meters for up to 30 minutes, and also resistant to dust and other objects greater than 1mm in size.
They also both have aluminum frames, and share Samsung’s Flex Titanium technology, meaning their hinges are similarly invisible (you will notice their respective hinges at certain angles, but Samsung has come a long way in this department since the days of the original Galaxy Fold).
As for colors, while the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra is sold in Graphite, Cream, Green Shadow, and Violet Shadow, the Z Fold 8 can be bought in Graphite, Cream, Lavender, and Pistachio shades.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: display
Now we get to the biggest difference between these two phones: their displays. Or rather, the shape and purpose of those displays.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra has an 8.0-inch 2256 x 2504 foldable AMOLED screen and a 6.5-inch 1080 x 2520 AMOLED cover screen, both with a 120Hz refresh rate and around 422 pixels per inch.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 has a 7.6-inch 1828 x 2448 foldable AMOLED screen with around 403 pixels per inch and a 5.5-inch 1248 x 1972 AMOLED cover screen with roughly 428 pixels per inch.
So, both screens on the standard Z Fold 8 are noticeably smaller, but the aspect ratios arguably make a bigger difference, with the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra having an almost square 1.11:1 foldable screen and a narrow 21:9 cover screen.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8, on the other hand, has a 4:3 foldable screen, which is ideal for widescreen content, and a 10:16 cover screen, which is a bit more square than a typical phone and can be easily covered with one hand from top to bottom.
The taller, narrower Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra does have size benefits of its own, mind. It’s harder to stretch your thumb to the top of this phone’s display, but it’s more easily covered with one hand from left to right. And when open, the Ultra is better suited to productivity apps that display square-shaped content like spreadsheets.
For video streaming, you’ll want to go for the Galaxy Z Fold 8, since most video content is displayed in 16:9 (you’ll see smaller black bars on a 4:3 screen), and it’s arguably the better-shaped phone for gaming, too.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: cameras
There are big differences between the cameras on these two phones, with the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra coming out on top. This device has a 200MP f/1.7 wide camera, a 50MP f/1.9 ultra-wide with a 120-degree field of view, and a 10MP f/2.4 telephoto with 3x optical zoom. It also has a 10MP selfie camera on each screen.
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 has one fewer camera and fewer megapixels in its wide one. Specifically, you’re getting a 50MP f/1.8 wide camera, a 50MP f/1.9 ultra-wide with a 120-degree field of view, and two 10MP selfie cameras. So, it lacks the telephoto snapper found on the Ultra.
Both phones, though, are capable of recording video in up to 8K quality at 30fps, or in 4K at up to 120fps.
We haven’t had a chance to test both phones’ cameras just yet, but we’ll update this article with images when we have. The Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra will, for obvious reasons, be the superior zoom shooter, but there isn’t likely to be too much to choose between the phones’ 200MP and 50MP wide cameras, since both will default to smaller photo sizes anyway, as is standard practice for modern smartphones.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: performance and software
There’s nothing to choose here, with both the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra and the Z Fold 8 having a Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 for Galaxy chipset and 12GB of RAM — unless you get a 1TB model, in which case you’ll get 16GB of RAM.
This combination of specs will ensure top-end performance regardless of what you’re doing on your phone, and in our short time with both devices, they’re equally capable gaming phones and productivity powerhouses (notwithstanding their respective display sizes, which makes each better suited to different tasks).
Both the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra and Galaxy Z Fold 8 also run Android 17 overlaid with One UI 9, and come with the promise of seven major Android upgrades.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: battery
Samsung has finally started putting silicon-carbon batteries in its phones, allowing for higher-capacity batteries in the same footprint. As a result, it’s managed to pack a 5,000mAh battery into the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra (up from 4,400mAh in the Z Fold 7).
Unsurprisingly, the smaller Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 features a lower-capacity battery (4,800mAh), which should allow the Ultra to last slightly longer — but not by much.
Samsung claims you’ll get 27 hours of video playback from the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra, while the standard Galaxy Z Fold 8 is rated for 26 hours. In our early anecdotal testing, we’ve managed to use both phones for multiple days without needing to charge them, so those playback estimates are likely accurate.
Both phones also support up to 45W wired charging and 20W wireless, so you won’t be losing out on charging speed by picking one phone over the other.
Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra vs Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8: early verdict
The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra has bigger, more productivity-friendly screens than the Galaxy Z Fold 8, along with an extra camera, more megapixels in its wide camera, and a slightly higher-capacity battery. However, it also costs $200 / £200 / AU$300 more, and offers identical power.
Its larger screens also won’t be desirable for everyone — indeed, the Galaxy Z Fold 8’s screens are much more video-friendly, and may soon become the norm for foldables — so the only indisputable advantages of the pricier model are its cameras and larger battery (though on the latter, we’re talking fine margins).
Whether those extra features are significant enough to justify the Galaxy Z Fold 8 Ultra’s higher price will, of course, be subjective, but you might want to wait for our full reviews to see how these two phones compare in practice.
Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds.
Tech
Qualcomm’s chip price hikes could make phones, wearables, and laptops even pricier
Ripple effect: As rising memory costs push up the prices of everything from PCs and smartphones to game consoles, one key hardware supplier after another has announced that it can no longer delay price hikes. This time it’s Qualcomm, with a fast-approaching adjustment that could make smartphones, tablets, wearables, and some laptops even less affordable.
Qualcomm issued a letter to its clients on Friday warning that its chips will soon become more expensive due to rising supply costs. The company develops chips that power most Android devices, numerous wearables, automotive systems, and a rising crop of Arm-based laptops, so the impact is expected to be widespread.
Bloomberg, which obtained the letter, reports that price hikes will rise by an unspecified double-digit percentage, and will apply to components shipped after September 1. Qualcomm has been unable to escape the skyrocketing supply costs that have impacted Microsoft, Apple, Sony, and numerous other manufacturers.
Memory and storage are the biggest culprits, having quintupled in price since late last year as AI data center construction absorbs most of the available production capacity of DRAM and NAND manufacturers. RAM prices could rise by another 40% to 50% in the third quarter of this year, then an additional 30% to 40% in Q4. The ripple effect has also pushed up the prices of CPUs, printed circuit boards, and other components. Qualcomm at least partially blames its upcoming price hike on the need to find alternative suppliers.

Samsung phones, which are powered by Qualcomm’s Snapdragon processors, might be the most popular affected products. However, wearable devices like smart glasses and VR headsets also use chips from the same family. Additionally, Microsoft and various PC manufacturers are attempting to promote an alternative Arm-based version of Windows via new lineups of more powerful Snapdragon SoCs.
Qualcomm’s adjustment might also affect Google’s plans to launch a lineup of Snapdragon-based laptops using a new Android-based operating system later this year.
Qualcomm’s products even extend to the AI data centers responsible for the component shortages. The company recently unveiled ambitious plans to compete with Nvidia in the server CPU market.
The situation is expected to worsen next year due to further price hikes from the manufacturer that Qualcomm, Apple, Nvidia, Google, Amazon, Arm, and MediaTek all rely heavily upon: TSMC. Recent reports indicate that the chipmaker will raise prices for most of its semiconductor nodes at least once next year by around 10%, creating a much broader ripple effect.
Tech
Librarians are hosting viral ‘Avoiding AI’ workshops for people who are fed up with Big Tech
“Everybody’s on their phone at my program!” joked Charlie Bailey, a librarian in South Philadelphia. He’s just asked his audience to pull out their phones so that he can walk them through the steps of disabling Apple Intelligence and Gemini.
Bailey stands at the front of a library classroom that’s outfitted for children – the focal point is the vibrant rug he’s standing on, which reminds us that M is for “moon” and Z is for “zebra.” But the 20-odd adults in the room aren’t here to learn about the alphabet. They’re at a workshop called Avoiding AI, which, in this context does not stand for “apple” and “igloo.”
“I was inspired by the feeling of people’s frustration with AI tools being kind of forced onto them, and feeling like AI tools we didn’t ask for are suddenly everywhere in our lives,” Bailey told TechCrunch.
Bailey starts the hour-long workshop with an overview of how AI chatbots and other consumer AI tools work, explaining why people might want to use these products, and why they might opt to abstain. Then, he walks through all of the most popular tech platforms and devices, showing step-by-step instructions on the projector to guide people through turning off specific features.
“As a librarian, I think it’s important to see this as advancing digital literacy and helping people reclaim their autonomy over whether they want to use AI tools,” Bailey said. “It’s important, especially when it can be so difficult not to use them, and when the design seems to force adoption.”

Bailey got the idea for the Avoiding AI workshop from Hannah Cyrus, a librarian in Maine. He was one of dozens of librarians from around the world who contacted Cyrus after she published a journal article about developing her own workshop.
“This has never happened before with anything I’ve worked on,” Cyrus told TechCrunch. “Nobody has ever been emailing me like, ‘Can you give me your Intro to Computers slides?’”
At the Bangor Public Library, patrons turn to Cyrus when they need help with anything involving technology.
“More and more, I was getting questions about, ‘How do I turn this [AI] stuff off? Why is it trying to write my emails for me? Why is it trying to summarize my one-sentence email that I can easily read?’” Cyrus said. “I just decided that with so much media hype out there about AI products, it would be a good opportunity to teach people about the basics of what is happening when you’re using this technology, and then getting into how to turn it off if you don’t want to use it.”
Usually, Cyrus’ classes like Intro to Computers get about a dozen attendees. But so many people expressed interest in her first Avoiding AI workshop that she had to cut off registration at 30 people, open a waitlist, and share the workshop on Zoom. Including the livestream, about 70 people attended each of Cyrus’ first two workshops.
When Bailey followed Cyrus’ lead to host a workshop in Philadelphia, the reception was similarly unprecedented. The library’s Instagram post about the “Avoiding AI” event got over 2,000 likes and 220 shares, whereas most of the library’s posts don’t get more than a few dozen likes. He scheduled a second program because the first got too many registrations.
“As an information professional, it feels good to see people skeptical of AI,” Bailey said. “It felt really good to see how many people share this feeling.”
There’s a sense of camaraderie among the room of strangers during the workshop. When Bailey invites attendees to share their own tips, one person explains that when you append “&udm=14” to a Google Search, it will hide AI results. Bailey writes the string of characters down on a whiteboard next to the log-in credentials for the teen Wi-Fi server.
“You have to go through all the trouble to buy a home in today’s world, and two years from now, there could be a data center next to your house,” one workshop attendee named Johnny says.
“I keep getting AI shoved down my throat at work, and every time I see it, I think about the environment,” another attendee named Gabrielle adds. But she’s also not writing off AI as a technology altogether. “I’m not against AI in terms of medical breakthroughs.”
AI naysayers know that this technology is far broader than just chatbots and deepfake apps. Cyrus mentioned how useful optical character recognition is for scanning old documents at the library. But for her and the people who go to her workshops, the anti-AI movement isn’t about rejecting technology altogether so much as it is about advocating for more control, agency, and freedom in how people use technology.
“I think the forced adoption of AI on people’s devices might be the straw that’s breaking the camel’s back in some ways,” she said. “The awareness has been growing for a long time that these products and these companies that make them have an outsized influence over us, and that we’re not really using these products in the way that we would like to.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
Administration Accelerating Immigration Hearings To Ensure Migrants Miss New Court Dates
from the cruelty-is-all-they-have dept
No punishment is too vindictive. No cruelty is too small. The administration that is openly seeking to create a white Christian nationalist autocracy will do whatever it can to expel as many non-white people from this nation as possible.
Trump and his cabinet members constantly claim the country has been overrun by dangerous foreign migrants, many of them from (direct quote right here) “shithole countries.” They blame Biden for this completely imaginary “crisis” and preach the same message to the faithful over and over again: “worst of the worst.”
But it’s not that and it’s never been that. If the administration was simply trying to eject dangerous criminals, ICE wouldn’t be sending officers to immigration courts to pounce on migrants who are following the rules for staying in this country. ICE wouldn’t have set up a fake college to snare foreigners following the visa rules by continuing their education. And the government wouldn’t be telling its lawyers to dismiss ongoing removal proceedings solely for the purpose of making migrants attending scheduled probation check-ins immediately arrestable.
It’s only getting nastier and uglier. The Trump administration is now moving up immigration hearing dates for the sole purpose of generating more unearned “wins” that will, in turn, generate more deportations. Here’s Gwynne Hogan with the brutally nasty details for The City Reporter:
The mass immigration hearings picked up in New York City in early June, The City Reporter reported at the time. They were dubbed mega masters because a single judge could be assigned a docket of more than 100 cases a day, about double a regular master calendar docket before.
In addition to the large number of cases, many of these hearings were scheduled just weeks in advance and replaced hearings people might have had on the books months or years away.
The City Reporter observed one such mega master hearing where, on a docket of 121 cases, 39 people and their family members were ordered removed for failing to show up to court. In some instances, family members’ cases were linked.
As this report notes, for years most hearing dates were generally scheduled 180 days out from the initial hearing. But in the past few months — along with the creation of these so-called “mega masters” — the lead time has dropped precipitously. In May, the average was 98 days. By June, it was 42 days.
This is deliberate. Migrants engaged in the legal process would have no reason to believe their cases would be accelerated. After all, the mass deportation surges the Trump administration has generated tens of thousands of new cases, which would generally result in additional delays, rather than sudden accelerations.
And while the government is required to notify migrants of schedule changes, it’s not as though it’s a push notification via the normally accepted form of human connection these days. It’s a letter sent by snail mail. And it’s not as though this government is going to perform any due diligence to make sure the notification is seen by the intended recipient.
What’s happening here is the administration flooding the docket and ambushing migrants who fail to check their hearing status daily and who would have no reason to do so when they hadn’t seen any changes to hearing dates for several months.
The plan is as ugly as it is shitty: accelerate thousands of hearing dates and send federal officers out to scoop up migrants who are now on the wrong end of in absentia rulings handed down by judges who are deliberately overloaded to prevent them from fully engaging with these cases.
This is all in service to the impossible deportation goals set by the administration. You can’t get 2-3,000 arrests per day without cheating. Here’s how this has been playing out over the past couple of months.
In June, 4,447 people were ordered removed by immigration judges in the [New York City] “in absentia,” meaning they’d missed their hearings, the report found. That was more than double the number in May when 2,189 were ordered removed in absentia.
The analysis found the surge echoed a rise in absentia removal orders across the country. There were 53,808 such orders nationally in June, a 55% jump from a month earlier.
The real human cost is as incalculable as it is heartbreaking:
On Friday morning, several dozen people managed to make it to a courtroom inside 26 Federal Plaza for their mega master hearing where Immigration Judge Thanos Kanellakos appeared virtually from a courtroom in Maryland, overseeing a docket of 90 cases.
Most of the people who made it to court had traveled hundreds of miles from Tennessee, Georgia, North Dakota and Illinois to attend.
[…]
Several people at court told The City Reporter they’d had a court date scheduled months or even years away when they happened to double-check the online portal recently and learned they had a new hearing scheduled a few days away.
There is no legitimate reason for the government to be doing this. There is only the constant desire to hurt human beings this administration considers to be less than human. That’s why it’s trying to eradicate temporary protected status for all but the whitest migrants. And that’s why it’s engaging in barely disguised entrapment to keep its flying rail cars and prison camps loaded with its preferred scapegoats.
Filed Under: bigotry, dhs, doj, due process, ice, mass deportation, mega master, trump administration
Tech
Kalshi demands Netflix take down trailer for ‘Prediction Games’ documentary
Prediction market Kalshi sent Netflix a cease-and-desist letter on Friday demanding that the streaming service take down the trailer for an upcoming documentary. In the letter, Kalshi claimed the trailer is “defamatory” and contains “both fabricated documents and false and misleading statements.”
“Instadocs: The Prediction Games” is a documentary about the rise of prediction markets. According to Netflix, the film — part of the streamer’s “Instadoc” series of fast-turnaround documentaries — features interviews with both Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan and Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour.
The trailer, however, focuses on a recent party in Las Vegas, where men who have “made millions of dollars on prediction markets, probably eight figures, just over the course of the World Cup” have gathered to watch the World Cup final. One of the guests declares, “I like betting on Kalshi,” while another shows off an apparent $5,000 bet on their phone.
However, Kalshi is currently banned from operating in Nevada due to a court order. In its cease-and-desist letter, Kalshi said the bet shown on the phone is actually a screenshot of a bet made on May 16, 2025 — long before the ban. But the company argued that in the trailer, Netflix “misled its millions of customers into believing this individual was able to successfully trade sport event contracts in Nevada on July 19, 2026.”
In its letter, Kalshi also said that it recently spoke to a Netflix employee who “agreed not to feature the receipt in the documentary when it is released” on Sunday, July 26.
“However — despite Kalshi demonstrating to this employee that the claims in the video were demonstrably false — Netflix inexplicably refused to remove the receipt from the trailer currently circulating on the homepage of the Netflix app,” the company said.
Netflix doesn’t dispute that the screenshot is of a bet from 2025, but a spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter that none of the documentary footage was fabricated.
“The footage was filmed at the Winible World Cup Watch Weekend in Las Vegas on July 17, 2026,” the spokesperson said. “The featured trader with the trade on Spain showed us a screenshot of his bet, that was made in May 2025 prior to any Nevada court order. Any specific trades or bets referenced during that weekend are between the individual and the app in which they placed the trades.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
-
Fashion1 day agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Politics6 days agoDemocrats look to World Cup watch parties to register thousands of voters
-
News Videos6 days agoBig Money Is Entering XRP
-
Tech5 days agoSail Virtually Aboard The “Itanic” With IA-64 Emulator
-
Crypto World4 days agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
Tech5 days ago
Turtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
NewsBeat5 days agoUnregistered fitter used Gas Safe logo on business flyers
-
Business4 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Entertainment4 days agoJohnny Depp’s R-Rated Gothic Cult Classic Gets New Release Ahead of Sydney Sweeney Remake
-
Crypto World3 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
Tech5 days agoWatch Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley discuss the future of surveillance at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026
-
NewsBeat5 days agoShanghai science forum photos show China’s AI and robotics advances in rivalry with US
-
Crypto World5 days agoCircle’s President Sold Over 360,000 Shares, The Filings Explain Why
-
Tech6 days agoSubway Sandwich Computers Get a Second Life as Gaming Machines
-
Sports2 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
News Videos2 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Fashion2 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
Tech6 days agoHow To Use Claude’s Reflect Dashboard And Learn When It’s Time To Touch Grass
-
Tech5 days agoThe 35 Best Board Games for Family Game Night
-
Entertainment6 days agoStephen Colbert Returns to Social Media After Late Show End



You must be logged in to post a comment Login