×
We Risked Our Necks Testing Over 25 Laptop Stands to Find the Best

We Risked Our Necks Testing Over 25 Laptop Stands to Find the Best

Tech-news , , , , , ,

What to Look for in a Laptop Stand

When shopping for a laptop stand, think about how and where you’ll use it, and how much you’re willing to spend. Here’s what you need to consider:

Do you need portability? If you commute or like to work from a coffee shop, opt for a foldable laptop stand that fits in your bag. Some models even double as cases, like Moft’s Carry Sleeve.

Material preferences? Laptop stands come in a variety of materials—aluminum, steel, plastic, wood, etc. Aluminum models are generally lightweight and excellent for heat dissipation. Steel stands are sturdier but heavier, and plastic tends to be more affordable but also wobblier. If aesthetics matter, some wooden models like Grovemade’s Walnut Stand or Oakywood Laptop Stand add a bit more warmth and polish to your space.

How adjustable? Everyone’s workspace is different, and everybody is different, so most people benefit from an adjustable stand that lets you tweak your setup. If you’re using a sit-stand desk, you’ll want a stand that accommodates both modes. Some stands can even act as sit-stand desk converters, so you don’t have to purchase a new stand-up desk.

Do you use an external keyboard and mouse? If not, go for a sturdier stand. Portable laptop stands tend to be lightweight and wobbly if you’re typing directly on the laptop. Note: The right keyboard and ergonomic mouse can prevent muscle strain.

Extra features? Some stands come with extras like built-in cable management and compartments for storage. Be ready to spend a little more, though.

Do Laptop Stands Improve Posture?

Yes, they can. Working on a laptop atop a desk for long periods can form really poor posture habits. Because of the height of the laptop screen, your neck will always crane down, and you’ll find yourself hunching over or slouching to get more comfortable. The goal is to get the height of the laptop screen as close to eye level as possible. While an office chair or standing desk can lift the height of your laptop screen, that’ll mess with the angle of your elbows and wrists, which is also an ergonomic faux pas.

Should You Use a Laptop Stand Without an External Keyboard?

Probably not. While you certainly can use the keyboard or touchpad of your laptop in a pinch while it’s elevated on a laptop stand, it’s not the best ergonomic decision. All the experts I’ve spoken to have told me that you want to keep your arm at close to a 90 degree angle as possible, allowing you to use your mouse and keyboard in a more natural position. So, yes, if you’re using a laptop stand, you’ll also want to get an external mouse and keyboard.

Why Use a Vertical Laptop Stand?

By no means are vertical laptop stands required. However, they are a nice way of saving space on your desk if you have a nice monitor and don’t plan to use the laptop screen. Because you can now connect your laptop to a monitor with the screen closed, it’s a handy way to store your laptop vertically and free up space. A standard horizontal laptop stand is for when you want to use your laptop display in a dual-screen setup, paired with an external monitor. Vertical laptop stands tend to be very simple little products, so just make sure it fits your laptop and looks nice on your desk—something like the Coreminded Vertical Laptop Stand I mentioned above.

More Laptop Stands to Consider

There’s no shortage of computer stands out there, and most of them get the job done. While these didn’t quite make my top picks, they still have some perks worth considering.

Rain Design iLevel2

Courtesy of Rain Design

Rain Design iLevel2 for $65: I wanted to love the Rain Design iLevel2, assuming that it was a bestseller for a reason. Adjusting the height is easy—you slide the front level—but even at its lowest (5.4 inches), it still feels too high for some setups. It maxes out at 7.9 inches, which works fine if you’re using an external keyboard. Typing directly on your laptop while it’s perched on this stand, however, is a no-no; there’s a noticeable wobble that feels unstable and can get distracting.

Uncaged Ergonomics WorkEZ Best Laptop Stand for $40: If you liked the Nnewvante stand but want something a bit more compact, this one is worth a look. It’s not as sturdy as other picks, but the legs make it versatile enough so that you can use it on a table, bed, or couch, depending on how you’re propped up.

FluidStance Lift Laptop Stand for $79: FluidStance’s Lift Stand is a magnetic whiteboard that doubles as a surface for jotting notes and to-dos. The steel build won’t budge or buckle, and there are built-in notches to manage cables. Note that it’s not foldable, so I would leave this at home. Bonus: The Lift is made in the US from mostly recycled steel.

Arlo Skye Stowaway Lap Desk for $125: I appreciate the lap desk’s cushion and its built-in storage compartment for a caseless laptop (up to 14 inches), plus space for a thin notepad and pen. It’s great for working from bed or the couch, and there’s a slot for holding up your phone or tablet. This is also a solid option for kids. They can draw and color while keeping their supplies together. It is expensive for what it is, though.

Moft Invisible Stand a black angular laptop stand with two hands holding a silver laptop about to place it on top

Moft Invisible Stand

Courtesy of Moft

Moft Invisible Stand for $25: The Moft Invisible Stand is made of MOVAS-P vegan leather and folds like origami to give you two adjustable angles: 25 degrees for viewing purposes and 15 degrees for typing or sketching. It feels flimsy, but it holds up to 11 pounds and folds flat when not in use. If you can’t snag one (it’s often sold out), the Carry Sleeve is another option that doubles as a laptop sleeve—but note it’s not compatible with tablets.

FlexiSpot SC-4U Adjustable Laptop Stand for $50: This stand feels like the sibling of our discontinued pick from ObVus Solutions. It doesn’t get as high (a maximum of 10.6 inches) but would fit better on a small desk or in a bag. It’s tough to adjust, which isn’t necessarily a downside, since it means it won’t budge once you get it to the angle you like. Bonus points for the rotating base, which is great if you’re collaborating with coworkers.

Laptop Stands to Avoid

Amazon is filled with laptop stands, many of which come from companies you may not have heard of. While some of these are higher quality, we’ve come across a few with serious problems.

Tonmom Laptop Stand: When something costs under $10, you can’t have high expectations. I liked the idea of an extremely portable laptop stand—something you could take on a plane or to a coffee shop. And this one had tons of good reviews on Amazon. While the Tonmom Laptop Stand does fold down to something you could toss in a backpack (and comes with a nice velvet bag), it feels very wobbly. It has so many free-floating parts that I never felt like my laptop was safe. It could easily slide out if something bumped it while the laptop is secured.

Gogoonike Laptop Stand: I tried this one as an even cheaper alternative to the Amazon Basics model, but it fails on many levels. I like that it’s not as tight as the Amazon Basics stand, meaning it’s easier to adjust while still feeling firm. But that’s where my compliments end. My unit came with nicks and faded paint all along the edge of the metal base. My guess is that this wear and tear will only get worse over time. The most egregious failure was that my unit wouldn’t sit completely flat on the table, as it uses cheap pads on the bottom rather than proper silicone feet. A laptop stand that doesn’t sit flat on a table is a big problem.

Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.

Source link
#Risked #Necks #Testing #Laptop #Stands #Find

Tag

Related Posts

New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised $9 million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow. 

Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image. 

Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks.

Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.”

“I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?”

Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM. 

“Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks. 

For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI. 

As AI content floods the internet, Pangram raises M to detect it | TechCrunch New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow.  Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image.  Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks. Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.” “I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?” Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM.  “Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks.  For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI.  Image Credits:Pangram Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.   That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too. The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban. Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector. Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers.  Users can access Pangram via a -per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen.  Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero.  Does Pangram work? Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.   I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score.  Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text. My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive.  Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo.  In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content.  Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop.  “The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.” When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop
Image Credits:Pangram

Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.  

That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too.

The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban.

Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector.

Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers. 

Users can access Pangram via a $20-per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen. 

Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero. 

Does Pangram work?

Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.  

I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score. 

Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text.

My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive. 

Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo. 

In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content. 

Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop. 

“The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop">As AI content floods the internet, Pangram raises M to detect it | TechCrunch New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow.  Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image.  Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks. Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.” “I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?” Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM.  “Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks.  For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI.  Image Credits:Pangram Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.   That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too. The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban. Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector. Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers.  Users can access Pangram via a -per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen.  Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero.  Does Pangram work? Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.   I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score.  Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text. My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive.  Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo.  In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content.  Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop.  “The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.” When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop

Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised $9 million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow. 

Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image. 

Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks.

Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.”

“I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?”

Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM. 

“Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks. 

For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI. 

As AI content floods the internet, Pangram raises M to detect it | TechCrunch New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow.  Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image.  Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks. Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.” “I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?” Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM.  “Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks.  For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI.  Image Credits:Pangram Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.   That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too. The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban. Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector. Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers.  Users can access Pangram via a -per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen.  Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero.  Does Pangram work? Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.   I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score.  Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text. My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive.  Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo.  In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content.  Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop.  “The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.” When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop
Image Credits:Pangram

Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.  

That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too.

The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban.

Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector.

Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers. 

Users can access Pangram via a $20-per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen. 

Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero. 

Does Pangram work?

Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.  

I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score. 

Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text.

My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive. 

Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo. 

In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content. 

Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop. 

“The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop">As AI content floods the internet, Pangram raises $9M to detect it | TechCrunch

New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised $9 million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow. 

Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image. 

Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks.

Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.”

“I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?”

Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM. 

“Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks. 

For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI. 

As AI content floods the internet, Pangram raises M to detect it | TechCrunch New York-based AI detection startup Pangram is on a mission to combat the AI slop infestation spreading across the internet, and it just raised million on a bet that demand for tools that distinguish human-generated content from AI-generated text will only grow.  Pangram’s fundraise — led by Menlo Ventures, with participation from Haystack, ScOp, Script Capital, and Cadenza — comes as the startup also launches its next-generation AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model, Pangram Image.  Pangram says the new text detection model is over 99% accurate at finding AI-assisted writing and mixed human-AI content, plus it can more easily detect AI humanizer programs. The AI image detector is only available via research preview for now; Pangram plans to release it more widely in the coming weeks. Stanford AI and machine learning grads Max Spero and Bradley Emi launched Pangram about two years ago, after the launch of ChatGPT opened the floodgates for an internet full of bots, AI-generated SEO slop content, and what Spero calls “LLM-powered Russian disinformation campaigns and UAE-influenced campaigns on Twitter.” “I think it’s just incredibly valuable to know whether what you’re looking at is something that’s AI-generated or not,” Spero told TechCrunch. “Especially text that you’re reading, because it changes how people approach the text. Is this something that I’m going to have to look out for hallucinations and jump in skeptically, or is this something that I trust was well-researched from an actual journalist?” Pangram’s AI detection system is essentially a large machine learning model that was trained on tens of millions of known human documents. The startup then created a “synthetic mirror” for each document, replicating the topic, length, and tone of voice, but written by a frontier LLM.  “Our model is learning the stylistic differences and the choices that AI makes consistently and is able to use that to learn what makes something AI-generated with high confidence,” Spero said, adding that the AI detector isn’t relying on copy-paste metadata or hidden watermarks.  For Pangram, AI detection isn’t just about whether or not a piece of text was written entirely by AI. It’s also about distinguishing between levels of AI assistance — like in the case of someone who writes something themselves, but then asks AI to edit or clean it up. Spero believes AI assistance can be acceptable, just so long as the writer discloses their use of AI.  Image Credits:Pangram Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.   That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too. The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban. Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector. Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers.  Users can access Pangram via a -per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen.  Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero.  Does Pangram work? Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.   I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score.  Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text. My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive.  Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo.  In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content.  Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop.  “The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.” When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop
Image Credits:Pangram

Pangram’s emergence comes at a time when AI usage is becoming more commonplace. In some cases, like the Canadian politician who read an AI prompt aloud in a speech to lawmakers, the mistakes result in ridicule. In other cases, as with certain lawyers making their case using fake citations created by ChatGPT, the consequences could be sanctions and fines.  

That backlash isn’t just costing individuals embarrassment or sanctions — it’s starting to show up in institutional rules, too.

The open-access archive arXiv introduced a new enforcement policy this year, stating that submissions containing evidence that authors failed to review LLM output (like hallucinated references or meta comments such as, “Would you like me to make any changes?”) can trigger a one-year submission ban.

Pangram isn’t the only one betting that AI detection will become more sought after. Competitors like Winston AI, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and GPTZero are are chasing the same demand, each building its own detector.

Pangram’s technology, while not perfect, could help fuel the resistance to accepting the AI-generated content flooding the internet, the courtroom, and academic papers. 

Users can access Pangram via a $20-per-month subscription on the web or download the Chrome extension, which automatically labels posts in real time on X, LinkedIn, Substack, Reddit, and Medium. It also provides a feed health score with a percentage breakdown of human versus AI content on your screen. 

Pangram also offers its technology via API. Notably, Substack recently integrated Pangram’s technology into its platform to show readers which of their favorite authors write their newsletters using AI. Other API customers include Quora, schools and universities, publishers and agents, and recruiters, among others, per Spero. 

Does Pangram work?

Pangram detected AI-generated content even when lightly edited by a human. Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Spero said roughly one in 10,000 human documents are incorrectly labeled as AI with Pangram’s model, so I decided to put it to the test. The text detection model was very impressive but not perfect. It easily flagged entirely AI-generated news articles written by both ChatGPT and Claude, and was rarely fooled by my attempts to edit the AI-generated text into sounding more human. At the same time, Pangram did flag sentences that I completely rewrote as being AI-written. Pangram also wasn’t at all fooled by my attempts to prompt ChatGPT and Claude into evading AI detectors when generating content.  

I also gave ChatGPT and Claude one of my own articles and asked them to polish it up. Pangram gave it a 13% AI assisted score, which was probably close to accurate, but the model was able to detect subtle word-choice changes in some sentences and ignored them in others. It also flagged some sentences as AI-assisted when they were human written. That was notable because when I gave Pangram that same article in its entirety, as I had written it, it got a 100% human score. 

Maybe the problem was that news articles can be a bit dry and could easily sound like AI. So I tried a different tactic. I tested Pangram on my own more voicey, personal Substack newsletter content, pasting the first half of the text into Pangram and then asking ChatGPT and Claude to copy my style and write the second half. For the most part, Pangram easily detected human-written text versus AI-written text.

My limited testing of Pangram’s new image detection model turned out to be equally impressive. 

Image Credits:Pangram/TechCrunch

Pangram’s AI image detection system promises to spot AI-generated images across AI models, unlike OpenAI’s or Google DeepMind’s watermark-based checks, which mostly detect their own output. It works on pixel-level distributions, learning subtle statistical differences between real photos and AI-generated images. Spero says the model can even detect an AI image that appears inside a real-world photo. 

In my testing, the model easily detected AI-generated imagery, whether it was photorealistic or cartoonish. I can also confirm the model could detect an AI image appearing in a real-world photo — the heat map Pangram provides clearly lighting up over the image — though in one instance it incorrectly labeled a photo of an AI-generated image as human content. 

Spero says he doesn’t want his technology to fuel a witch hunt against people using AI for writing, but that there needs to be some sort of mechanism to push back against the slop. 

“The future that I see is that AI content just continues to proliferate,” Spero said. “We’re getting new GPUs faster than new people are being born. If we do not actively discriminate in favor of human content, then we’re just gonna see more and more AI, and it’s just gonna drown out any human signal that we have.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#content #floods #internet #Pangram #raises #detect #TechCrunchai slop
reports, Vivo has started preparations for launching its S series phones back in India with the release of the Vivo S2 smartphone. While Vivo hasn’t officially confirmed a release date, some reports indicate the phone could launch on August 6th, with sales expected to begin on August 11. This would mark the revival of the S series of phones in India following the debut of the Vivo S1 phone back in 2019. Reports have also given an early look at its design while revealing details about its expected specifications, color options, and launch plans.

Expected Specifications and Camera Features

Leaks suggest the Vivo S2 will feature an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120Hz. The phone may use the MediaTek Dimensity 7360 chipset, built on a 4nm process. Reports also suggest the phone will come in 8GB + 128GB and 8GB + 256GB variants. On the camera front, the Vivo S2 is tipped to include a 50MP Sony main sensor. Some information also suggests that the phone would be capable of recording videos in 4K quality through both front and rear cameras.

According to some recent leaks, the Vivo S2 would come with a sleek design. It would have a 3D curved display with narrow borders and a punch-hole selfie camera at the center of the device. On the back side, there would be a camera module in the shape of a pill with two big rings and an LED flash. Unlike many smartphones, the camera module matches the rear panel color for a more seamless finish. Vivo could offer the phone in Sapphire Blue, Regal Bronze, and Silk White. Its design closely resembles the Vivo X300 FE. Vivo has not shared any battery details yet. However, one report suggests the Vivo S2 may pack a 7,000mAh battery. This information is still based on leaks and awaits official confirmation.

Expected Price of Vivo S2

The Vivo S2 could target India’s premium mid-range smartphone market. It might cost anywhere between ₹40,000 and ₹50,000, though Vivo has not yet officially announced its pricing. Some leaks also reveal internal listing prices, but they may differ from the final retail price. On launch, the Vivo S2 will challenge the OnePlus Nord 6 and the Motorola Edge 70 Pro smartphones. It will also take on the Realme 16 Pro series and Vivo V70 FE.

#Vivo #India #Launch #Tipped #August #Design #Key #Specs #LeakedVivo">Vivo S2 India Launch Tipped for August 6: Design and Key Specs Leaked According to reports, Vivo has started preparations for launching its S series phones back in India with the release of the Vivo S2 smartphone. While Vivo hasn’t officially confirmed a release date, some reports indicate the phone could launch on August 6th, with sales expected to begin on August 11. This would mark the revival of the S series of phones in India following the debut of the Vivo S1 phone back in 2019. Reports have also given an early look at its design while revealing details about its expected specifications, color options, and launch plans. Expected Specifications and Camera Features Leaks suggest the Vivo S2 will feature an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120Hz. The phone may use the MediaTek Dimensity 7360 chipset, built on a 4nm process. Reports also suggest the phone will come in 8GB + 128GB and 8GB + 256GB variants. On the camera front, the Vivo S2 is tipped to include a 50MP Sony main sensor. Some information also suggests that the phone would be capable of recording videos in 4K quality through both front and rear cameras. According to some recent leaks, the Vivo S2 would come with a sleek design. It would have a 3D curved display with narrow borders and a punch-hole selfie camera at the center of the device. On the back side, there would be a camera module in the shape of a pill with two big rings and an LED flash. Unlike many smartphones, the camera module matches the rear panel color for a more seamless finish. Vivo could offer the phone in Sapphire Blue, Regal Bronze, and Silk White. Its design closely resembles the Vivo X300 FE. Vivo has not shared any battery details yet. However, one report suggests the Vivo S2 may pack a 7,000mAh battery. This information is still based on leaks and awaits official confirmation. Expected Price of Vivo S2 The Vivo S2 could target India’s premium mid-range smartphone market. It might cost anywhere between ₹40,000 and ₹50,000, though Vivo has not yet officially announced its pricing. Some leaks also reveal internal listing prices, but they may differ from the final retail price. On launch, the Vivo S2 will challenge the OnePlus Nord 6 and the Motorola Edge 70 Pro smartphones. It will also take on the Realme 16 Pro series and Vivo V70 FE. #Vivo #India #Launch #Tipped #August #Design #Key #Specs #LeakedVivo

, Vivo has started preparations for launching its S series phones back in India with the release of the Vivo S2 smartphone. While Vivo hasn’t officially confirmed a release date, some reports indicate the phone could launch on August 6th, with sales expected to begin on August 11. This would mark the revival of the S series of phones in India following the debut of the Vivo S1 phone back in 2019. Reports have also given an early look at its design while revealing details about its expected specifications, color options, and launch plans.

Expected Specifications and Camera Features

Leaks suggest the Vivo S2 will feature an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120Hz. The phone may use the MediaTek Dimensity 7360 chipset, built on a 4nm process. Reports also suggest the phone will come in 8GB + 128GB and 8GB + 256GB variants. On the camera front, the Vivo S2 is tipped to include a 50MP Sony main sensor. Some information also suggests that the phone would be capable of recording videos in 4K quality through both front and rear cameras.

According to some recent leaks, the Vivo S2 would come with a sleek design. It would have a 3D curved display with narrow borders and a punch-hole selfie camera at the center of the device. On the back side, there would be a camera module in the shape of a pill with two big rings and an LED flash. Unlike many smartphones, the camera module matches the rear panel color for a more seamless finish. Vivo could offer the phone in Sapphire Blue, Regal Bronze, and Silk White. Its design closely resembles the Vivo X300 FE. Vivo has not shared any battery details yet. However, one report suggests the Vivo S2 may pack a 7,000mAh battery. This information is still based on leaks and awaits official confirmation.

Expected Price of Vivo S2

The Vivo S2 could target India’s premium mid-range smartphone market. It might cost anywhere between ₹40,000 and ₹50,000, though Vivo has not yet officially announced its pricing. Some leaks also reveal internal listing prices, but they may differ from the final retail price. On launch, the Vivo S2 will challenge the OnePlus Nord 6 and the Motorola Edge 70 Pro smartphones. It will also take on the Realme 16 Pro series and Vivo V70 FE.

#Vivo #India #Launch #Tipped #August #Design #Key #Specs #LeakedVivo">Vivo S2 India Launch Tipped for August 6: Design and Key Specs Leaked

According to reports, Vivo has started preparations for launching its S series phones back in India with the release of the Vivo S2 smartphone. While Vivo hasn’t officially confirmed a release date, some reports indicate the phone could launch on August 6th, with sales expected to begin on August 11. This would mark the revival of the S series of phones in India following the debut of the Vivo S1 phone back in 2019. Reports have also given an early look at its design while revealing details about its expected specifications, color options, and launch plans.

Expected Specifications and Camera Features

Leaks suggest the Vivo S2 will feature an OLED display with a refresh rate of up to 120Hz. The phone may use the MediaTek Dimensity 7360 chipset, built on a 4nm process. Reports also suggest the phone will come in 8GB + 128GB and 8GB + 256GB variants. On the camera front, the Vivo S2 is tipped to include a 50MP Sony main sensor. Some information also suggests that the phone would be capable of recording videos in 4K quality through both front and rear cameras.

According to some recent leaks, the Vivo S2 would come with a sleek design. It would have a 3D curved display with narrow borders and a punch-hole selfie camera at the center of the device. On the back side, there would be a camera module in the shape of a pill with two big rings and an LED flash. Unlike many smartphones, the camera module matches the rear panel color for a more seamless finish. Vivo could offer the phone in Sapphire Blue, Regal Bronze, and Silk White. Its design closely resembles the Vivo X300 FE. Vivo has not shared any battery details yet. However, one report suggests the Vivo S2 may pack a 7,000mAh battery. This information is still based on leaks and awaits official confirmation.

Expected Price of Vivo S2

The Vivo S2 could target India’s premium mid-range smartphone market. It might cost anywhere between ₹40,000 and ₹50,000, though Vivo has not yet officially announced its pricing. Some leaks also reveal internal listing prices, but they may differ from the final retail price. On launch, the Vivo S2 will challenge the OnePlus Nord 6 and the Motorola Edge 70 Pro smartphones. It will also take on the Realme 16 Pro series and Vivo V70 FE.

#Vivo #India #Launch #Tipped #August #Design #Key #Specs #LeakedVivo

Before Denis Villeneuve came aboard as the next James Bond movie director, another intriguing project was sitting in his potential “to-do” pile: an adaptation of Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen‘s 2024 book that uses extensive interviews and research to examine, minute by minute, what would happen if nuclear war broke out. Her latest book sounds very much in that same vein; it’s titled Biological War: A Scenario, and though it’s just been released today, it’s already been scooped up for adaptation.

Variety reports that Patrick Macmanus (the creator of Peacock’s Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy) secured the rights to a television adaptation for his production company; he and Jacobsen will co-create and serve as executive producers on Biological War.

The book takes a close look at the seconds, minutes, hours, and days after the release of a microscopic agent that could bring down civilization if it’s allowed to spread across the globe. And it’s a weapon, not unlike The Stand‘s Captain Trips, so presumably the show will include a heavy government-military aspect to things as well.

“What begins with a routine day leads to the end of the world six days later,” Macmamus told Variety. “But it isn’t ultimately a nihilistic show. Yes. There’s the dark excitement and exploration of the apocalypse. But there’s a parallel story of the instinct to protect and rebuild. A celebration of community and family. The wish-fulfillment of starting the human experiment over again in the hopes of getting it right this time around.”

The Variety piece mentions the potential Villeneuve adaptation of Nuclear War, so maybe we’ll get to see that on screens eventually too. So far, there’s no streamer or network locked in for Biological War, but the trade writes “the television adaptation will be taken out to buyers in the upcoming weeks.”

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Annie #Jacobsens #Biological #War #ComingAnnie Jacobsen,Biological War">Annie Jacobsen’s ‘Biological War’ Is Coming to TV Before Denis Villeneuve came aboard as the next James Bond movie director, another intriguing project was sitting in his potential “to-do” pile: an adaptation of Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen‘s 2024 book that uses extensive interviews and research to examine, minute by minute, what would happen if nuclear war broke out. Her latest book sounds very much in that same vein; it’s titled Biological War: A Scenario, and though it’s just been released today, it’s already been scooped up for adaptation. Variety reports that Patrick Macmanus (the creator of Peacock’s Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy) secured the rights to a television adaptation for his production company; he and Jacobsen will co-create and serve as executive producers on Biological War. The book takes a close look at the seconds, minutes, hours, and days after the release of a microscopic agent that could bring down civilization if it’s allowed to spread across the globe. And it’s a weapon, not unlike The Stand‘s Captain Trips, so presumably the show will include a heavy government-military aspect to things as well. “What begins with a routine day leads to the end of the world six days later,” Macmamus told Variety. “But it isn’t ultimately a nihilistic show. Yes. There’s the dark excitement and exploration of the apocalypse. But there’s a parallel story of the instinct to protect and rebuild. A celebration of community and family. The wish-fulfillment of starting the human experiment over again in the hopes of getting it right this time around.” The Variety piece mentions the potential Villeneuve adaptation of Nuclear War, so maybe we’ll get to see that on screens eventually too. So far, there’s no streamer or network locked in for Biological War, but the trade writes “the television adaptation will be taken out to buyers in the upcoming weeks.” Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who. #Annie #Jacobsens #Biological #War #ComingAnnie Jacobsen,Biological War

came aboard as the next James Bond movie director, another intriguing project was sitting in his potential “to-do” pile: an adaptation of Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen‘s 2024 book that uses extensive interviews and research to examine, minute by minute, what would happen if nuclear war broke out. Her latest book sounds very much in that same vein; it’s titled Biological War: A Scenario, and though it’s just been released today, it’s already been scooped up for adaptation.

Variety reports that Patrick Macmanus (the creator of Peacock’s Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy) secured the rights to a television adaptation for his production company; he and Jacobsen will co-create and serve as executive producers on Biological War.

The book takes a close look at the seconds, minutes, hours, and days after the release of a microscopic agent that could bring down civilization if it’s allowed to spread across the globe. And it’s a weapon, not unlike The Stand‘s Captain Trips, so presumably the show will include a heavy government-military aspect to things as well.

“What begins with a routine day leads to the end of the world six days later,” Macmamus told Variety. “But it isn’t ultimately a nihilistic show. Yes. There’s the dark excitement and exploration of the apocalypse. But there’s a parallel story of the instinct to protect and rebuild. A celebration of community and family. The wish-fulfillment of starting the human experiment over again in the hopes of getting it right this time around.”

The Variety piece mentions the potential Villeneuve adaptation of Nuclear War, so maybe we’ll get to see that on screens eventually too. So far, there’s no streamer or network locked in for Biological War, but the trade writes “the television adaptation will be taken out to buyers in the upcoming weeks.”

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Annie #Jacobsens #Biological #War #ComingAnnie Jacobsen,Biological War">Annie Jacobsen’s ‘Biological War’ Is Coming to TVAnnie Jacobsen’s ‘Biological War’ Is Coming to TV Before Denis Villeneuve came aboard as the next James Bond movie director, another intriguing project was sitting in his potential “to-do” pile: an adaptation of Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen‘s 2024 book that uses extensive interviews and research to examine, minute by minute, what would happen if nuclear war broke out. Her latest book sounds very much in that same vein; it’s titled Biological War: A Scenario, and though it’s just been released today, it’s already been scooped up for adaptation. Variety reports that Patrick Macmanus (the creator of Peacock’s Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy) secured the rights to a television adaptation for his production company; he and Jacobsen will co-create and serve as executive producers on Biological War. The book takes a close look at the seconds, minutes, hours, and days after the release of a microscopic agent that could bring down civilization if it’s allowed to spread across the globe. And it’s a weapon, not unlike The Stand‘s Captain Trips, so presumably the show will include a heavy government-military aspect to things as well. “What begins with a routine day leads to the end of the world six days later,” Macmamus told Variety. “But it isn’t ultimately a nihilistic show. Yes. There’s the dark excitement and exploration of the apocalypse. But there’s a parallel story of the instinct to protect and rebuild. A celebration of community and family. The wish-fulfillment of starting the human experiment over again in the hopes of getting it right this time around.” The Variety piece mentions the potential Villeneuve adaptation of Nuclear War, so maybe we’ll get to see that on screens eventually too. So far, there’s no streamer or network locked in for Biological War, but the trade writes “the television adaptation will be taken out to buyers in the upcoming weeks.” Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who. #Annie #Jacobsens #Biological #War #ComingAnnie Jacobsen,Biological War

Before Denis Villeneuve came aboard as the next James Bond movie director, another intriguing project was sitting in his potential “to-do” pile: an adaptation of Nuclear War: A Scenario, Annie Jacobsen‘s 2024 book that uses extensive interviews and research to examine, minute by minute, what would happen if nuclear war broke out. Her latest book sounds very much in that same vein; it’s titled Biological War: A Scenario, and though it’s just been released today, it’s already been scooped up for adaptation.

Variety reports that Patrick Macmanus (the creator of Peacock’s Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy) secured the rights to a television adaptation for his production company; he and Jacobsen will co-create and serve as executive producers on Biological War.

The book takes a close look at the seconds, minutes, hours, and days after the release of a microscopic agent that could bring down civilization if it’s allowed to spread across the globe. And it’s a weapon, not unlike The Stand‘s Captain Trips, so presumably the show will include a heavy government-military aspect to things as well.

“What begins with a routine day leads to the end of the world six days later,” Macmamus told Variety. “But it isn’t ultimately a nihilistic show. Yes. There’s the dark excitement and exploration of the apocalypse. But there’s a parallel story of the instinct to protect and rebuild. A celebration of community and family. The wish-fulfillment of starting the human experiment over again in the hopes of getting it right this time around.”

The Variety piece mentions the potential Villeneuve adaptation of Nuclear War, so maybe we’ll get to see that on screens eventually too. So far, there’s no streamer or network locked in for Biological War, but the trade writes “the television adaptation will be taken out to buyers in the upcoming weeks.”

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Annie #Jacobsens #Biological #War #ComingAnnie Jacobsen,Biological War

Post Comment

Wolfnewss | Powered By SpiceThemes