Blog

Minuscule ID chips could help spot even the smallest counterfeits

[ad_1]

The security itself is relatively strong. The chip relies on elliptic curve cryptography that uses a mix of public and private keys to only reveal data to valid readers. You can’t just snoop on wireless traffic to determine which devices are involved and what’s being sent.

As is often the case, there’s more to be done before the scientists are happy. The chip has enough range to allow for a tag scanner up to two inches away, but MIT would prefer enough range that you could scan products simply by bringing them into a room. Ideally, they’d also run the chips on the terahertz signals rather than light.

The technology is already cheap and easy to make, though. If it can translate to real-world products, you could use it to tag small objects where conventional tags are either impractical or just won’t fit, whether it’s a phone component or a tooth implant. That, in turn, could make it easier to spot counterfeits and ensure that whatever you’re buying is completely authentic, right down to the littlest parts.

[ad_2]

Source link

Facebook plans to clarify when pro-Bloomberg posts come from staffers

[ad_1]

At the moment, Facebook doesn’t have a way to show when political posts come from paid campaigners, and CNBC’s source didn’t share any proposed solutions.

“We think it’s important that political campaigns have the guidance and tools to be transparent,” a Facebook spokesperson told CNBC. “That’s why we recommend campaign employees make the relationship clear on their accounts. We welcome clearer guidance from regulators in this area.”

According to Facebook’s Ad Library, Bloomberg has spent $48.5 million on campaign and issue ads since last May, and his latest strategy represents relatively uncharted territory.

“We are meeting voters everywhere on any platform that they consume their news. One of the most effective ways of reaching voters is by activating their friends and network to encourage them to support Mike for president,” Bloomberg campaign senior national spokesperson Sabrina Singh said in a statement provided to CNBC.

Over the past few years, Facebook has taken steps to add transparency around political ads. It began labeling paid political posts and archiving them in its Ad Library. But the company also faced criticism for allowing politicians to post untrue ads.

Last week, Facebook told Instagram influencers that they must disclose paid partnerships with political campaigns. It’s unclear if it will require similar disclosures for campaign staff, or how it would enforce such rules.

[ad_2]

Source link

Pre-order the Galaxy S20 from Amazon and get free Galaxy Buds+

[ad_1]

For instance, if you purchase one of the new S20 phones from Amazon, the company will give you a free Duo wireless charging mat and a complimentary pair of Galaxy Buds+. In the case of the Galaxy S20, the bundle costs $1,000 instead of $1,159.86. The S20+ and S20 Ultra bundles are $1,200 and $1,400, respectively.

If you’d like to buy from Samsung directly, you can up to $200 in credit — $100 for the Galaxy S20, $150 for the Galaxy S20+ and $200 for Galaxy Ultra — to build your own pre-order your own bundle.

While we’re still working on our Galaxy S20 review, we did get a chance to test the Galaxy Buds+. Senior news editor Billy Steele gave them a score of 83 and said they’re a significant improvement over Samsung’s previous pair of true wireless earbuds. He found the new model sounds better and features longer battery life — though he would have liked if Samsung had found a way to add active noise cancellation and improved water-proofing.

Buy Galaxy S20 on Amazon – $1,000

[ad_2]

Source link

Twitch built a tool to help new players understand ‘League of Legends’

[ad_1]

League of Legends extension
When a League streamer installs the extension, their audience will be able to pull up an interactive panel that displays the match scoreboard, the streamer’s gameplay stats and match history, as well as other information. The interface features four tabs, the most notable of which breaks down the streamer’s champion build (seen above). This part of the extension allows you to see the order the person you’re watching upgraded their skills and runes, as well as what items they bought. One of the nifty features here is that you get to see a timeline of the streamer’s item build, so you can get a sense of when you should aim to acquire certain items. The utility of the tool is that you can glean a lot of useful information about certain aspects of the game without having to wait for the person you’re watching to say something.

At almost any time of day, League of Legends is one of the most popular attractions on Twitch, so it’s easy to see why the company went out of its way to build this tool. With the game slated to make the jump to Android, iOS and consoles later this year, it will probably get a lot of use soon.

[ad_2]

Source link

The best Android and iPhone gimbal

[ad_1]

Why you should trust us

I am a lifelong photography enthusiast and journalist who has spent the past six years writing about emerging camera technology such as drones, 360-degree cameras, and light field cameras. I’ve spent hundreds of hours flying drones, and I’ve seen the benefits that a gimbal can provide for stabilizing footage.

Who should get this

Smartphones that shoot 4K video are now common enough that even amateur videographers can capture high-quality videos. A gimbal—a pivoting suspension device that mechanically stabilizes a camera—can replace an expensive tripod or dolly to make cinematic video effects accessible to anyone. Primarily, gimbals smooth out hand tremors or a bumpy gait if you are filming while walking. They can also make pans look smooth and consistent, or automate time-lapses and other tricky shots. Additionally, they can serve as souped-up selfie sticks that allow you to hold a phone farther away from your face for better framing.

Gimbals consist of two parts: On the bottom is a handle, which you hold much as you do a selfie stick. The handle usually includes a mix of buttons, joysticks, and wheels. The gimbal sits on top of the handle and looks like an arm with a gripper that holds your phone or attaches to a built-in camera. When you wiggle the handle, the phone or camera stays in place.

If you like filming video with your existing smartphone and don’t mind spending around $100 to achieve more professional-looking results, a gimbal can be a good choice. It’s a nice tool to bring along for filming scenery on vacation or for an active hobby like snowboarding. The ability to film yourself also makes it useful for social media and live streaming.

Though a gimbal for a smartphone is likely to be less expensive, gimbals are available for nearly every type of camera, including DSLRs and GoPros. If you use a different type of camera more than your phone, consider investing in a gimbal for that camera instead.

For this guide we also tested the DJI Osmo Pocket, a camera with a built-in gimbal, and the GoPro Hero7 Black action camera, which approximates a gimbal’s performance digitally (rather than physically); we plan to look into more cameras like them in the future. We like the Insta360 One X, which we recommend in our guide to 360-degree cameras. It lets you shoot spherical videos that you can edit into shake-free regular videos, complete with gimbal-like pans. This type of setup costs a bit more but could be a good option if you don’t have a high-quality camera in your smartphone or if you want something you can pull out of your pocket and start using. It can also be a better option if you don’t want to risk damaging your $1,000 smartphone while filming.

How we picked

We read Amazon and B&H reviews to find the most popular smartphone gimbals currently available. We also watched YouTube reviews and footage shot with different gimbals to find promising options. Going by what we learned, and keeping our own habits in mind, we determined that the following features are most important:

  • A three-axis gimbal: A three-axis gimbal provides stabilization superior to that of a two-axis gimbal because it stabilizes on the pitch (up and down), roll (rotation sideways), and yaw (left and right) axes. A two-axis gimbal usually forgoes the yaw axis. We skipped testing stabilizers that did not have a true three-axis gimbal.
  • Autonomous modes: Preprogrammed shooting modes make getting some types of shots, including time-lapses and dolly zooms, dead simple. Many gimbals can also autonomously track a moving subject.
  • Great customer service: Reaching a customer service representative and receiving a response should be easy; the faster, the better.
  • Warranty coverage: Manufacturers should be willing to repair or replace gimbals that develop problems outside the owner’s control. A yearlong warranty is standard.
  • Easy setup: An instruction booklet or a link to a video that shows how to set up and operate the gimbal is essential, as every gimbal operates differently. If the gimbal needs adjustment so that the phone balances correctly, it should take just one or two steps. The gimbal, phone, and app should all connect to one another without much fuss.
  • Compatibility with a wide range of phones: Companies usually list a range of phone sizes and weights that work with their gimbals. We looked for options that worked with a wide selection of phones, but especially with our top iPhone and Android picks.
  • A great app: The best apps are easy to use thanks to clear design, and they should come with lots of options for customizing camera settings. The app should be available for both iOS and Android devices.
  • Easy-to-use buttons: Whether you prefer more or fewer buttons on a gimbal’s handle, each button should have a clear purpose and be relatively easy to learn and use. However, if you dislike a gimbal’s buttons you can usually accomplish the same tasks by touching your phone’s screen instead.
  • Long battery life: Unless you’re especially worried about weight, a longer battery life is better because it means you have to charge the gimbal less often. Gimbals can usually charge a phone too, so a bigger battery means a longer life for your phone.
  • Comfortable design: A light gimbal with an ergonomic grip is much easier to hold during lengthy shoots.
  • Accessories: It’s nice, but not essential, to get useful accessories such as a carrying case and a small tripod along with your gimbal.

How we tested

Gimbal

Many gimbals performed similarly, so app design and button placement became of extra interest to us during our testing. Photo: Signe Brewster

In 2018, we tested five smartphone gimbals by filming videos with an Apple iPhone 8 and a Samsung Galaxy S8. We used the front-facing camera while walking down a street and used the back-facing camera combined with the gimbals’ object-tracking modes to film a moving drone. We examined the footage for its smoothness.

We also timed how long it took to set up each gimbal, ranked how much we liked the iOS and Android apps, noted our experience using the buttons on each handle, recorded how easy (or difficult) it was to balance each gimbal, and noted any included accessories. Finally, we asked customer service at each company how to balance the gimbal, and we recorded how long a representative took to respond and how helpful they were.

In early 2019, we tested the DJI Osmo Pocket, a gimbal that has a built-in camera, against the GoPro Hero7 Black and its electronic image stabilization. We tested the DJI Osmo Mobile 3 in late 2019.

Our pick: Zhiyun Smooth 4

Gimbal

Photo: Signe Brewster

The Zhiyun Smooth 4 creates stable video that will elevate any hobby videographer’s style. It has a nice selection of autonomous shooting modes and the best-designed videography apps. We liked using the large number of buttons on its handle (once we learned their purposes) because they integrated so flawlessly with the apps.

The footage we shot with the Smooth 4 while filming a drone looked shake-free and smooth. The gimbal autonomously tracked the drone’s movement; it also comes with other preprogrammed shooting modes such as motion-lapse and hyperlapse.

Gimbal

Compared with our also-great pick, the Smooth 4 has more buttons, which we preferred because we did not have to touch the phone as often. Photo: Signe Brewster

Our Smooth 4 came with a slip of paper that directed us toward a YouTube tutorial. The piece of paper didn’t look professional, but the video is well done and helpful. It clearly lays out how to set up the gimbal and use its many buttons. Setting up the gimbal for the first time took us only about three minutes, as it came already balanced.

The iPhone 8 and Galaxy S8 fit in the Smooth 4 gimbal’s gripper without issue. The gripper is also compatible with modern phones such as the iPhone XR, iPhone XS Max, Google Pixel 3, and Google Pixel 3 XL. While iOS users should have no problem using Zhiyun’s ZY Play app, we recommend that Android phone owners download the Filmic Pro app instead because the Zhiyun app does not currently support filming in 4K on Android devices. We preferred the Filmic and Zhiyun apps to DJI’s app because we could more easily find different features and quickly adjust settings.

While the Osmo Mobile 3 has a minimal amount of buttons on its handle, the Smooth 4 is packed with buttons. This array can be overwhelming at first, but over time we found ourselves using the buttons more. Not having to touch the phone screen when the phone was oriented at an awkward angle was nice, and hitting a physical button when your thumb is already on the handle is faster. The buttons are well placed, and they integrate with the app seamlessly. We recommend watching the video tutorial a few times to learn the basics of how to use each button. If you’re still overwhelmed, you can always interact with the digital buttons on the phone screen instead.

Zhiyun says the Smooth 4’s battery lasts up to 12 hours; that’s a few hours shy of the Osmo Mobile 3’s battery life, but it still ranks among the longest-lasting batteries of the gimbals we came across in our research. The Smooth 4 also comes with both a carrying case and a tripod. Made of Styrofoam, the carrying case felt cheap compared with the cloth cases some of the other gimbals came with, but it fit the Zhiyun gimbal just fine. The tripod is just a few inches tall, which works if you plan to place it on a table but is mostly useless if you don’t have a raised place to set it. You may want to invest in a full-size tripod.

The Smooth 4 comes with a one-year warranty. Just make sure to buy directly from Zhiyun, as its warranty covers only devices that it sells directly.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

In customer service, Zhiyun fell short of DJI. We reached out via email and Zhiyun’s support page on Facebook. In both cases a representative took about 10 hours to respond, as the company is based in China and responds only during local business hours. Instead of helping us troubleshoot our problem directly, the representatives linked us to a relevant tutorial. The response was helpful—just not as personal.

Although we found the Smooth 4’s handle comfortable enough to hold, its flatter shape made it feel less ergonomic than the Osmo Mobile 3’s rounded handle. This model is also heavier than the Osmo Mobile 3 (547 grams versus 405 grams), but we didn’t really notice the difference. If you plan to shoot many hours of video a week, the handle could be something to consider before you make a purchase.

As with any gimbal, it takes some time to learn all of the vocabulary associated with operating the Smooth 4. We recommend watching the tutorial and experimenting with modes you don’t fully understand to improve your skills.

Also great: DJI Osmo Mobile 3

Gimbal

Photo: Signe Brewster

We liked using the DJI Osmo Mobile 3 almost as much as using the Smooth 4, and we found that it benefits from the best customer service of any gimbal we tested. If you expect you’ll need some help due to inexperience or heavy use, the Osmo Mobile 3 could be a safer choice. It also shoots smooth-looking footage that makes your videos look more professional. It has a nice selection of autonomous shooting modes, a straightforward app, and a comfortable handle with just a few buttons, so it’s one of the easiest gimbals to learn how to use.

The Osmo Mobile 3’s three-axis design allowed us to shoot footage that looked smooth and shake-free, similar to what we got from the Smooth 4. We also liked the selection of autonomous modes, including ActiveTrack, which cues the gimbal to automatically track a moving object (or a still one while you move around it with the camera). The gimbal can also help you make a time-lapse or keep the camera steady while you zoom or film in slow motion. The hyperlapse and motion-lapse options combine the camera moving with a time-lapse, making for even more sophisticated shots. We also thought this model’s rounded handle was more comfortable to hold than the Smooth 4’s flatter shape, and the buttons are all within easy reach of a thumb.

Most people have never used a gimbal because until recently the devices cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars. As a result, easy access to helpful customer service, a decent warranty, and easy-to-follow instructions for setup and operation are especially valuable. When we reached out via live chat on DJI’s website, a customer service representative responded almost instantly. They also walked us through steps to diagnose our stated problem, instead of just pointing us toward a tutorial as the other gimbal companies did. Like all the other gimbals we tested, the Osmo Mobile 3 comes with a one-year warranty.

Gimbal

The Osmo Mobile 3 has only a few buttons, which makes it easier to learn how to use but also requires you to touch the phone screen more often. Photo: Signe Brewster

DJI offers a quick-start guide for the Osmo Mobile 3 plus a more thorough instruction manual. You can also find a wide variety of DJI and third-party tutorial videos online. Overall, this gimbal comes with the most thorough set of documentation of any gimbal we tested. Setting up the Osmo Mobile 3 for the first time, including connecting the phone and gimbal via Bluetooth, took less than a minute. The gimbal was already balanced, and we were not able to unbalance it (not even purposely).

DJI says the Osmo Mobile 3 is compatible with phones ranging from 58.6 to 84.8 mm wide and up to 8.4 mm thick. It fit our iPhone 8 and Galaxy S8 without issue, and it can accommodate larger modern phones such as the iPhone XR, iPhone XS Max, Google Pixel 3, and Google Pixel 3 XL. Like the Smooth 4, it has a weakness when it comes to Android phones: Users of the Android DJI Mimo app can shoot a max of 30 fps, while iOS users can shoot at up to 60 fps. Finding different features and setting up shots was easy, but even so we preferred the ZY Play and Filmic Pro apps because they allowed us to more easily make quick adjustments to the settings. Filmic Pro is also compatible with the Osmo Mobile 3, so if you’d like a slight upgrade for less than 20 bucks, that app could be worth purchasing.

The Osmo Mobile 3 has a trigger, two buttons, a joystick, and a slider, which amounts to few buttons compared with the assortment on other gimbals we tested. Fewer buttons equals a shorter learning curve, which is nice if you are picking up a gimbal for the first time and prefer to use the easier-to-decipher digital buttons in the DJI Mimo app. One button allows you to turn the gimbal on, and once it’s on you can press it one, two, or three times to select different camera modes. Press the other button to take a photo or start recording. The joystick moves the gimbal to point the camera left, right, up, or down. The slider lets you zoom in or out without touching the phone. You can complete any other tasks by manually moving the gimbal or navigating within the DJI Mimo app. Although learning how to use the few Osmo Mobile 3 buttons is easier, we discovered that as we grew more comfortable with the gimbals we preferred having the large array of buttons on the Zhiyun Smooth 4. Touching the phone screen when the phone is at an odd angle can be annoying, so we opted for a gimbal’s physical buttons when possible.

DJI says the Osmo Mobile 3’s battery lasts up to 15 hours, which is the second-longest battery life of any gimbal we tested. It beats that of the Zhiyun Smooth 4 by three hours.

The base version of the Osmo Mobile 3 comes with a cloth bag. A more expensive bundle includes a tripod and a nice carrying case. We think the bundle comes at a good price (at this writing) for what it offers, but for the money it might make more sense to buy a more versatile smartphone tripod or a taller travel tripod. The Osmo Mobile 3 folds up to the size of a sandwich, and we think it’s sturdy enough to toss into a backpack or camera bag without a specialized case.

Upgrade pick: DJI Osmo Pocket

Gimbal

Photo: Signe Brewster

If you want the benefits of a gimbal in a standalone package, consider upgrading to the DJI Osmo Pocket, which has a built-in camera. Its pocket-friendly form and its ability to begin filming in seconds brings back memories of the Flip Video camera era, with the bonus of video stabilization and autonomous modes. In our tests it was as good at stabilizing video as the Smooth 4. We also think its portability makes it an interesting competitor to the GoPro Hero7 Black action camera: We found that the Osmo Pocket is a better stabilizer, though people who are more concerned about a device being waterproof or are interested in live streaming might still prefer the Hero7 Black.

The videos we filmed with the Osmo Pocket looked shake-free and smooth. We were able to use features such as ActiveTrack, where the camera autonomously follows a moving object, and MotionLapse, which condenses long shots into short, smooth videos. The built-in camera is capable of capturing 4K, 60 fps videos. We noticed that the raw videos from the Hero7 Black had brighter colors (not to mention GoPro’s signature wide-angle look), but you can make adjustments to your Osmo Pocket videos in the DJI-built Mimo app.

As we found with the Osmo Mobile 3, DJI’s customer service is easy to access and responsive. We almost didn’t need an instruction manual to get started with the Osmo Pocket. The gimbal has just two buttons: one that turns on the device and one that starts and stops filming. You can access other features, such as adjusting the video quality, by swiping the Osmo Pocket’s touchscreen. The smartphone app also lets you control more specialized settings such as white balance and noise reduction.

DJI says the Osmo Pocket’s battery lasts up to 2 hours, 20 minutes. That’s not very long compared with the battery life of our top smartphone gimbal picks, but it’s longer than the Hero7 Black’s 45 to 90 minutes. Thanks to the smaller battery, it weighs a slight 116 grams—nearly identical to the Hero7 Black. It comes with a plastic case that is still small enough to slide into a pocket or purse.

The competition

Gimbal

We tested five gimbals, including two that turned out to be identical. Photo: Signe Brewster

The DJI Osmo Mobile 2, our previous also-great pick, is still a nice gimbal for most of the same reasons as the Osmo Mobile 3. If you see it significantly discounted before it goes out of stock, it could be a worthwhile buy.

The Evo Pro is identical to the Zhiyun Smooth 4 in looks and operation. Its customer service is US-based, and a representative answered our request within a few minutes. However, this model didn’t come with an instructional video link as the Smooth 4 did, so its setup might be more confusing for a beginner. We recommend following the Zhiyun Smooth 4 setup video for the Evo Pro. The Evo Pro sometimes costs more than the Smooth 4, but if you find it for a lower price or are willing to spend a bit more for better customer service, you should consider buying it instead.

The FreeVision Vilta-M has the simplest handle of any gimbal we tested and an exceptionally long 17-hour battery life. It took less than a minute to set up. We also liked its easy-to-use app and cloth carrying case. However, it typically costs a bit more, and our customer support request via an online form didn’t seem to go through.

The Moza Mini-Mi is the least expensive gimbal we tested, and it has some interesting features such as wireless charging, but we couldn’t figure out how to connect it and the phone over Bluetooth, so it never worked correctly and we never got a chance to put this gimbal through our full tests.

This guide may have been updated by Wirecutter. To see the current recommendation, please go here.

When readers choose to buy Wirecutter’s independently chosen editorial picks, Wirecutter and Engadget may earn affiliate commissions.

[ad_2]

Source link

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip review: Admire it, don’t buy it

[ad_1]

Practically speaking, there are only two notable shortcomings. First, its resolution: at 2636×1080, it’s far less pixel-dense than a Galaxy S20, but you’ll probably never notice the difference unless your nose is pushed up against the screen. The other is that, presumably because of its odd, 21.9:9 aspect ratio, some apps don’t scale to fit the screen properly. Instagram, for instance, displays its Stories with big black bars along the top and bottom, and some of them are cut off along the sides. Uber, meanwhile, just runs with some dead space along the bottom. Beyond those relatively minor issues, I have no complaints here.

Even so, this smartphone’s screen is shaping up to be pretty controversial, all because of what’s on top of it. Samsung has made a lot of noise about its ultra-thin, flexible glass since the Z Flip was announced a few weeks ago, to the point where the development sounded like a material science miracle. A glass screen! In a foldable! Someone finally figured it out!

I’ll admit it: When I was at the Galaxy Unpacked event in San Francisco, I just took Samsung’s word for it. What the company never bothered to make clear is that, glass or not, the Z Flip’s screen still doesn’t seem anywhere near as durable as a traditional smartphone display.

For one, it’s still highly susceptible to scratches — our Z Flip’s screen has already picked up a handful of them, and I can’t for the life of me tell you how they got there. As it turns out, those scratches are appearing so readily because you’re not directly touching the glass, but a thin layer of protective plastic sitting on top of it. (Like on the Galaxy Fold, it stretches under the display’s raised bezels so it’s near-impossible to remove accidentally.) It’s not quite right to think of this as a mere screen protector, either. In a chilling YouTube teardown, Zack Nelson of JerryRigEverything peeled back the plastic and destroyed the display in the process. No, this plastic is an essential part of the screen itself, so be ready to see your fair share of nicks and gouges.

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip review

And then there’s the ultra-thin glass itself. Our contacts at Samsung wouldn’t directly confirm how thick this glass layer is, but the company’s display division shed some light on its approach in a recent press release. The glass here is 30 microns, or 0.03mm thick — that’s probably thinner than a sheet of paper you have sitting in your printer right now. To put that in perspective, Corning’s widely used Gorilla Glass ranges from, 0.4mm to 2mm. No matter how you look at it, you’re getting less protective glass here than you would with basically any other phone. It shows, too: That same YouTube teardown revealed that the Z Flip screen doesn’t resist puncture damage very well, so god forbid you ever drop the phone face down on something. (For what’s with worth, our unit survived a few accidental landings on hard, clean floors without issue.)

In day to day use, the main benefit of this ultra-thin glass is that it just feels better. Apart from the crease, which is both mildly annoying and currently unavoidable for foldables — the Z Flip’s screen feels just like a regular smartphone; there’s no screen flexing or plastic squishiness here. That’s important, for sure, but doesn’t mean you should expect this screen to handle daily life as well as a traditional smartphone.

[ad_2]

Source link

Toronto rejects some of Sidewalk Labs’ smart neighborhood ideas

[ad_1]

The technical evaluation broke the four-volume MIDP into 160 distinct proposals. Sixteen of those suggestions were labeled “non-support,” which means “new solutions must be explored,” Waterfront Toronto explained in a discussion guide that will inform a second round of public consultation.

The organization rejected an “efficient” and “ultra efficient” housing concept that would have been roughly seven percent smaller than Sidewalk’s equivalent “standard” unit. The proposed homes would have used multipurpose furniture, such as height-adjustable benches that could double as desks or shelves, and flexible walls that could shrink and expand rooms. Sidewalk thought communal eating and co-working could work too, alongside a combination of in-building and off-site storage services.

Sidewalk Labs

Waterfront Toronto supported buildings with shared building amenities, but thought the “efficient” units were still too small, according to The Star. Sidewalk Labs wants 40 percent of Quayside homes to be below market rate — of these apartments, it said in the MIDP, the average “efficient” unit would be 578 square feet, compared to the average “standard” of 638 square feet.

Waterfront Toronto also threw out a categorization system that would allow buildings to contain “a shifting mix” of residential, commercial and industrial spaces. Alphabet wanted to move away from single-use zones and adopt a “digital building code system” instead. The approach would measure noise, air pollution and other forms of general nuisance caused by its occupants. For this to work, Sidewalk Labs wanted to shrink Toronto’s building code system down to nine “use-neutral” categories in Quayside. Anything that fell under these categories, which included one-person homes, restaurants and stores, could occupy a space, provided it didn’t breach the building’s predefined nuisance levels.

Alphabet was considering a “lantern forest” that used eight-meter-tall kiosks, clumped together like trees, to protect people from the wind.

Other rejections fell outside Quayside’s brick-and-mortar buildings. Sidewalk Labs had prototyped a special “raincoat” awning that could protect nearby pedestrians from rain, wind and dazzling sunlight. The company thought they could be attached to a single building and moored with peg-like piles, or set up between two buildings like a canopy. In a similar vein, the draft MIDP had proposed “fanshell” shelters for parks and other outdoor spaces. They would come in two styles — a ground-hugging “shell” or a “fan” that sprouted upward like an umbrella — and be constructed from an origami-style fabric that could be folded and packed away when required.

Alphabet was also considering a “lantern forest” concept that used eight-meter-tall kiosks, clumped together like trees, to protect people from the wind. They could be deployed in open spaces that are exposed to the elements, the company said, or placed strategically in so-called “urban canyons” that create narrow wind tunnels between stores and apartments. Waterfront Toronto rejected the raincoat, fanshell and lantern forest concepts, though. “We’re excited to keep looking into solutions for outdoor comfort in our building designs at Quayside, which we will review with Waterfront Toronto on an ongoing basis,” Keerthana Rang, a spokesperson for Sidewalk Labs said.

Sidewalk Labs

To power and heat its smart neighorbood, Sidewalk has proposed an advanced power grid, thermal grid, waste management system and stormwater management system. The company said that the thermal grid could be connected to the Ashbridges Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant in Toronto — the second-largest facility of its kind in Canada — which it argued has the “thermal energy potential” to heat “some 35 Quaysides.”

The Alphabet subsidiary also proposed a two-part system for processing food waste in the neighborhood. First, a building inside Quayside would separate the waste and send it to a “neighborhood collection point.” An off-site facility would then remove any contamination and process the waste with anaerobic digesters — microorganisms that can break down biodegradable waste — into biogas. Waterfront Toronto rejected the Ashbridges Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant connection and the use of anaerobic digestion for food waste because it didn’t believe they were feasible for a 12-acre neighborhood, according to The Star.

Most of the other rejections relate to funding. Waterfront Toronto took issue with a suggestion that it would need to make recurring payments to subsidize advanced infrastructure including the thermal grid. It also didn’t agree with the funding required for a Quayside Neighborhood Association, or the idea that 5 percent of homes should be available for owners to part rent and part own through a shared equity program.

These setbacks are dwarfed, however, by the preliminary approvals in the technical evaluation. There were 92 solutions that Waterfront Toronto said it would support provided all funding and delivery was handled by the private sector. The organization approved a further 24 with the promise that it would advocate for additional funding from the government. The final 17 were solutions that it would support while pushing for relevant policy changes and regulatory reform. The 144 approved measures include mass timber buildings, solar-panel and/or vegetation-covered rooftops, EV ownership incentives and charging infrastructure, smart waste chutes and the thermal grid.

Sidewalk Labs

According to Sidewalk Labs, most of the “non-support” decisions were merely confirmation of “agreed changes in project geography, governance, or roles.” “That said, we are still in active negotiations with Waterfront Toronto and are still reviewing what will be possible at Quayside,” Rang said in a tweet today.

Those “agreed changes” likely relate to the “threshold issues” that Waterfront Toronto had with the draft MIDP upon its release. The tri-government organization’s biggest concern was Sidewalk’s intent to expand beyond Quayside with a 62-hectare River District that would comprise of five neighborhoods: Keating East, Villiers West, Villiers East, Polson Quay and McCleary. Google also asked to be the lead developer at Villiers West and to build a new Google Canadian headquarters on the 8-hectare land.

In an open letter, Waterfront Toronto said the proposed expansion was premature. “Waterfront Toronto must first see its goals and objectives achieved at Quayside before deciding whether to work together in other areas,” Steve Diamond, the chair of Waterfront Toronto’s board of directors said. “Even then, we would only move forward with the full collaboration and support of the City of Toronto, particularly where it pertains to City-owned lands.” It also rebuffed Sidewalk Labs’ proposal to be lead developer and reiterated that it would go through a “competitive, public procurement process” instead.

Sidewalk Labs agreed to all of Waterfront Toronto’s demands. For now, that means the evaluation process can continue. The project has divided citizens, though, who want change but are wary of Sidewalk’s ties to Google. Waterfront Toronto has until the end of the year to decide once and for all whether the project should go ahead. Before then, it’s likely that Sidewalk will have to negotiate and compromise further on its master plan.

“It will not be an easy negotiation, but I believe there is a will on both sides to make it work,” Sheldon Levy, a member of the six-person committee that reviewed the technical evaluation told George Zegarac, a fellow member and the CEO of Waterfront Toronto in a letter.

Update 02/21/20 12:10PM ET: Added comment from Sidewalk Labs that many of the “non-support” decisions were a result of the “threshold issues” that were negotiated and remedied last year.



[ad_2]

Source link

How to buy a mirrorless camera in 2020

[ad_1]

Because of that, there are a lot of new models to talk about since we ran our last guide in 2019. Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm and Panasonic are chasing Sony in the full-frame and APS-C mirrorless markets, while Olympus is the lone holdout building only Micro Four Thirds cameras. Meanwhile, Sony isn’t resting on its industry-leading market share, having unveiled a full-frame mirrorless camera that shot to the top of many critics’ lists, including mine.

What we’re seeing this year is cameras with more and better AI autofocus tech, faster shooting speeds and video that goes well beyond 4K. That’s all great, but you may be confused about which model to buy, so we’re here to help. Our 2020 guide will help you sort out which camera is the best for your personal needs, depending on your budget.

The basics

To see why mirrorless cameras have taken over from DSLRs, let’s go back to basics. While DSLRs give photographers a direct optical view through the lens using a reflex mirror, they’re bulkier than mirrorless models. On top of that, the mirror jumps out of the way when you take a shot, blocking your view of the decisive moment. DSLRs have also traditionally delivered faster autofocus than mirrorless cameras via dedicated phase-detect sensors, but even that advantage is disappearing.

Most mirrorless cameras now have phase-detect pixels directly on the sensor, giving you autofocus that’s nearly as fast and accurate as DSLRs. At the same time, they also use contrast-detect AF that processes the image as a whole, giving you the benefit of AI-powered features like face detection and object tracking. And many mirrorless models like the X-T3 offer blackout-free shooting with the electronic shutter.

Only mirrorless models from Panasonic still use contrast detect-only autofocus. Others, including models from Sony, Fujifilm, Olympus, Nikon and Canon, have hybrid contrast-and-phase-detect systems. The phase-detect pixels are built right into the sensor, so in theory, they can work just as fast as the systems on DSLRs. The problem is that they reduce the sensor area and can introduce horizontal banding into images. This isn’t noticeable unless you’re really looking for it, however.

At the same time, the electronic viewfinders (EVFs) used in place of optical viewfinders on mirrorless cameras are better than ever. Most medium- and high-end cameras pack at least 2.4 million dot LCD models, and many have even higher-resolution and clearer OLED EVFs. Unlike an optical viewfinder, an EVF shows exactly what the final image will look like. All told, DSLRs have very few advantages now, other than lower power consumption.

High-end DSLRs like Nikon’s D850 have generally used faster autofocus systems than mirrorless cameras. However, models like Sony’s A9 II have effectively closed that gap, while also offering more sophisticated eye- and face-tracking software. In addition, mirrorless cameras don’t need to switch modes to do video, unlike DSLRs that must go into a “live view” mode.

While technically not in the mirrorless category, compact cameras are identical except for the fixed lenses that can’t be removed or replaced. While that’s great for portability, a single lens means you’re going to sacrifice something. Fujifilm’s X100V, for instance, has a fast but fixed 35mm-equivalent f/2.0 lens and no zoom. Sony’s RX100 VI has a 24-200mm zoom, but it’s slower at the telephoto end (f/4.5) and less sharp than a prime lens. Because of their size, compact cameras are ideal for street and tourism photography.

DSLR vs. mirrorless vs. compact

So should you get a DSLR, mirrorless or high-end compact camera? And do you need a one-inch, Micro Four Thirds, APS-C or full-frame sensor? How many megapixels? What about the low-light sensitivity?

Let’s break these things down with some charts. Bear in mind that the points apply in most but not all cases. For instance, recent DSLRs and mirrorless cameras have improved live-view autofocus, vastly closing the AF performance gap.

Sizing up sensors

Larger sensors are ideal for professional photographers because they offer more control over the image. However, there’s also more that can go wrong if you make a mistake.

If you wanted a full-frame mirrorless camera most of last year, you were stuck with one choice (not counting Leica, which is out of most folks’ budgets). That would be Sony. Over the last two years, however, Nikon, Canon and Panasonic have all unveiled multiple full-frame mirrorless cameras each. The only holdouts are Fujifilm, which is fending for itself just fine with APS-C sensors and Olympus, the last company to use Micro Four Thirds exclusively.

At a size equivalent to 35mm film (36 x 24mm), full-frame offers the best performance in terms of image quality, low-light capability and depth of field. It’s also the most expensive and finicky. While blurred background “bokeh” can look beautiful at f/1.4, the depth of field is so razor thin that your subject’s nose will be in focus, but not their eyes. This can also make video shooting difficult.

The next size category is APS-C (around 23.5 x 15.6mm for most models and 22.2 x 14.8mm for Canon), offered on Fujifilm’s X-T3 and X-T30, Sony’s A6400, Canon’s M-series mirrorless models and several compacts, among others. It’s cheaper than full frame, both for the camera body and lenses, but still brings most of the advantages. You still get dreamy bokeh, high ISOs for low-light shooting and relatively high resolution. With a sensor size equivalent to 35mm movie film it’s ideal for shooting video, and focus is less demanding than with full-frame cameras.

Micro Four Thirds (17.3 x 13mm), a format and mount shared by Panasonic and Olympus for their mirrorless cameras, is the next step down in sensor size. It offers less bokeh and light-gathering capability than APS-C and full frame, but it allows for smaller and lighter cameras and lenses. For video, you still get a reasonably tight depth of field with good prime lenses, but focus is easier to control.

The other common sensor size is Type 1 (1 inch). That’s used mostly by compact models like Sony’s RX100 VI and Panasonic’s FZ-1000 II superzoom. The size permits a smaller camera body and lens but still offers much better image quality than a smartphone. Most high-end compacts, unlike many DSLRs and mirrorless models, offer 4K video.

It’s worth mentioning that Sony makes the sensors for nearly all other camera manufacturers nowadays, with the exception of Canon and, in some cases, Nikon. Oddly, Sony’s latest APS-C–equipped A6600 packs an older sensor, while Fujifilm’s latest X-T3 and X-T30 have all-new, higher-resolution X-Trans sensors, presumably made by Sony.

*The above chart doesn’t include medium format (which is larger than full frame) or APS-H (which is larger than APS-C, but smaller than full frame) because they are not common in consumer cameras.

Video

If you’re buying a mirrorless or DSLR camera because of video and decent photos are just a bonus, then you’ll have different needs. For vlogging, you probably want a selfie-type flip-out rear screen — an item that’s found on models like Canon’s EOS R/RP and the Panasonic GH5/GH5s. Sony’s latest A6100, A6400 and A6600 models do have pop-up displays, but as I discussed in my review, a hot-shoe-mounted external microphone will block it.

Here are a few other things you need to ponder: Does your camera line-skip for video recording or read out the whole sensor? Sony’s A7 III, for instance, reads the entire sensor to produce crisp, artifact-free video. However, the more expensive A7R IV can only do that in cropped APS-C mode due to the higher resolution. It can handle full-frame 4K, but does line-skipping, which produces so-called moire (rainbow colors) and aliasing (jagged diagonal lines).

The same applies to Nikon’s Z6 (full-frame readout) and Z7 (cropped), Canon’s M6 Mark II (full-frame/line skipping) and the Panasonic S1 (full-frame readout) and S1R (cropped). Sony’s A6400, the Fujifilm X-T3/X-T30, Nikon’s Z50 and Pansonic’s GH5 all scan the entire sensor and super sample, giving you crisp video with no nasty artifacts.

Is rolling shutter, or the “jello” effect that can skew video and photos, well controlled? Almost all digital cameras have it, but it varies a lot by model and resolution. It’s pretty brutal on Sony’s A7 III and A6600 at 4K, for instance, but much better on Fujifilm’s X-T3 and the Panasonic GH5.

Other things to consider: How’s the form factor for video (smaller isn’t necessarily better)? How long can you shoot before the camera heats up or stops? Does it support 10-bit HDR video? Is there a microphone and/or a headphone jack? (If you do a lot of interviews, it’s preferable to have both.) How’s the video autofocus? With its fast, accurate Dual Pixel AF, Canon models like the EOS R are the gold standard for vloggers and one-man-band shooters, but Sony’s latest models are catching up.

Our top picks at any price

Is Sony’s A7 III still the best full-frame mirrorless camera on the market? Or have some of the newer models edged it? If you’ve got the cash, then no, it’s been usurped by the incredible A7R IV. It’s still the best model in its price range, but not for video shooters.

Sony A7 III/A7R III/A7R IV

Sony A7R IV

When it first came out, I said that Sony’s 24.2-megapixel A7 III was a “near-perfect all-around camera.” That still applies. The already excellent 693-point hybrid phase detect autofocus system has been updated via firmware with the real-time eye and animal AF features introduced with the A6100/A6400 models. On top of that, you can shoot bursts at up to 10 fps with continuous autofocus and auto exposure. On the video side, however, it’s been surpassed by the like-priced Z6 and S1 models from Nikon and Panasonic.

The A7R III has been succeeded by the A7R IV, but it’s still available at a bargain price of $2,500, down from $3,200 last year. It marries a 42.4-megapixel sensor and 102,400 max ISO, giving you both high resolution images and low-light shooting. It can even go where high-resolution cameras aren’t supposed to, shooting 10 fps in bursts and recording 4K video internally with a full (albeit cropped) sensor readout. Like the A7 III, it also got real time eye AF and animal eye AF too, delivering incredible autofocus speeds when tracking a subject’s eyes.

If your budget can handle it, though, the $3,500 A7R IV is the camera to get in 2020. It handles better than the A7R III and leaves rivals in the dust, resolution-wise, with a 61-megapixel sensor. At the same time, you can shoot at 10 fps with continuous AF enabled — quite a feat considering each RAW photo is over 100MB in size. Sony improved its color science too, so images are truer to life and skin tones more natural, while fine details are rendered with incredible clarity. The A7R IV can even hold its own with video, letting you shoot full-frame 4K with line skipping or downsampled video that’s cropped to an APS-C size.

Fujifilm X-T3

Sony had a chance to top Fujifilm with the launch of the A6600, but didn’t succeed (more on that shortly). As such, the $1,300 X-T3 has retained its title as the best APS-C camera. The compact, retro, weatherproof body has that Fujifilm allure, making it ideal for street and travel photography. At the same time, it’s the most technically advanced X-Series model ever, thanks to an all-new, higher-resolution sensor, faster shooting speeds and good autofocus. Fujifilm drastically beefed up the video, adding Cinema 4K recording at up to 60 fps, 10-bit color depth and microphone and headphone ports. While it’s still the best APS-C mirrorless camera out there, you might want to wait to buy, as the price could drop once Fujfilm unveils the X-T4 on February 26th.

Nikon Z6 and Z7

It’s fair to lump these models together, because other than the resolution and video capabilities, they’re largely identical. If you’re more into portrait or landscape work and have a decent budget, the 45.7-megapixel Z7 is a great option. The new Z-mount is huge, and will allow Nikon to develop some incredible lenses. The selection is currently limited to four not-very-interesting models, but with a $100 adapter, you can add any standard F-Mount Nikon DSLR lens. 4K video is surprisingly good, though it can be a bit fuzzy if you don’t crop, thanks to line-skipping. The biggest issue I had with the Z7 was the autofocus, which is slow and not up to par to Sony’s models.

The Z6 is Nikon’s answer to Sony’s stellar A7 III and does beat it in one area: video. It delivers crisp, full-frame 4K, but unlike its rival, outputs 10-bit, 4:2:2 video for maximum dynamic range. It features 5-axis in-body stabilization, has excellent low-light capability and delivers sharp, color-accurate images. Nikon has five lenses, including three zooms and two primes, and you can adapt F-mount DSLR lenses with a $250 adapter. The single XQD card slot is a mark against it, however, and the autofocus is slow in continuous-tracking mode — though better with recent firmware updates.

Panasonic S1, S1R and S1H

The $2,500, 24.2-megapixel S1 was one of the best cameras released last year, being great for both video and photos. It delivers in-body stabilization, one of the best electronic viewfinders on the market and 10-bit video, both internally and externally. On top of that, Panasonic made it even better with a $200 firmware update that offers more 10-bit video options, along with V-Log recording and 14+ stops of dynamic range. The drawback is that it’s more expensive than rival models like the A7 III and Nikon’s Z6. It also relies on contrast-detect autofocus that can cause the camera to hunt during video shooting.

The $3,700, 47.3-megapixel S1R isn’t quite as desirable, as it’s more expensive than Sony’s A7R IV and has an inferior autofocus system. It’s also much heavier. However, it’s still a good camera for high-resolution portrait and landscape photography, with features like in-body stabilization and a high-resolution 5.7-million dot EVF.

The 24.2-megapixel Panasonic S1H is another animal altogether. It’s much more expensive at $4,000, but it’s specifically designed for video shooters with features like 6K video, 60 fps, 10-bit 4K video and a flip out, tilting display. You can be confident in the video quality, too, as it’s the first mirrorless camera to be approved for Netflix productions.

Panasonic GH5 and GH5s

Despite having smaller sensors than the S1/S1H, the $2,000 GH5 and $2,500 GH5s are still great options for budget video shooters. They’re among the few mirrorless consumer cameras to deliver 10-bit, high-data-rate 4K-video recording, for one thing. That gives you a large amount of control over video in post-production, letting you tweak colors to a fine degree. It also allows producers to create HDR videos that are perfect for today’s modern TVs and projectors. The GH5s, which I personally use to shoot most Engadget camera review videos, also delivers excellent low-light performance for a Micro Four Thirds camera, thanks to the dual ISO sensor.

Canon EOS R/EOS RP

I and others slammed the Canon EOS R — and rightfully so — for the lack of in-body stabilization and poor 4K video implementation. However, the 32-megapixel, $1,800 EOS R does have a few things in its favor. The Dual Pixel autofocus system is better for video than any other camera, and Canon has some excellent native RF lenses for it. After using it over the last year, I found that I enjoyed shooting with it thanks to the excellent image quality and handling, too — apart from that touch bar, which was a bad idea.

If you’re not willing to pay that kind of cash but still want a full-frame Canon mirrorless camera, consider the EOS RP. It’s available now for just $1,000, a pretty steep discount over the original price. For $800 less than the EOS R, you get a 26.2 rather than a 30.3-megapixel sensor, lower 5 fps burst shooting speeds and a lower resolution EVF. Still, it’s a solid full-frame mirrorless camera that works with all of Canon’s excellent RF lenses and many EF lenses too via a selection of three different adapters.

Canon could regain its full-frame mirrorless crown shortly. It’s set to release a new full-frame mirrorless RF mount camera called the EOS R5 that addresses nearly everything I didn’t like about the EOS R. You can expect features like in-body stabilization, dual card slots and, incredibly, 8K video.

Olympus OM-D E-M1X/E-M1 Mark III

The $2,500 OM-D E-M1X is a pro-level mirrorless camera with very rapid shooting speeds and an all-new image stabilizer that will help both video shooters and photographers. It’s larger than any other Olympus camera thanks to a dual-battery setup, isn’t a huge improvement over the 2016 O-MD E-M1 Mark II. It packs the same 20.4-megapixel sensor and 18 fps shooting speeds with the AF locked, too, or an exceptional 60 fps with those settings locked. Though it’s large for a Micro Four Thirds camera, sports-shooting pros might like the tough body and relatively compact telephoto lenses.

If you prefer your Olympus cameras smaller, the recently announced $1,800 OM-D E-M1 Mark III is very similar to its bigger brother. It’s an excellent camera for wildlife shooting, weighing half that of rival full-frame models with a 600mm equivalent lens. However, it’s got limited video shooting powers compared to rivals, and uses the same sensor as its four-year-old predecessor.

Sony A6600

Finally, if you’re looking for a flagship APS-C Mirrorless camera, my second choice after the Fujifilm X-T3 is Sony’s $1,200 A6600. While I considered it a “misstep” because of ongoing handling issues and the lack of a new sensor, it still has the best autofocus system of any APS-C camera with incredible AF speed and AI eye-detection smarts. And unlike the X-T3, it has a 5-axis in-body stabilization system that makes handheld shooting easier in low light. It can also handle 4K video, but you’ll need to be aware of the bad rolling shutter issue.

Our top affordable picks

Fujifilm X-T30

Stepping down in price, Fujifilm again trumps Sony, in my opinion, with the $899 X-T30, a slightly stripped down version of the X-T3. It’s much improved over its predecessor, the X-T20, with the addition of a focus joystick and touchscreen. On top of that, it shares the X-T3’s 26.1-megapixel X-Trans CMOS 4 BSI (backside-illuminated) sensor and quad-core X-Processor, bringing better resolution and faster shooting speeds. It has a similarly classy, but much smaller body that weighs just 383 grams (0.89 pounds), compared to 539 grams for the X-T3. It handles video pretty well, with 30 fps 4K video internally, and amazingly for a camera of this price, 10-bit external 4K video.

Canon M6 Mark II

There’s a lot to like about the $850 Canon M6 Mark II, particularly the very high-resolution 32.5-megapixel sensor and blazing 14 fps shooting speeds. Those things allow you to take the sharpest APS-C images you can get with Canon’s realistic colors, and do so at a very high-speed. That goes a long way to trumping the issues I have with this camera, including the lack of a built-in EVF and very mediocre lens lineup. Also, while you can shoot full-sensor 4K video, the M6 II does so with line-skipping, yielding a very soft image.

Nikon Z50

While Canon has two completely different mounts for its APS-C and full-frame systems, Nikon decided to go with the same Z mount as its full-frame Z6/Z7 camera for its first-ever APS-C mirrorless camera, the $850 Z50. That makes for a wider lens selection, and it’s a great handling camera with good image quality and decent autofocus capability. It also shoots downsampled 4K video using the full width of the sensor. It would be near the top of this list if it came out a year ago, but with the arrival of the X-T30 and Canon’s M6 II, it has to settle for the bronze medal.

Sony A6400/A6100

The $900 A6400 has the same autofocus system as the A6600, with incredible real-time eye-tracking speed. It also makes a decent vlogging camera thanks to the flip-up screen and full-sensor 4K video — just be aware of the terrible rolling shutter. In fact, a better choice might be the A6100, which has most of the same features (it has a lower-resolution EVF and no log video recording) but only costs $600.

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III

Money is an object for many of us, and that’s where Olympus’ sweet, badly named OM-D E-M10 Mark III comes in. For just $650, you get everything a beginning-to-intermediate-level shooter could want, like manual-adjustment dials, a compact size, 2.36-million-dot electronic viewfinder, five-axis in-body stabilization and 4K, 30-fps video. The drawback is its Micro Four Thirds 16.1-megapixel sensor that’s both smaller and lower resolution than on rival cameras. Image quality is good, but you’ll get more noise and less-dynamic range in low-light images. Battery life is not the best either.

Sony A7 II

Sony A7

Sony’s A7 II came out in 2015, so why would you still buy one? For starters, it costs just $900 (body only), making it the cheapest new full-frame mirrorless camera you can buy (the original A7 has been discontinued). For that price, you get in-body stabilization, a 2.36 million dot electronic viewfinder and 1080/60p/24p HD video with both microphone and headphone jacks. Most importantly, the full-frame 24.3-megapixel sensor gives you maximum bokeh and support for a growing number of full-frame FE lenses from Sony and others.

*Sony A7, rather than A7 II, pictured.

Canon EOS M50

Canon EOS M50

The EOS M50 was Canon’s first mirrorless M-series camera with Ultra HD 4K video. Packing a new DIGIC 8 processor, the 24.1-megapixel, APS-C model can shoot 3,840 x 2,160 video at 24 fps, or 1080p video at 60 fps. It’s getting a bit dated next to other cameras in this class, but at $570 (body only), it’s a pretty good deal next to other APS-C models from Canon, Sony and Fujifilm. Plus, lenses for it are very inexpensive and at least it has a built-in EVF — unlike the M6 II.

Images: Steve Dent/Brett Putman for Engadget (all, except); Canon (EOS M50)

[ad_2]

Source link

Amazon is removing listings for products that claim to cure coronavirus

[ad_1]

It’s not surprising that people are trying to sell products on dubious claims relating to the coronavirus, or COVID-19, outbreak. According to CNBC, sellers are peddling books on the virus and vitamin C sales have increased due to false statements that it is a cure. It’s good to see that Amazon is doing what it can to intercept misinformation and protect consumers.

Facebook and Google have been fighting coronavirus misinformation since late last month, and as the disease continues to spread, the fight against false claims will likely continue as well.

[ad_2]

Source link

Tesla receives permission to continue working on its German Gigafactory

[ad_1]

Last week, Tesla was ordered to stop clearing the forest plot while the court reviewed a complaint from the environmental group Green League of Bradenburg. Activists were upset that Tesla was allowed to begin clearing the land before the company received all of the necessary building permits, and they accused the court of granting Tesla preferential treatment. The court rejected those arguments, stating “the decision is final.”

While Tesla now has permission to continue clearing, protestors remain concerned that the factory will cause chemical pollution and excessive water consumption, as well as disrupt bat colonies and ant hills. Musk has addressed those concerns and promised to plant three trees for every one that the company cuts down. Many hail this as economic progress and say it is one of the most important industrial developments in eastern Germany to have happened in a long time.

Ultimately, Tesla hopes to improve the environment by replacing gas-powered cars with electric vehicles, but the company will have to mitigate short-term environmental impacts and fears in order to do so.

[ad_2]

Source link