Congrats to any budding Nostradamus out there who peered into the future to boldly predict that Amazon would bring more shopping features to Alexa+ sooner rather than later. A gold star for you. Yes, it hasn’t taken too long for Amazon to weave more features into the generative AI-powered version of Alexa that are designed to get you to buy more stuff.

Shopping features were part of the original Alexa from the jump, of course, but Amazon is doing some interesting things with the latest iteration. For instance, the company is rolling out a new price tracking feature. Tell it the product you want and how much you’re willing to pay for it. As soon as the item goes on sale for below that price, Alexa+ will automatically order it for you using your default payment method and delivery address. This deal tracking feature also keeps an eye on items in your cart and wishlists. Maybe remember to turn this off when you’re going out of town for a while, though.

Another feature that Alexa+ users can start trying today is a Shopping Essentials tool on Echo Show 15 and 21. You’ll be able to see real-time tracking for your orders, your recent orders, household essentials that it may be time to reorder, saved items and your shopping list. Tap the screen and you can find out more info about products, add them to your cart and complete your purchase. You’ll soon be able to add a shopping widget to your Echo Show home screen, but for now you can check this out by saying “Open Shopping Essentials” or “Alexa, where’s my stuff?”

Elsewhere, Alexa+ can offer personalized product recommendations after you share details about a special occasion or a person you’re buying for. That could be handy if you haven’t completed your gift shopping yet. There’s also an option to add extra items onto a current order until just before it leaves an Amazon warehouse. Alexa+ might make some suggestions here, such as asking if you need batteries for a new gadget or toy.

Amazon was always going to be interested in tapping into Alexa+ to prompt you to buy more goods from the company, but some of these features are pretty interesting, especially for deal hawks and those who order items frequently. It makes even more sense now as to why Amazon is trying to prevent third-party AI agents (such as the one in Perplexity’s Comet browser) from carrying out purchases on the platform.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/amazon-is-rolling-out-new-shopping-features-for-alexa-because-of-course-it-is-150000355.html?src=rss

The latest Apple Watch costs $429. A basic Peloton Bike is $1,395, plus a $49.99 monthly subscription. Throw in a WHOOP membership at $149 annually, maybe an Oura Ring for another $349, and suddenly you’re looking at thousands of dollars to participate in what’s become the standard way many Americans approach their health. For some, that price tag is steep. For others, it’s a non-starter.

I’m no stranger to the appeal of the latest, greatest wearables and smart health devices. But as all this wellness technology become the norm, what does this mean for people who don’t strap a smartwatch onto their wrists? If comprehensive health data—and the insights it provides—becomes a luxury good, the existing digital health divide will only get worse.

The digital health divide

The issue starts well before anyone considers buying a fitness tracker. Digital equity in healthcare is already a fundamental access issue. “In many ways, access to healthcare means access to technology,” says Amy Gonzales, an associate professor in UC Santa Barbara’s Department of Communication. “Especially since [the COVID-19 pandemic], the healthcare industry relies heavily on technology for their services. Text reminders about your appointment, scanning a QR code to check in, needing an e-health account to see your test results, or some providers only being available via telehealth, and so on.”

The basic infrastructure of modern healthcare—patient portals, appointment scheduling apps, prescription management systems—demands a level of digital literacy and access that not everyone can meet. Seniors may struggle with smartphone interfaces. Low-income families might rely on limited mobile data or shared devices. People with certain disabilities may find standard health apps difficult or impossible to navigate. And the problem compounds: Gonzales notes the populations most likely to face barriers with technology are often the same groups who may need that healthcare the most.

Fitness trackers are becoming the norm—for some

Against this backdrop of baseline digital inequity, fitness trackers and wearables have gotten more and more popular. These aren’t essential medical devices in the traditional sense—nobody’s life support depends on their Fitbit—but they’ve become cultural markers of health optimization. More concerning, they’re increasingly becoming tools that provide genuinely useful health information that simply isn’t available to people without the resources to buy in. Heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, sleep stages, stress levels, and more: We’re living in a time of unprecedented insight into what our bodies are doing, if you can afford it.

IN some circles, these devices have become simply how health-conscious people approach their wellbeing. Studies have shown that wearables can help detect abnormal heart rhythms, encourage increased physical activity, and provide early warning signs of illness. Some insurance companies offer discounts for users who share their fitness tracking data. Employers incorporate wearables into wellness programs.

While this is promising for those who can afford it, others get left behind. “The digital divide is even more problematic with ‘bonus devices,’ or health ‘accoutrements,’ like smart wearables,” says Gonzales. If at-risk health populations are already at-risk for digital access, it tracks that this access gap is only getting wider.

The problem with ubquitous fitness tech

The creation of a two-tiered information system is perhaps the most insidious aspect of fitness tech inequality. A person with an Apple Watch receives detailed daily reports about their cardiovascular health, activity levels, and sleep quality. They get alerts when their heart rate becomes irregular, or they can share comprehensive data with their physician that provides context for symptoms and conditions. Someone without these devices? They’re left with subjective assessments and whatever gets captured during periodic doctor visits.

“If you don’t have the same resources to track your blood pressure, blood pressure, or physical activity,” says Gonzales, “you are certainly being left behind on useful healthcare.” Consider two people with similar cardiovascular risk factors. The one with a wearable device might receive an alert and seek immediate treatment, potentially preventing a stroke. The other person might not notice symptoms until a serious cardiac event occurs. Both deserved that potentially life-saving alert, but only one could afford the device that provided it.

As more people in higher-income brackets adopt these technologies and share data with healthcare providers, medical understanding itself may become skewed toward populations who can afford comprehensive self-monitoring. If research studies increasingly incorporate wearable data, but if that data predominantly comes from affluent, educated users, the resulting insights may not apply equally across all demographics.

Another perspective

Access isn’t the only lens through which to view this fitness tech. “There’s this implicit assumption that wearables are inherently good,” says Gonzales. “What about privacy risks?” After all, if you think you own all your health data, think again.

Think of the history of the healthcare industry’s relationship with marginalized communities. The Tuskegee syphilis study, forced sterilizations, and ongoing disparities in pain management and maternal mortality have created a pretty understandable skepticism toward giving up data, to say the least. “Given the history of experimentation and exploitation of certain low-income populations, there’s a natural distrust in these sub-groups,” Gonzales says. “Maybe these demographics intentionally avoid third parties collecting their data.”

So, the same communities that might benefit most from health monitoring technology may also have the most legitimate reasons to be wary of it. As I’ve previously covered, data privacy protections remain inconsistent, and the long-term implications of sharing detailed biometric data with corporations are still unclear. For populations that have historically been surveilled, exploited, or discriminated against, choosing not to participate in constant data collection might be a rational decision, rather than simply a matter of access. There’s something to be said for health approaches that don’t involve third-party corporations accumulating detailed records of your body’s functions.

Finding solutions

Naturally, budget options for fitness tech do exist, and these options can help some people access these technologies. But even “affordable” options still cost money that many families simply don’t have for what remains, technically speaking, optional equipment. When you’re choosing between a $50 fitness tracker and groceries, the choice isn’t really a choice at all.

All of this is to say that the fitness tech inequality problem can’t be solved by individual purchasing decisions or corporate discount programs. It’s embedded in broader questions about healthcare access, digital equity, and what we consider essential versus optional in maintaining health. Glucose monitors, fertility trackers, or blood pressure cuffs could more easily qualify as medical equipment, where an Oura ring is still a luxury good. Addressing the gap requires reimagining what counts as necessary healthcare technology. Otherwise, we could be approaching a future where your ability to detect health problems early, track chronic conditions, and optimize your fitness depends on whether you can afford a monthly subscription.

The bottom line

Healthcare has become digitized, creating new opportunities for monitoring and intervention, but also new mechanisms for inequality. As fitness technology continues advancing, offering more sophisticated monitoring and more actionable insights, that fundamental inequality will only get worse. Because at the intersection of healthcare and technology, “the people who struggle with one are often the same people who need the other,” Gonzales says.

The Apple Watch on your wrist may feel like a personal choice, a small investment in your personal wellness. But scale that up across millions of people and billions of data points, and individual choices become structural inequalities. Technology that was supposed to democratize health information may instead be creating new hierarchies of who gets to know what about their own bodies. And those who need that knowledge most may be the least likely to access it.

The Southern District of Texas announced the seizure of more than $50 million in NVIDIA GPUs bound for China in violation of US export laws. Authorities arrested two businessmen, one of them the owner of a Houston company, accused of smuggling the chips used to train and run AI models.

“Operation Gatekeeper has exposed a sophisticated smuggling network that threatens our Nation’s security by funneling cutting-edge AI technology to those who would use it against American interests,” said US Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei. The investigation had been ongoing since at least last year and centers on the illicit export or attempted export of at least $160 million worth of NVIDIA H100 and H200 GPUs. The H200 chips are the very same that the Trump administration announced a revenue-sharing agreement for today, allowing NVIDIA to sell them to “approved customers” in China.

The smuggling operation used a combination of falsified paperwork, purposefully misclassified goods, straw purchasers and even removing the NVIDIA labels on GPUs to ship them to both mainland China and Hong Kong. The conspirators face between 10 and 20 years in prison if convicted.

The H200 chips in question are more powerful than the H20 chip specifically designed to comply with US export restrictions. Production of the H20, however, was reportedly halted shortly after the Trump administration struck a revenue-sharing deal with NVIDIA, after which China began heavily discouraging local companies from buying them.

Illicit sales to China are nothing new and occur against the backdrop of an AI technology race and tight export controls. NVIDIA is still prevented from selling its highest-end Blackwell chips to China, with the US hoping to keep an edge over foreign competition.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/texas-authorities-have-made-multiple-arrests-in-an-nvidia-gpu-smuggling-operation-144749526.html?src=rss

Microsoft Excel, the 40-year-old spreadsheet application that helped establish personal computers as essential workplace tools and contributed to Microsoft’s current valuation of nearly $4 trillion, has weathered both the rise of cloud computing and the current AI boom largely unscathed. In its most recent quarter, commercial revenue for Microsoft 365 — the bundle including Excel, Word, and PowerPoint — increased 17% year over year, and consumer revenue rose 28%.

The software traces its origins to a 1983 Microsoft offsite under the code name Odyssey, where engineers set out to clone Lotus 1-2-3. That program had itself cloned VisiCalc, the first computerized spreadsheet, created by Dan Bricklin for the Apple II in the late 1970s. Bricklin never patented VisiCalc. “Financially it would have been great if we’d have been able to patent it,” he told Bloomberg. “And there would be a Bricklin Building at MIT, instead of a Gates Building.”

Excel now counts an estimated 500 million paying users. The Pentagon pays for 2 million Microsoft 365 licenses. Google’s free Sheets product, launched in 2006, captured casual use cases like potluck sign-ups but failed to dislodge Excel from enterprise work. AI chatbots present the latest challenge, but venture capitalists say nearly every AI spreadsheet startup they meet builds on top of Excel rather than replacing it.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

India’s dominant airline IndiGo has cancelled roughly 3,000 flights since last week after new pilot fatigue regulations collided with technical issues and the seasonal schedule shift, stranding more than half a million passengers and forcing aviation authorities to reverse course on the safety rules they had just implemented.

InterGlobe Aviation, IndiGo’s parent company, told regulators that stricter requirements for night flying and weekly rest periods created an acute crew shortage. The Airline Pilots Association of India called the regulatory rollback a “dangerous precedent,” noting that management had known about the requirements since early last year.

IndiGo controls 65.6% of India’s domestic aviation market as of October 2025 and briefly became the world’s most valuable airline in April. The crisis arrives as India’s second-largest carrier, Air India, remains under investigation following a June crash that killed 241 passengers and crew. Authorities have imposed temporary price caps to prevent gouging.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

It’s the end of another year, so it’s time for the Engadget staff to compile a list of the year’s biggest losers. We scour over articles from the previous 12 months to determine the people, companies, products and trends that made our lives worse over the course of the year. Some selections may be so pervasive they actually make our list of biggest winners. But, for the most part, we’re confident you’ll share in our collective rage over the biggest losers of 2025.

OpenAI

Anadolu via Getty Images

In 2025, OpenAI shed any pretense it was committed to anything more than making money. There are a few different things you could point to, including the company’s successful reorganization into a more traditional profit-seeking business, but I think the most damning sign was OpenAI’s response to the tragic death of Adam Raine. 

In August, Raine’s parents sued OpenAI, alleging ChatGPT was aware of four suicide attempts by their son before it helped him successfully plan his death. At first, OpenAI’s response appeared commensurate with the gravity of the situation. A week after news of the lawsuit broke, the company announced in early September it was working on parental controls. That same month, the company said it was working on a system that would automatically identify teen users and restrict their ChatGPT usage. 

Then came the announcement of a new “wellness” advisory council. Setting aside the question of whether OpenAI would even follow the advice of the council, it was peculiar that the company chose not recruit a single expert on suicide prevention. At that point, it was still possible to give OpenAI the benefit of the doubt, but then information about the company’s legal defense against the Raines started to trickle out, including the fact it had reportedly asked to see the memorial guest list for Adam Raine’s funeral, a request the family’s lawyers described as “intentional harassment.” In late November, court documents revealed the company planned to argue Raine’s “misuse” of ChatGPT was to blame for his death, not its own insufficient safety systems.  

We live in a world where tech giants are rarely held accountable for the great harm they’ve shown themselves capable of inflicting on people. As things stand, OpenAI’s handling of Adam Raine’s death is further proof something must change. — Igor Bonifacic, Senior reporter

Xbox

Sam Rutherford for Engadget

Did anything go right for Xbox this year? While price increases have also affected Sony and Nintendo, Microsoft cranked up the prices of both the Xbox Series S and X twice in the last year. It’s bad: The Series S is now $100 more than at launch, five years on.

Previously “the best deal in gaming”, the Xbox Series X/S combined with a Game Pass subscription gave you a ton of games to play, including any of Microsoft’s own titles on their launch date. However, the subscription is now $30 a month, up 50 percent. (It was previously $17 per month the year before.)

I agree with Nathan Ingraham’s take: $30 for literally hundreds of games, plus launch-day availability for major games that typically cost $70, is reasonable. But it’s still a harder sell when the price has jumped. Are you getting 50 percent more games? Not yet. 

According to Bloomberg, Microsoft demanded higher profits from Xbox back in 2023. When the gaming division reached around 12 percent growth in the first nine months of 2022, that was an ambitious goal. Day One launches on Game Pass apparently dented Xbox’s ability to pull profits from its biggest titles.

Microsoft no longer shares console unit sales, but in its most recent earnings report, the company announced that hardware revenue dropped 29 percent. That’s including those price increases, meaning console sales fell even further.

Estimates over the last few years put the PS5 tens of millions of units ahead. An annual subscription to Game Pass is more than double the Sony console’s most premium plan, although it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. 

This year, Microsoft collaborated with ASUS to create Xbox-branded handheld gaming PCs. In that form-factor, I was on the precipice of grabbing Game Pass and barreling through Xbox titles I never had the chance to play. Then, I reassessed exactly what I was missing out on. 

It wasn’t the inclusion of a Fortnite Crew subscription. 

Despite its developer shopping spree, Xbox exclusives remain few, with many appearing on rival platforms. This year, Indiana Jones and even the Forza series is available to play on PlayStation. And next year? Halo. 

Where are the exciting new games going to come from? In the middle of 2025, Microsoft announced major layoffs affecting over 9,000 employees across the company. with the gaming division being hit exceptionally hard. Cuts and closures across many of Microsoft’s game studios led to cancellations like a Perfect Dark reboot and Rare’s Everwild.

Xbox’s 2025 was bad on both the business and creative fronts. The decision to hike console and Game Pass prices didn’t immediately turn around revenue. At the same time, layoffs and high-profile game cancellations make Xbox a challenging pitch for anyone deciding which console or platform to invest in. 

Right now, looking at Engadget’s pick of the top Xbox games, the only game I feel like I’m missing out on is Avowed. Many of our favorite games are already available on PS5 and several can be played on the Switch. The reverse, however, isn’t true. — Mat Smith, UK bureau chief

Grok

NurPhoto via Getty Images

It’s hard to even know where to begin. X users have long noticed that Grok, the site’s built-in chatbot, is less filtered than other AI tools. But this year, Grok went off the rails in some truly unhinged and disturbing ways. 

There was the time Grok randomly began talking about a nonexistent “white genocide” in South Africa in response to completely unrelated questions. There was the time it declared itself “MechaHitler,” much to the delight of neo-nazi fanboys on X. There was the time it was caught posting Holocaust denial tropes, and the time researchers noted its Wikipedia knockoff that contains dozens of citations of neo-Nazi website Stormfront. There was the time it became so embarrassingly obsessed with Elon Musk it claimed he was a better basketball player than LeBron James and a better actor than Tom Cruise. It later brought both its anti-semitism and Musk sycophancy together when it stated that it would choose saving Musk’s brain over saving 16 million Jews. “His potential long-term impact on billions outweighs the loss in utilitarian terms,” it stated in a post that’s since been deleted. 

Besides the horrifying racism, what all of these incidents have in common is that xAI, Musk’s AI company that acquired X earlier this year, has failed to fully explain how its chatbot went so far off the rails. The company has blamed an unnamed rogue employee, its own Nazi-loving users and “adversarial prompting” for Grok’s missteps. — Karissa Bell, Senior reporter

EVs in the US

Brandon Bell via Getty Images

EVs sales across the globe are up around 25 percent this year. Germany broke records in the first half of 2025, with electric cars accounting for nearly one in five new registrations. Meanwhile, back in September, sales of BEVs in the UK grew by almost a third, setting a new high for our neighbors across the pond. And in China, EV sales are growing so fast (over 50 percent market share) that the country is beginning to flood the global market with gas-powered cars that it can’t sell at home. So naturally, what did our esteemed leaders in the US do in order to help companies here stay competitive? They ended the EV tax credit. 

And wouldn’t you know it, after a spike earlier this fall just before the credit went away, sales of EVs in the US began to slump, with some automakers like Ford seeing a drop of 60 percent year-over-year. No matter how you slice it, this is bad for any company that sells EVs in the US and particularly bad for anyone considering purchasing a new one in the foreseeable future. As an EV owner, that just bums me out. Not only does this policy change put more roadblocks in the way of making battery-powered cars more affordable, it also puts a damper on EV investment and threatens to cause US automakers to fall even further behind their rivals in China and elsewhere. Manufacturers across the Pacific are going so wild, they are making EVs that can jump like the Mach 5 from Speed Racer. 

That isn’t to say there aren’t any promising developments on the horizon. Ford’s Universal EV Platform and the arrival of the Rivian R2 sometime next year are a couple of examples. But it’s clear that our politicians wanted to target EVs in the US this year and they sure made it happen. So the next time someone asks why we can’t have nice things here, you know who to blame. — Sam Rutherford, Senior reporter

DJI drone customers

Steve Dent for Engadget

Barring a miracle, DJI will be banned from selling any new drones in the US starting December 23rd — and buyers will feel the pain. As I wrote last month, the company has been targeted by regulators since 2017 over concerns that its products could be used to spy on sensitive US infrastructure on behalf of China. 

“What’s the big deal?” you may ask. “Surely people can buy from other drone companies.” Indeed, but the problem is that DJI has such a monumental technological lead and high market share (over 75 percent) that its absence will effectively upend the industry. 

Commercial buyers have checked other (approved) options from the likes of Skydio, but found them wanting. “In one year and a half, we had five failures of the manufacturers on the list. DJI, none,” Orlando police Sgt. David Cruz told the Miami Herald. “I work for a popular UAV photogrammetry company,” said a user on Reddit. “[A] ban will set back the drone industry in the US by several years. There’s no competitor to DJI right now.”

The same applies on the consumer side. DJI’s drones outperform rivals in nearly every area including range, battery life, subject tracking, obstacle detection and video quality. It’s so one-sided that when testing DJI drones, I struggle to find other options for buyers with anywhere close to the same capabilities. 

The US government does have reason to be concerned about DJI’s drones. They present an obvious national security risk due to their ability to fly over sensitive areas, take photos or video and transmit them, live, to any location in the world. And being a Chinese company, they’re compelled by law to cooperate with state intelligence services. 

However, the US government hasn’t attempted to work with DJI to determine whether its products pose a risk so far. DJI made a final plea for a security review recently by sending letters to five US agencies that could assess its products. If that fails, chaos among drone users is likely to ensue. 

“We just want the best technology that keeps our citizens safe for the most reasonable price,” Sgt. Drew Fennelly of the Lawrence, Kansas police department told The Wall Street Journal last year. “The technology in the US-made drones has not caught up with the Chinese-manufactured drones.”

TV streaming

PATRICK T. FALLON via Getty Images

In 2015, Sling TV arrived with ESPN, CNN, TBS, HGTV, Disney Channel and others for just $20 a month. A couple years later, YouTube TV debuted for just $35 monthly and showed local CBS, Fox, NBC and ABC stations plus dozens of other channels including ESPN, Fox Sports 1 and Bravo. Streaming TV had arrived. It was here to unfetter TV watchers from cable’s onerous contracts, high prices and carrier monopolies. Take that, Comcast! In your face, Charter! (But they’d still like to pay you for internet access, please.) 

Fast forward to 2025: Streaming TV and its low-price, monopoly-free, contractless freedom is all but dead. Every major live TV service provider raised prices this year. Currently, YouTubeTV, Hulu+ Live TV, Fubo and DirecTV all go for a minimum of $83 per month. That’s before you opt for cable-inspired package upgrades and channel add-ons. Throw in perks like 4K, additional sports channels and a couple of one-off networks and you’re easily shelling out $150 every month. You’ll pay less for chopped-up live TV plans from Sling TV, but be prepared to create a spreadsheet to make sure a plan has the channels you want.  

This year, consolidation came for TV streaming, giving strong Cox/Charter/Comcast monopoly vibes. Disney, which completed its buyout of Hulu in 2023, acquired Fubo this year and plans to combine the two. The combo makes Disney the second-largest live TV streaming provider behind Google. DirecTV already owns Sling TV, so that leaves just three big players in the live TV streaming arena. With Netflix’s move to buy Warner Bros, the traditional streaming market is getting narrower, too. We can safely assume good ol’ market competition won’t be bringing prices down anytime soon. 

But it’s not just consolidation — fragmentation also contributes to an overall crappier streaming experience. In 2025, Disney launched a standalone ESPN service (no, not that one, nor that one) for $30 per month. So far, that doesn’t mean you can’t find ESPN content through other providers. But we did see Disney flex its increasingly large TV muscles in drawn-out contract negotiations with Google. The dispute darkened ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels on YouTube TV for two weeks this fall — which, I’ll point out for the cynical crowd, was less than two months after the standalone service launched. YouTube TV subscribers got a $20 credit, but that probably didn’t placate NFL and NCAA football fans who missed out on ESPN-carried games. 

Then in November, Fubo quarreled with NBCUniversal, saying the Peacock parent was “shifting content to their own streaming services” and forcing up rates. The spat turned off NBC, Bravo, USA and other channels for Fubo subscribers, no doubt infuriating both NBA and Real Housewives fans, despite a $15 credit. Of course, Fubo is Disney’s newest affiliate, so there are no non-bad guys here.

The only advantage TV streaming has in its favor is the lack of cable-style contracts and I haven’t heard any murmurs of such a thing forthcoming. We are still all free to hop around between the big three TV streamers until we give up and just go back to DVDs. — Amy Skorheim, Senior reporter

The work of DOGE

The Washington Post via Getty Images

An Elon Musk-led attempt to rein in federal spending with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been a failure by almost every metric. As of November, it was reported that DOGE is no more, even though the initiative ostensibly had eight months left to run. An official told Reuters that DOGE “doesn’t exist,” and it never should have in the first place.

Though Musk was only at the helm of DOGE for a few months, he and his team caused chaos. Adopting the slash-and-burn tactic Musk employed when he took over Twitter, he swung a chainsaw through myriad government departments, with DOGE firing workers who were actually essential and quickly had to be hired back. By August, the government was said to have fired some 300,000 federal workers, with DOGE taking responsibility for most of those. Among other things, cuts at the National Institutes of Health resulted in the end of funding for hundreds of medical studies, which is said to have affected tens of thousands of patients. It’s also estimated that the dismantling of the US Agency for International Development had resulted in more than 650,000 deaths around the world by early December, with children accounting for two-thirds of those. 

DOGE workers seemed to be busy, though. They reportedly monitored government communications for criticisms of both Musk and President Donald Trump, while implementing generative AI chatbots in an attempt to automate some government tasks. But for all the blustering about making the government much more efficient, DOGE did not meet its stated goal.

Musk initially promised to reduce government spending by $2 trillion, but it didn’t take long for him to reduce that pledge to $150 billion. And yet government spending has actually gone up. In October, the first month of the government’s fiscal year, its total outlay was $689 billion, an increase of $105 billion (18 percent) from October 2024. Still, maybe DOGE wasn’t a total disaster for its architects. It was able to gain access to sensitive and valuable government data, after all. — Kris Holt, Contributing reporter

AI video

Cheng Xin via Getty Images

In our post-truth world, video was one of the few remaining ways to prove something had actually happened. It had its problems of course, but the fact it was harder to fake than words and images, and anyone could record a clip with their phone, made it vital to our sense of shared reality. Think about the murder of George Floyd: The grave injustice of his death would have probably never come to light if Darnella Frazier had not filmed what happened.  

With the advent of AI video, I’m not sure where we go. Both Google and OpenAI pushed the technology into the realm of uncomfortable realism this year, but it’s Sora’s cameo feature that has me worried. Within the first week of the app’s public availability, people were using the feature, which allows users to add the likeness of other people to their videos, to generate clips of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman stealing GPUs from Target. Cameo has limitations, and users can restrict and delete videos that include their likeness, but it’s just another assault on the truth. It’s hard to see how making it trivial to create deepfake videos benefits anyone other than the companies offering building the tech. — I.B.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/techs-biggest-losers-of-2025-140000419.html?src=rss

I recently put together a list of the best small portable gaming handhelds for people who are tired of how big the Nintendo Switch 2 and handheld gaming PCs like the Steam Deck are. In an era of gaming devices that often feel like laptops with grips and buttons added to them, these retro gaming handhelds (as I call them) can be a great solution for people who miss the days of the PSP and Nintendo DS. But since they come from smaller companies, and run either Linux or Android, actually getting games on these devices is not quite so straightforward. After all, it’s not like the people making these handhelds are publishing cartridges for them.

While that’s true, there are plenty of ways to play games both new and old on these devices, even if they were originally made for other consoles. And despite a reputation to the contrary, if you do them right, they’re all legal.

Retro gaming handhelds and emulation

Credit: Libetro

Emulation is a common use for retro gaming handhelds, to the point where some people just call them emulators. It isn’t the only thing you can do with these devices, but it’s definitely a popular way to put games on them, especially the weaker ones.

Through emulation, your system can mimic older devices like the Game Boy, Super Nintendo, and PlayStation 1, to play games originally released for those platforms. This works by using your modern device’s more powerful hardware to run software that virtually recreates all the processes of old consoles, making older games think they’re running on the real thing. This is in comparison to games that “run natively,” meaning they’re running on the system they were built for. Emulators developed by fans are well-known, but even large companies like Nintendo use emulation. In fact, the games you play on Nintendo Switch Online are technically all emulated.

This can come with downsides. You might run into minor inaccuracies in sound or graphics, but typically, the more powerful your device’s chip and the weaker the system you’re emulating, the less common these will be. You could also experience input lag, although I’ve never once been able to actually feel it across most of the devices I’ve used to emulate. (I say this as someone who has beaten all three of the original Ninja Gaiden games using emulation.)

And there are upsides to emulation, too. Games can be upscaled to push out higher resolutions than ever intended natively, which can make for homebrew HD remasters if played on a nice enough screen. And most emulation programs support save states, which let you save your progress anywhere, anytime, separate from a specific game’s built-in save system. Save states can be a lifesaver for especially difficult games, or while playing on the go.

The biggest hurdle, then, is setup. Some devices come with emulators built in, although you’ll probably want to configure them to your specifications, and if you’re on a Linux-based handheld, possibly run them alongside a custom, third-party firmware (more on that later).

Specifics will vary from device to device, so for help, I suggest YouTuber Russ Crandall’s guides on emulation. Crandall runs the channel Retro Game Corps, and has been a big help in my own emulation journey. He’s also exhaustively catalogued the steps you’ll need to go through for various handhelds.

Truth be told, though, you’ll probably be using similar programs across your handhelds. RetroArch is popular for emulating older systems, while newer ones require specific apps like Dolphin (for GameCube and Wii) or PPSSPP (for PSP). After you’ve set these up once, doing it for other handhelds is kind of like riding a bike. The biggest difficulty you’ll probably encounter will be providing ROM files for your emulators, which leads me to the elephant in the room.

How legal is emulation?

Emulation is convenient, and a great way to experience games that haven’t been re-released for modern consoles. But it also has a bit of a reputation for being shady. For comment, I reached out to YouTube Bob Wulff of Wulff Den, another mainstay in guides and reviews for retro gaming handhelds. Ultimately, Wulff thinks this reputation is undeserved.

“I don’t like this stigma that Emulation [equals] Piracy,” he told me. “There are plenty of ways to acquire your ROMs legally.”

And therein lies the rub. When people think that emulation is illegal, they’re usually conflating emulator programs with pirated game files, or ROMs. The process of writing original software to mimic a console’s function is actually perfectly legal, to the point where Apple now allows emulators on the App Store, but distributing copyrighted software to run on those emulators is where you get into legal issues. That’s why handheld companies like Anbernic have a bit of a bad reputation for including ROMs with their devices, as I highlight in my list of the best retro gaming handhelds. But theoretically, if you legally own a game, U.S. law allows you to make your own backup of it, which you could then play on an emulator without issue. Unless you’re downloading your games off pirate sites or buying SD cards with pirated ROMs pre-loaded onto them, playing games using an emulator shouldn’t be any different in the eyes of the law than playing games on original hardware.

As for how you can actually get your own legal backups of games you own, there are a number of devices that will read your cartridges and back up their ROM files for you, as well as PC programs that will do the same thing for disc-based games. Also note that you can emulate on phones and PCs, too, although there is a certain magic in emulating using a small handheld with controls built-in.

You can also play Android and PC games

Credit: PCMag

But as much as some fans like to call retro gaming handhelds “emulators” and leave it at that, these devices can do more than mimic old consoles. The hardware for these devices is usually versatile enough to support playing modern games natively, streaming games from the cloud, or in some cases, even playing games originally meant for PC. You can play new games on these handhelds, too. Let’s start with Android and cloud gaming, as they’re among the simplest ways to get games on these devices.

Android games

This is the obvious one. If your retro gaming handheld runs Android, then it stands to reason that it can run Android apps. This means that in addition to emulation, you can play phone games like Genshin Impact or Call of Duty Mobile. Your device’s built-in controller will work with the game like any standard phone controller, and you’ll be able to play just as well as anyone on a phone could. Android-based gaming handhelds also come with touchscreens, so you shouldn’t run into problems if your game needs one. The only catch is that some devices with a square-ish aspect ratio might use a lot of letterboxing to actually show anything other than retro games on-screen, which could make for a tiny image (they’ll be great for old, 4:3 games, though). Otherwise, know that the Play Store is your oyster.

Cloud gaming

If your retro gaming handheld has Android installed on it, then you can also use it to stream games from the cloud. That means you could connect it to either your own home console, your PC, or a subscription service to play games that your device isn’t able to run on its own, or that you don’t want to install to it. The only issues you’ll face will be potential input lag and video compression, plus the need for a constant internet connection. But given that Sony sells a whole handheld built entirely around Remote Play, it’s great to have it as an option on these devices, while knowing that they can also play games on their own power, too. It’s an especially great choice for turn-based games, or other titles that don’t require twitchy, fast-paced inputs.

How to play PC games on Linux and Android handhelds

Credit: Michelle Ehrhardt

This is a more recent innovation, but there are currently two ways to play PC games on your retro gaming handheld without relying on the cloud. One runs them natively, and one uses technology similar to the Steam Deck’s.

Portmaster

The first method is for retro gaming handhelds that run Linux. These are usually the cheaper devices, the type you’ll get from companies like Anbernic or Miyoo. The version of Linux on these isn’t the same as on handhelds like the Steam Deck, so don’t expect to just be able to log into your Steam account with these and go off to the races. But thanks to the fan-made program Portmaster, you can still play some of your Steam games on these handhelds.

Portmaster connects you with fan-made ports of PC games built to run natively on your retro gaming handheld. Some of these are freeware, and some will need you to plug in files from your own Steam installs to avoid violating copyright. But both types of games can be up-and-running in just a few steps, and like with emulation, Crandall has a guide to help get you started on your particular device.

The big caveat here is that, to get Portmaster, you’ll probably need to install a third-party firmware, also fan-made, to your device, rather than using what comes with it out of the box. I use muOS, but if you want something with a different style, there are other options, depending on your device. Since there’s so much variation, I haven’t personally tested all options, but Crandall again has you covered.

You’ll also mostly be stuck with retro and lightweight games using this method, but there’s an upside to that, too. I’ve already used it to help get through the indie darlings in my Steam back catalog, like Undertale.

GameHub, GameHub Lite, and GameNative

The second method is for devices that run Android. Much like the Steam Deck uses real-time compatibility layers to convert Windows games to run on its version of Linux, there are now Android apps that can help you run your Steam games on either your phone or your retro gaming handheld.

The three popular ones are called GameHub, GameHub Lite, and GameNative. These programs add extra configuration and user friendliness on top of an existing app called WinLator, a compatibility layer that allows Windows programs to run on Android. You can log right into your Steam account using these apps, then download your games and play them on your Android handheld, complete with cloud saves. You’ll still be limited in what you can play, based on what’s had the most compatibility work put into it, but it’s great for lightweight games, older AAA games, and if your handheld is powerful enough (think the AYN Odin 3), even more recent AAA games from the PS4 era.

“These Windows containers are really exciting,” Crandall told me when I reached out for comment. “I don’t think they are anywhere close to replacing a PC, but it’s exciting to get a lightweight PC game running nicely on a smaller handheld.”

The problems with playing Steam games on Android

That said, there are a few concerns with using these apps. While Gamenative is open source, and GameHub Lite is an independent fork of GameHub that tries to fix its issues, GameHub will likely be the easiest app for most people to use, as it has the simplest interface and the most compatibility updates for various games. Unfortunately, it comes with a number of privacy concerns.

Gamehub is made by controller company GameSir, which has made reputable products in the past, but it does want you to log into a GameSir account to use it, and some users might be uncomfortable linking their Steam data to that. It also includes, in Crandall’s words, “some fairly intrusive telemetry permissions.”

However, both Crandall and Wulff are ultimately positive enough on GameHub.

“It’s frankly no more nosy than any of the various social media apps we already have on our phones,” Crandall told me, also saying that if you’re uncomfortable logging in with a GameSir account, you can use “a Steam login token via QR code,” which should be more secure.

Wulff, meanwhile, said “I don’t personally think there are any potential security issues with GameHub,” citing GameSir’s reputation and saying “I also just don’t think our Steam data is worth a damn.”

The future of PC games on Android

I see where both creators are coming from, but I have been a bit more cautious on this front. Still, it’s an enticing option if you’re willing to try it out, and it actually points to things to come. Recently, Valve announced its Steam Frame VR headset, which runs on the same type of framework that Android phones do. With that, retro gaming handheld enthusiasts are hopeful Valve will soon release an official way to play Steam games on these devices (and phones). That’s something the company recently hinted at in an interview with The Verge, saying it has been quietly bankrolling much of the development on the compatibility layers that apps like WinLator and its derivatives use.

On that note, if you’re brave, you could also just play your PC games on these devices using WinLator itself, or other alternatives like Pluvia. However, these have been too complex for me to fiddle with, and I wouldn’t recommend them to anyone but the most hardcore tinkerers. I think I’m with Crandall in saying that “I’d much rather have a proper Steam-derived solution.” Fingers-crossed.

Google is no stranger to scrutiny from government bodies such as the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), and the European Commission. Now it can add another probe to its list: The European Commission has opened an antitrust investigation into the company surrounding the content used for its AI tools. Namely, the Commission is looking into two things, starting with whether Google used web publisher’s content for its AI Overview and AI Mode services — without “appropriate compensation” or the option to “refuse” the use of their materials. 

“The Commission will investigate to what extent the generation of AI Overviews and AI Mode by Google is based on web publishers’ content without appropriate compensation for that, and without the possibility for publishers to refuse without losing access to Google Search,” the EU executive body stated in its announcement. “Indeed, many publishers depend on Google Search for user traffic, and they do not want to risk losing access to it.”

The second prong of the Commission’s investigation similarly looks into Google’s potential misuse surrounding AI. It’s digging into whether Google has used content uploaded to YouTube for training its generative AI models. As in the first case, the Commission “is concerned” that YouTube creators are not receiving proper compensation or the option to opt out of Google using their content. 

In it’s overview of the investigation, the Commission noted that creators have to allow Google to use their data in return for uploading media on YouTube. It added that Google’s rival AI developers are unable to use any YouTube content for training their models. 

“AI is bringing remarkable innovation and many benefits for people and businesses across Europe, but this progress cannot come at the expense of the principles at the heart of our societies,” Teresa Ribera, EVP for clean, just and competitive transition at the European Commission, said in a statement. “This is why we are investigating whether Google may have imposed unfair terms and conditions on publishers and content creators, while placing rival AI models developers at a disadvantage, in breach of EU competition rules.” 

A Google spokesperson told Engadget that the investigation “risks stifling innovation in a market that is more competitive than ever. Europeans deserve to benefit from the latest technologies and we will continue to work closely with the news and creative industries as they transition to the AI era.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/eu-opens-antitrust-investigation-into-googles-ai-practices-133015762.html?src=rss

We may earn a commission from links on this page.

Many of us with professions that center on writing once toiled in a book shop to make ends meet, including me. When I worked at Barnes & Noble in college, I was dumbfounded by how many books there were on productivity and self-betterment. Surely, they couldn’t all contain nuggets of wisdom. Certainly, they must be money-grabs aiming to profit off people’s self-doubt. In many cases, that’s true; but, I learned, some of them do have serious value to share. The catch is that if you spend all your time reading about some author’s productivity, you won’t have much time for enhancing your own. Smartly choosing which to read is a major first step toward productivity and better time management, but I went ahead and did a little of the legwork for you. Here are the best tidbits on productivity and the books they come from.

The best productivity tips from books

Getting Things Done (GTD)

GTD is a method that comes from David Allen’s infamous 2001 book, Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity, which was updated in 2015. GTD has been popular for a long time and is all about organizing your to-do lists, priorities, and schedule in a way that keeps it all manageable. You use five pillars—capture everything in a notebook, app, or planner; clarify what you need to do by breaking it all down into actionable steps; organize the steps by category and priority; reflect on the to-do list; and get to work—to streamline your planning, thinking, and action. It’s stuck around this long because it’s effective, but that means it’s now also recognizable. This is a solid entry-level productivity plan that has been written about a lot, has plenty of adherents, and makes sense in the real world.

The action method

The action method comes from Scott Belsky’s 2010 book, Making Ideas Happen: Overcoming the Obstacles Between Vision and Reality. Like GTD, it aims to organize your ideas and priorities, giving you a path to more action than deliberation. You write down your to-dos, then organize them into action steps (the specific tasks you need to get done and the ones with actions behind them), references (extra info you need to accomplish those tasks), and back-burners (more nebulous goals that don’t need to be accomplished right now). Use a planner or spreadsheet to create the three columns, bearing in mind that references and back-burners are typically things that supplement the action steps, so you should always be checking those while you tackle the action steps. And never forget that, if left unattended, a back-burner can escalate into an actionable item quickly, so take this one on if you need guidance but are serious about sticking with it.

Zen to Done

At the heart of Zen to Done is the idea that your sense of wellbeing is integral to your overall productivity. It comes from Leo Babauta, who has written books like Essential Zen Habits: Mastering the Art of Change, Briefly and The Power of Less: The Fine Art of Limiting Yourself to the Essential… in Business and in Life. Reading his work, you start to see the value of changing your habits and building new ones incrementally and peacefully. Because you’re changing your habits over time and in a chill way, you can focus on the actual work you need to get done. ZTD contains 10 habits total, but Babauta says you can focus on the first four to get started: “Collect” by always taking notes about what you need to do and ideas you have, “process” by making quick decisions on tasks that are in front of you at the moment, “plan” by setting goals every Monday, and “do” by selecting a task and focusing on it and only it.

Deep work

I talk about deep work a lot because it’s an important concept that impacts a lot of other productivity techniques. Deep work is the ability to focus completely on a demanding task without allowing any distraction get in your way, according to Cal Newport’s Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World. His work focuses on drawing the distinction between deep work and shallow work, or the kind of work that you can still get done while distracted, then building time into your schedule to take care of the deeper tasks. Mastering the art of slipping into a flow state and getting into deep work is foundational to basically any other productivity approach, so this full book might be worth the read.

Eat the frog

This approach to productivity calls for you to tackle your biggest, most demanding task first during the course of your day, so everything after that feels easier by comparison. The evocative phrase, “eat the frog,” comes from a quote that’s usually attributed to Mark Twain, but it was Brian Tracy’s Eat That Frog book series that made it catch on. Per Tracy, your “frog” is whatever task “you are most likely to procrastinate on if you don’t do something about it.” In workbooks and quick-tip books, he helps you figure out your frogs, then come up with strategies to get the motivation to tackle them. Committing to eating the frog is a big part of other productivity approaches and scheduling techniques, like the 1-3-5 list and the pickle jar theory, so the more familiar you are with the idea, the better off you’ll be.

Power Hour

Power Hour is a productivity technique that aims to empower you to reclaim part of your daily time and devote it to something intentional, whether that’s a passion project or a major task that needs completing. It comes from Adrienne Herbert’s book, Power Hour: How to Focus on Your Goals and Create a Life You Love, and is complementary to Newport’s deep work concept. Herbert suggests you find an hour in each day that you can use for a completely focused, intentional project. During that hour you’ll use deep work, but Herbert’s strategy focuses more on finding and defining that critical hour in your schedule more than training yourself to sink into the zone and avoid distractions.

The 168-hour method

You may not think that having 24 hours in a day is enough, but what about 168 hours in a week? Laura Vanderkam wrote 168 Hours: You Have More Time Than You Think to encourage people to stop thinking about your time in terms of days and start thinking about how much you can accomplish in a week. Spend a week tracking your time using time-tracking software or a spreadsheet, keeping your entries as detailed as possible. At the end of the week, look at your data and figure out when you wasted time, spent too long on something, or could have been doing something else. Using Vanderkam’s method, you can make more time for the things you want to do by getting a solid grasp of how you allot your existing time over seven days.

Flow theory

You’ve probably heard of flow theory, the brainchild of psychologist Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, who came up with it in 1970 and then wrote a number of books on it. According to him, a flow state is similar to when someone is floating along, being carried by water. The person is working so efficiently that they’re just gliding ahead with no problems and the state is practically propelling them. (It’s quite similar to deep work, mentioned above, so this would be a good one to read along with Newport’s book.) There are eight characteristics of being in flow, ranging from complete concentration on the task to finding intrinsic rewards in the work and feeling confident in possessing the necessary skills to complete it, and these offer almost a step-by-step guide for getting into deep work, the method mentioned above.

The best book combo for busy folks

Having a hard time narrowing down which books to grab? I’d suggest one of Csíkszentmihályi’s books on flow theory, Newport’s book on deep work, and Herbert’s book on power hours, as these all describe similar practices, but offer complementary, supplemental advice that all adds up to help you pick a specific time of day to get work done easily and efficiently. It’s important to remember that motivation can—and does—come from a variety of sources, including break time, having a purpose, and actually getting things done. The combination of these three authors’ approaches makes plenty of space for all of that, which will leave you actually wanting to get to work.

It’s likely you’ve heard of the Pareto principle (maybe even while reading my tips on how to be more productive at work or study more effectively). But do you really know what the Pareto principle is?

To be honest, I only just started to get a grip on it fairly recently, because it’s a lot easier to read about than put into practice. Also known as the 80/20 rule or the law of the vital few, it can be little confusing at first, but understanding and implementing it can truly transformative, helping you to better manage your time and get more done with less effort. Who doesn’t want that?

What is the Pareto principle?

Basically, the Pareto principle states that 80% of your outcomes result from just 20% of your effort. The principle was coined by consultant Joseph M. Juran in the 1940s and he named it after a sociologist and economist named Vilfredo Pareto, who was famous for pointing out that 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the total amount of people. You’ll hear it described a number of ways: 80% of results come from 20% of the work, or 80% of effects come from 20% of the causes. No matter the wording, it all means the same thing; just focus on that 80/20 split.

An often-cited example of how this works for everyday people is learning the piano or guitar. You study individual notes, keys, time signatures, tempos, chords, rhythms, styles and so much else, including music theory. But when it’s time to jam, you’re probably falling back on a handful of the most common chords—and it sounds fine. In that way, a huge chunk of your actual playing is dependent on just a few small things you’ve mastered (although you do need that knowledge of keys and styles to make it come together).

For another example, consider how a few truly excellent players tend to be responsible for the majority of points scored by your favorite sports team during a given game. Now think of how much you do in a day: You go to your job, work any side gigs you might have, do household chores, and devote time to hobbies, child-rearing, studying for classes, going to the gym, and seeing friends. You do a lot, but you only get paid for a small fraction of that work, which is why you might prioritize your job over some of the other things on the list—even side hustles, which typically generate less money. That’s where the 80/20 rule comes in: It helps you prioritize your to-do list. 

How to use the Pareto principle to maximize your results

You can identify ways the general principle manifests in your work. For instance, if you work for a retail company, you might notice a major chunk of profits comes from a small but dedicated group of consistent buyers. It would make sense, then, to focus a majority of your work on appealing to them, or to bringing others into that group—maybe by strategic, data-based advertising. If the majority of would-be consumers ignore your email marketing, don’t keep doing what you’re doing. Instead, zero in on how you can add more people to that core group, or just go all-in on the core group itself. The real trick to using this principle is figuring out how it applies to your own day-to-day tasks. 

When you make your daily to-do list, use a prioritization technique, like the 1-3-5 list, Kanban, or Eisenhower Matrix. Right off the bat, this helps you figure out which of your necessary tasks for the day are important and which can be pushed off or delegated. Spend about two weeks working on your to-do lists every day as normal, but at the end of the day, write down what the direct results of each activity were. So, if you spent half an hour responding to emails and netted 10 new clients from that, write it down. If you dedicated an hour to compiling the data for a big meeting that got your project greenlit, mark it down. Over time, the basic functions that yield the biggest results will become apparent and you can start making those activities—the 20%-of-your-effort activities—a bigger priority, so you waste less time on the tasks that don’t produce as many results. 

Working backward and considering the effects, then identifying their causes, will help you prioritize and get more done, but it can also help you with non-work tasks. In a more abstract sense, a relatively small amount of effort is required to grab a coffee with a friend or help your kid with homework, but the 80% yield might be reenforcing and maintaining a friendship or helping your child feel safe and accomplished, which have longer-lasting impacts than the 30 minutes those tasks take. When you free up your working time through prioritization and an understanding of the Pareto principle, you have more opportunities to spread it around in other areas of your life and keep reaping the benefits. 

NVIDIA is now allowed to sell its second-best H200 processors to China, rather than just the sanction-approved H20 model that China had previously declined to buy, President Trump wrote on Truth Social. The United States will collect a 25 percent tariff on those sales, the Commerce Department confirmed yesterday. 

Trump said that he informed China’s President Xi Jinping of the decision and that he “responded positively.” The Commerce Department is finalizing details and the administration will take the same approach with AMD, Intel and other US companies. He added that the administration would “protect National Security,” so the latest Blackwell and upcoming Rubin chips are not part of the deal. The 25 percent tariff would be higher than the 15 percent the White House suggested in August.

Though the administration won’t allow NVIDIA to send its latest high-end chips, it was reportedly concerned that the company would lose business to Huawei if it was completely shut out of China’s market, according to Reuters. No details about the number of H200 chips or which companies would be eligible to buy them were released. “Offering H200 to approved commercial customers, vetted by the Department of Commerce, strikes a thoughtful balance that is great for America,” NVIDIA said in a statement.

The decision is not without controversy, though. Several Democratic US senators called it a “colossal economic and national security failure” that will aid China’s industry and military. Republican representative John Mollenaar put it in even starker terms. “NVIDIA should be under no illusions — China will rip off its technology, mass-produce it themselves and seek to end NVIDIA as a competitor,” he said.

Despite the current restriction on Blackwell B200 processors, $1 billion worth of those and other high-end NVIDIA chips have made their way to China via black market sales, according to previous reports. That model, along with the H100 and H200, is far more capable than the H20 chip, which was designed to comply with export restrictions for sale to China. NVIDIA has said that the B200 chip is almost ten times faster than the H200 for some jobs, and the H200 is six times faster than the H20. 

Washington’s approval doesn’t mean that China will purchase NVIDIA’s chips, as Beijing has previously told companies not to use US technology. Huawei is currently the most advanced company in that regard and recently unveiled a three-year plan to catch up with NVIDIA and AMD. However, AI chip experts like Richard Windsor have said NVIDIA’s tech is still far ahead of anything that Huawei or other Chinese companies can currently produce. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/nvidia-can-now-sell-its-high-end-ai-chips-to-approved-customers-in-china-trump-says-130007458.html?src=rss