×
Elon Musk vs. the regulators | TechCrunch

Elon Musk vs. the regulators | TechCrunch

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your hub for all things “future of transportation.” To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility!

Elon Musk has never had the best relationship with regulators, often bumping up against or outright sidestepping local and state laws where his numerous companies operate. 

This week has been particularly active on the regulatory front. 

Musk’s tunneling and infrastructure firm The Boring Company is accused of nearly 800 violations by Nevada regulators, including digging without approval, dumping untreated water onto city streets, failing to install silt fences, and tracking dirt from construction sites onto nearby roadways, a ProPublica investigation discovered. 

Then there is Tesla, which was hit with an enforcement action by California’s Department of Insurance for routinely denying or delaying customer claims despite years of warnings from the state regulator. Reminder: Tesla is an insurance provider in certain states.  

Tesla also has the attention, once again, of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The agency opened an investigation into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving tech after receiving reports the software caused vehicles to run red lights or cross into wrong lanes. 

The NHTSA has investigated Tesla before. But this one is notable because it specifically targets Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) driver-assistance software. And Musk, as well as Tesla shareholders, have pinned the company’s future on its ability to be a leader in autonomous vehicle technology, as well as robotics and AI. 

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025

This single investigation likely won’t derail Tesla’s plans; the company just rolled out the newest version of FSD (v14). But it is another example of increased scrutiny on the technology that Tesla is trying to put front and center and raises questions about its robotaxis, which uses a version of its FSD software.

A little bird

Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

A Wired article from July discovered that General Motors repurposed a few Chevy Bolt EVs that had been part of the shuttered Cruise robotaxi program and was driving them on select highways in Michigan near Austin, Texas, and the San Francisco Bay Area to develop simulation models and new driver-assistance technology.

Now it seems that General Motors might be moving forward with its autonomous vehicle development but in potentially surprising ways. When GM absorbed Cruise in December 2024, it said it would combine Cruise’s tech with its own ADAS efforts to develop fully autonomous personal vehicles.

We’re hearing chatter here and there that GM is building out an AV team across Austin and Mountain View. This comes just a couple months after GM started rehiring laid-off Cruise employees, per Bloomberg.

We’re poking around and if you know anything, reach out.

Got a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at kirsten.korosec@techcrunch.com or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or email Sean O’Kane at sean.okane@techcrunch.com.

Deals!

money the station
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

Joby Aviation sold 30.5 million shares to raise about $514 million, money that the company said would be used to fund certification and manufacturing efforts and prepare for commercial operations, as well as for general working capital and other general corporate purposes. The company plans to start carrying passengers in its electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft in Dubai in 2026, followed by the United States. 

Investors didn’t react too favorably, though, because shares went for a discount. Under the deal, they sold for $16.85 per share, nearly 11% lower than the previous close.

Other deals that got my attention this week …

I forgot this one last week. Futurail, a European startup developing an autonomy stack for self-driving trains, raised €7.5 million in seed funding co-led by Asterion Ventures and Leap435, joined by EIT Urban Mobility and U.S. investors Zero Infinity Partners and Heroic Ventures. Side note: The Autonocast, a podcast I co-host, recently had Alex Haag, CEO and co-founder of Futurail, on the show. Take a listen. 

Nexcade, a London-based startup developing end-to-end automation for freight forwarders, raised $2.5 million in a pre-seed round led by Connect Ventures. MMC Ventures, Entropy Industrial Capital, and Inovia also participated.

Toyota and Metal Mining have struck a deal to work together on the mass production of cathode materials for all-solid-state batteries to be installed in battery electric vehicles.

Tycho AI, an autonomous drone navigation startup, raised $10 million in a Series A round led by FirstMark.

Utilimarc, a Minneapolis-based fleet analytics and benchmarking company, was acquired by Smith System. The terms were not disclosed.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Image Credits:Bryce Durbin

California governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill that gives Uber and Lyft drivers in the state the right to unionize as independent contractors. 

Just last week, we featured DoorDash’s efforts to build its own autonomous delivery robot. But that internal program isn’t stopping the company from outside partnerships. DoorDash and Serve Robotics announced a multi-year partnership that would see them using autonomous robots to make deliveries across the United States.

Lucid delivered a record number of EVs in the third quarter. While it’s still nowhere near the projections it shared back when it was going public, the recent sales report does show progress.

Lyft has locked in another AV partnership — this time with Tensor Auto. The plan, the companies said, is to deploy robotaxis in Europe and North America starting in 2027. Tensor Auto might not sound familiar, but Chinese robotaxi company AutoX might. Tensor Auto’s roots are from AutoX, although the San Jose-based company has told TechCrunch in the past that AutoX’s Chinese operations were fully divested.

Transportation includes infrastructure like bridges. Climate tech reporter Tim De Chant looked into Allium Engineering, a startup developing paper-thin stainless steel that could change how bridges are built.

Tesla revealed bare-bones versions of the Model 3 and Model Y, which start at $36,990 and $39,990, respectively. These “standard” versions are pretty stripped down. Senior reporter Sean O’Kane provides more detail here. 

A few things jumped out at me. For one, I was surprised this standard version doesn’t include Autopilot. Also, Tesla is really known for innovating, from its manufacturing process and software-first approach to its business model. But this wasn’t an act of innovation or even cleverness. It was merely stripping away — and the end result wasn’t the deep discounts that had been previously touted. Remember, Elon Musk was once pushing a $25,000 vehicle, a program that was later scrapped. 

Zero Motorcycles has moved its key operations from California to a new European headquarters in the Netherlands. The company told TechCrunch the move is designed to accelerate growth and sharpen focus on global opportunities.

One more thing …

If you’re in San Francisco later this month, come say hello. I’ll be at TechCrunch Disrupt 2025, which will be held October 27 to October 29 at Moscone West. And there are a few transportation-related talks you won’t want to miss.

For instance, TechCrunch will be interviewing Uber chief product officer Sachin Kansal and Nuro co-founder and president Dave Ferguson about the evolving relationship between AI and mobility. The discussion is expected to cover how predictive models and computer vision are improving road safety, why last-mile delivery is an autonomy proving ground, and what it will take to bring AI-driven transportation to scale.

Source link
#Elon #Musk #regulators #TechCrunch


When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have?

This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”

The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO. 

But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand.

That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. 

That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them.

The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.”

#Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House">Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
                When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”

 The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO. 

 But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. 

 That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.”      #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House

grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have?

This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”

The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO. 

But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand.

That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. 

That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them.

The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.”

#Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House">Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
                When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”

 The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO. 

 But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. 

 That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.”      #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House

When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have?

This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”

The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO. 

But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand.

That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. 

That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them.

The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.”

#Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House

smart thermostats, one for the highest floor and another for the lower two. I asked to turn on the AC, which Gemini immediately did, but it didn’t ask me to specify which one and decided it was time for the upstairs AC to shine. It also defaulted to Eco mode, so I had to request that the thermostats be set to 75 degrees instead of the high 70s. Still, I was able to casually say “Can you set the temperature in the living room to 75, and upstairs too?” and it applied that to both smart thermostats.

Gemini Live is another way to converse with the Google Home Speaker (it’s only available on some older devices). You’ll tell the speaker “Hey Google, let’s talk,” and it’ll activate a conversational mode that will chat back and forth with you about any topics you bring up. I had a back-and-forth conversation with Gemini about my 3-year-old’s sleep schedule, how to treat sunburns on your scalp (you’ll never guess what I got this weekend), and asked about a summary of the previous night’s episode of Love Island (though Gemini didn’t have a recap yet of the episode that had premiered a few hours before).

Gemini also asked follow-up questions with each topic to keep the conversation going, but would change gears to whatever topic I introduced. It works as intended, but I’m not sure how useful it is in the home context—you’re more likely to use something like this on your smartphone. It’s just not my preferred way to learn or discuss new information, but audio learners might really like it.

I was excited to ask Gemini what it sees around the home via my Google security cameras, but the experience didn’t impress me as much as I hoped. Time and time again, I asked questions like whether the car was in the garage, and Gemini said that either it didn’t have access to that information or that I needed to upgrade my subscription tier to get the answer (you need Google Home Advanced).

Echo Chamber

Image may contain Electronics and Speaker

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Google and Amazon made the same move at roughly the same time: a new small-sized smart speaker that promises the sound quality of larger speakers, retailing for $100. Smaller speakers like the previous Echo Dot models and the Google Home Mini have been popular because they can be placed anywhere, whether it’s on a crowded shelf or tucked into a corner of the kitchen, but they were also much cheaper.

#Googles #Smart #Speaker #Takes #Leadgoogle,shopping,smart home,review,speakers,google gemini,smart speakers,reviews">Google’s New Smart Speaker Takes the LeadGemini did a pretty good job with more conversational commands, though you still need to be specific for some requests. For example, my three-story townhouse has two smart thermostats, one for the highest floor and another for the lower two. I asked to turn on the AC, which Gemini immediately did, but it didn’t ask me to specify which one and decided it was time for the upstairs AC to shine. It also defaulted to Eco mode, so I had to request that the thermostats be set to 75 degrees instead of the high 70s. Still, I was able to casually say “Can you set the temperature in the living room to 75, and upstairs too?” and it applied that to both smart thermostats.Gemini Live is another way to converse with the Google Home Speaker (it’s only available on some older devices). You’ll tell the speaker “Hey Google, let’s talk,” and it’ll activate a conversational mode that will chat back and forth with you about any topics you bring up. I had a back-and-forth conversation with Gemini about my 3-year-old’s sleep schedule, how to treat sunburns on your scalp (you’ll never guess what I got this weekend), and asked about a summary of the previous night’s episode of Love Island (though Gemini didn’t have a recap yet of the episode that had premiered a few hours before).Gemini also asked follow-up questions with each topic to keep the conversation going, but would change gears to whatever topic I introduced. It works as intended, but I’m not sure how useful it is in the home context—you’re more likely to use something like this on your smartphone. It’s just not my preferred way to learn or discuss new information, but audio learners might really like it.I was excited to ask Gemini what it sees around the home via my Google security cameras, but the experience didn’t impress me as much as I hoped. Time and time again, I asked questions like whether the car was in the garage, and Gemini said that either it didn’t have access to that information or that I needed to upgrade my subscription tier to get the answer (you need Google Home Advanced).Echo ChamberPhotograph: Nena FarrellGoogle and Amazon made the same move at roughly the same time: a new small-sized smart speaker that promises the sound quality of larger speakers, retailing for 0. Smaller speakers like the previous Echo Dot models and the Google Home Mini have been popular because they can be placed anywhere, whether it’s on a crowded shelf or tucked into a corner of the kitchen, but they were also much cheaper.#Googles #Smart #Speaker #Takes #Leadgoogle,shopping,smart home,review,speakers,google gemini,smart speakers,reviews

, one for the highest floor and another for the lower two. I asked to turn on the AC, which Gemini immediately did, but it didn’t ask me to specify which one and decided it was time for the upstairs AC to shine. It also defaulted to Eco mode, so I had to request that the thermostats be set to 75 degrees instead of the high 70s. Still, I was able to casually say “Can you set the temperature in the living room to 75, and upstairs too?” and it applied that to both smart thermostats.

Gemini Live is another way to converse with the Google Home Speaker (it’s only available on some older devices). You’ll tell the speaker “Hey Google, let’s talk,” and it’ll activate a conversational mode that will chat back and forth with you about any topics you bring up. I had a back-and-forth conversation with Gemini about my 3-year-old’s sleep schedule, how to treat sunburns on your scalp (you’ll never guess what I got this weekend), and asked about a summary of the previous night’s episode of Love Island (though Gemini didn’t have a recap yet of the episode that had premiered a few hours before).

Gemini also asked follow-up questions with each topic to keep the conversation going, but would change gears to whatever topic I introduced. It works as intended, but I’m not sure how useful it is in the home context—you’re more likely to use something like this on your smartphone. It’s just not my preferred way to learn or discuss new information, but audio learners might really like it.

I was excited to ask Gemini what it sees around the home via my Google security cameras, but the experience didn’t impress me as much as I hoped. Time and time again, I asked questions like whether the car was in the garage, and Gemini said that either it didn’t have access to that information or that I needed to upgrade my subscription tier to get the answer (you need Google Home Advanced).

Echo Chamber

Image may contain Electronics and Speaker

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Google and Amazon made the same move at roughly the same time: a new small-sized smart speaker that promises the sound quality of larger speakers, retailing for $100. Smaller speakers like the previous Echo Dot models and the Google Home Mini have been popular because they can be placed anywhere, whether it’s on a crowded shelf or tucked into a corner of the kitchen, but they were also much cheaper.

#Googles #Smart #Speaker #Takes #Leadgoogle,shopping,smart home,review,speakers,google gemini,smart speakers,reviews">Google’s New Smart Speaker Takes the Lead

Gemini did a pretty good job with more conversational commands, though you still need to be specific for some requests. For example, my three-story townhouse has two smart thermostats, one for the highest floor and another for the lower two. I asked to turn on the AC, which Gemini immediately did, but it didn’t ask me to specify which one and decided it was time for the upstairs AC to shine. It also defaulted to Eco mode, so I had to request that the thermostats be set to 75 degrees instead of the high 70s. Still, I was able to casually say “Can you set the temperature in the living room to 75, and upstairs too?” and it applied that to both smart thermostats.

Gemini Live is another way to converse with the Google Home Speaker (it’s only available on some older devices). You’ll tell the speaker “Hey Google, let’s talk,” and it’ll activate a conversational mode that will chat back and forth with you about any topics you bring up. I had a back-and-forth conversation with Gemini about my 3-year-old’s sleep schedule, how to treat sunburns on your scalp (you’ll never guess what I got this weekend), and asked about a summary of the previous night’s episode of Love Island (though Gemini didn’t have a recap yet of the episode that had premiered a few hours before).

Gemini also asked follow-up questions with each topic to keep the conversation going, but would change gears to whatever topic I introduced. It works as intended, but I’m not sure how useful it is in the home context—you’re more likely to use something like this on your smartphone. It’s just not my preferred way to learn or discuss new information, but audio learners might really like it.

I was excited to ask Gemini what it sees around the home via my Google security cameras, but the experience didn’t impress me as much as I hoped. Time and time again, I asked questions like whether the car was in the garage, and Gemini said that either it didn’t have access to that information or that I needed to upgrade my subscription tier to get the answer (you need Google Home Advanced).

Echo Chamber

Image may contain Electronics and Speaker

Photograph: Nena Farrell

Google and Amazon made the same move at roughly the same time: a new small-sized smart speaker that promises the sound quality of larger speakers, retailing for $100. Smaller speakers like the previous Echo Dot models and the Google Home Mini have been popular because they can be placed anywhere, whether it’s on a crowded shelf or tucked into a corner of the kitchen, but they were also much cheaper.

#Googles #Smart #Speaker #Takes #Leadgoogle,shopping,smart home,review,speakers,google gemini,smart speakers,reviews

Post Comment