Technology News

Elon Musk is now claiming that bad actors in Ukraine are behind an alleged cyberattack that caused outages on his social media platform X on Monday.

In an interview, Musk told Fox Business that he believes the attack came from "IP addresses originating in the Ukraine area."

Musk admitted that "we don't know exactly what happened"—nodding as his comments were characterized as a suspicion and discussing no evidence—but alleged that the attackers were trying to take down the entire X platform.

Read full article

Comments

Elon Musk is now claiming that bad actors in Ukraine are behind an alleged cyberattack that caused outages on his social media platform X on Monday.

In an interview, Musk told Fox Business that he believes the attack came from "IP addresses originating in the Ukraine area."

Musk admitted that "we don't know exactly what happened"—nodding as his comments were characterized as a suspicion and discussing no evidence—but alleged that the attackers were trying to take down the entire X platform.

Read full article

Comments

Elon Musk said a “massive cyberattack” disrupted X on Monday and pointed to “IP addresses originating in the Ukraine area” as the source of the attack. Security experts say that's not how it works.

A year ago, we called the M3 version of the MacBook Air "just about as good as laptops get."

The "as good as laptops get" part was about the qualitative experience of using the laptop, which was (and is) good-enough-to-great at just about everything a general-purpose laptop needs to be able to do. The "just about" part was mainly about the cost because to be happy with it long-term, it was a good idea for just about everybody to spend an extra $200 upgrading it from 8GB to 16GB of RAM. Apple also kept the M2 version of the Air in the lineup to hit its $999 entry-level price point; the M3 cost $100 extra.

Apple fixed the RAM problem last fall when it increased the minimum amount of RAM across the entire Mac lineup from 8GB to 16GB without increasing prices. Though Apple probably did it to help enable additional Apple Intelligence features down the line, nearly anything you do with your Mac will eventually benefit from extra memory, whether you're trying to use Photoshop or Logic Pro or even if you're just opening more than a couple of dozen browser tabs at once.

Read full article

Comments

Even three years later, AMD's high-end X3D-series processors still aren't a thing that most people need to spend extra money on—under all but a handful of circumstances, your GPU will be the limiting factor when you're running games, and few non-game apps benefit from the extra 64MB chunk of L3 cache that is the processors' calling card. They've been a reasonably popular way for people with old AM4 motherboards to extend the life of their gaming PCs, but for AM5 builds, a regular Zen 4 or Zen 5 CPU will not bottleneck modern graphics cards most of the time.

But high-end PC building isn't always about what's rational, and people spending $2,000 or more to stick a GeForce RTX 5090 into their systems probably won't worry that much about spending a couple hundred extra dollars to get the fastest CPU they can get. That's the audience for the new Ryzen 9 9950X3D, a 16-core, Zen 5-based, $699 monster of a processor that AMD begins selling tomorrow.

If you're only worried about game performance (and if you can find one), the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the superior choice, for reasons that will become apparent once we start looking at charts. But if you want fast game performance and you need as many CPU cores as you can get for other streaming or video production or rendering work, the 9950X3D is there for you. (It's a little funny to me that this a chip made almost precisely for the workload of the PC building tech YouTubers who will be reviewing it.)  It's also a processor that Intel doesn't have any kind of answer to.

Read full article

Comments

Apple is giving its high-end Mac Studio desktops a refresh this month, their first spec bump in almost two years. Considered on the time scale of, say, new Mac Pro updates, two years is barely any time at all. But Apple often delivers big performance increases for its Pro, Max, and Ultra chips from generation to generation, so any update—particularly one where you leapfrog two generations in a single refresh—can bring a major increase to performance that's worth waiting for.

It's the magnitude of Apple's generation-over-generation updates that makes this Studio refresh feel odd, though. The lower-end Studio gets an M4 Max processor like you'd expect—the same chip Apple sells in its high-end MacBook Pros but fit into a desktop enclosure instead of a laptop. But the top-end Studio gets an M3 Ultra instead of an M4 Ultra. That's still a huge increase in CPU and GPU cores (and there are other Ultra-specific benefits, too), but it makes the expensive Studio feel like less of a step up over the regular one.

How do these chips stack up to each other, and how big a deal is the lack of an M4 Ultra? How much does the Studio overlap with the refreshed M4 Pro Mac mini from last fall? And how do Apple's fastest chips compare to what Intel and AMD are doing in high-end PCs?

Read full article

Comments

This lightweight machine comes equipped with a bit more power and some necessary improvements, all for a more affordable price.

For creatives who need the very highest level of performance, the Mac Studio delivers it—and then some.

There’s little reason to pay top dollar for a smartphone. These iPhones and Android devices—ranging from $150 to $600—stood up to WIRED’s testing.

Google is contributing $1.5 million for a regenerative agriculture program with Indigo Ag, aiming to replenish an estimated 1.5 billion gallons of water in Oklahoma over…

Qualified Ford EV owners are finally receiving an adaptor that allows them to access the Tesla Supercharger network, and CEO Jim Farley tells WIRED that Ford is a “hungry” number two in US EV sales.

Is linen worth the splurge? Should you buy bamboo or silk sheets? We tested dozens of sheets to find our favorites, and we break it all down.

For years, businesses, governments, and researchers have struggled with a persistent problem: How to extract usable data from Portable Document Format (PDF) files. These digital documents serve as containers for everything from scientific research to government records, but their rigid formats often trap the data inside, making it difficult for machines to read and analyze.

"Part of the problem is that PDFs are a creature of a time when print layout was a big influence on publishing software, and PDFs are more of a 'print' product than a digital one," Derek Willis, a lecturer in Data and Computational Journalism at the University of Maryland, wrote in an email to Ars Technica. "The main issue is that many PDFs are simply pictures of information, which means you need Optical Character Recognition software to turn those pictures into data, especially when the original is old or includes handwriting."

Computational journalism is a field where traditional reporting techniques merge with data analysis, coding, and algorithmic thinking to uncover stories that might otherwise remain hidden in large datasets, which makes unlocking that data a particular interest for Willis.

Read full article

Comments