Author name: Mike M.

tv-technica:-our-favorite-shows-of-2025

TV Technica: Our favorite shows of 2025


Netflix and Apple TV dominate this year’s list with thrillers, fantasy, sci-fi, and murder.

Credit: Collage by Aurich Lawson

Credit: Collage by Aurich Lawson

Editor’s note: Warning: Although we’ve done our best to avoid spoiling anything major, please note this list does include a few specific references to several of the listed shows that some might consider spoiler-y.

This was a pretty good year for television, with established favorites sharing space on our list with some intriguing new shows. Streaming platforms reigned supreme, with Netflix and Apple TV dominating our list with seven and five selections each. Genre-wise, we’ve got a bit of everything: period dramas (The Gilded Age, Outrageous), superheroes (Daredevil: Born Again), mysteries (Ludwig, Poker Face, Dept. Q), political thrillers (The Diplomats, Slow Horses), science fiction (Andor, Severance, Alien: Earth), broody fantasy (The Sandman), and even an unconventional nature documentary (Underdogs).

As always, we’re opting for an unranked list, with the exception of our “year’s best” selection at the very end, so you might look over the variety of genres and options and possibly add surprises to your eventual watchlist. We invite you to head to the comments and add your own favorite TV shows released in 2025.

Underdogs (National Geographic/Disney+)

a honey badger investigates a logg in South Africa

Credit: National Geographic/Doug Parker

Most of us have seen a nature documentary or two (or three) at some point in our lives, so it’s a familiar format: sweeping, majestic footage of impressively regal animals accompanied by reverently high-toned narration (preferably with a tony British accent). Underdogs takes a decidedly different approach. Narrated with hilarious irreverence by Ryan Reynolds, the five-part series highlights nature’s less cool and majestic creatures—the outcasts and benchwarmers more noteworthy for their “unconventional hygiene choices” and “unsavory courtship rituals.” (It’s rated PG-13 due to the odd bit of scatalogical humor and shots of Nature Sexy Time.)

Each of the five episodes is built around a specific genre. “Superheroes” highlights the surprising superpowers of the honey badger, pistol shrimp, and the invisible glass frog, among others, augmented with comic book graphics; “Sexy Beasts” focuses on bizarre mating habits and follows the format of a romantic advice column; “Terrible Parents” highlights nature’s worst practices, following the outline of a parenting guide; “Total Grossout” is exactly what it sounds like; and “The Unusual Suspects” is a heist tale, documenting the supposed efforts of a macaque to put together the ultimate team of masters of deception and disguise (an inside man, a decoy, a fall guy, etc.). Green Day even wrote and recorded a special theme song for the opening credits.

While Reynolds mostly followed the script (which his team helped write), there was also a fair amount of improvisation—not all of it PG-13. The producers couldn’t use the racier ad-libs. But some made it into the final episodes, like Reynolds describing an aye-aye as “if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair.” We also meet the velvet worm, which creeps up on unsuspecting prey before squirting disgusting slime all over their food, and the pearl fish, which hides from predators in a sea cucumber’s butt, among other lowly yet fascinating critters. Verdict: Underdogs is positively addictive. It’s my favorite nature documentary ever.

Jennifer Ouellette

Dept. Q (Netflix)

group of people I'm an underground office sanding around a desk

Credit: Netflix

Dep. Q is a rare show that commits to old tropes—an unlikable but smart central character revisits cold cases—and somehow manages to repackage them in a way that feels distinctive. To get a sense of the show, you only have to describe its precise genre. You might call it a murder mystery, and there are murders in it, but one of the mysteries is whether a key player is alive or not, given that a lot of her story takes place in flashbacks with an uncertain relationship to the present. It’s almost a police procedural, except that many of the police are only following procedures grudgingly and erratically. It’s not really a whodunnit, given that you only end up learning who done some of it by the time the first season wraps up. And so on.

Amid all the genre fluidity, the show does a great job of balancing the key challenge of a mystery program: telling you enough that you can make reasonably informed guesses on at least some of what’s going on without giving the whole game away and making it easy to figure out all the details. And the acting is superb. Matthew Goode does a nice job of handling the central character’s recent trauma while helping you understand why he has a few loyal co-workers despite the fact that he was probably unlikable even before he was traumatized. And Alexej Manvelov (who I’d never seen before) is fantastic as a former Syrian policeman who drops occasional hints that he had been an active participant in that country’s police state.

There are definitely quibbles. The creation of a cold case squad happens on the flimsiest of motivations, and the fantastic Kelly Macdonald is badly underused. But the show is definitely good enough that I’m curious about some additional mysteries: Can the team behind it continue to avoid getting bogged down in the tropes in season two, and which of the many threads it left unresolved will be picked up when they try?

John Timmer 

Daredevil: Born Again (Disney+)

Matt Murdock and Wilson Fisk sitting across from each other in a diner

Credit: Marvel/Disney+

Enthusiasm was understandably high for Daredevil: Born Again, Marvel’s revival of the hugely popular series in the Netflix Defenders universe. Not only was Charlie Cox returning to the title role as Matt Murdock/Daredevil, but Vincent D’Onofrio was also coming back as his nemesis, crime lord Wilson Fisk/Kingpin. Their dynamic has always been electric, and that on-screen magic is as powerful as ever in Born Again, which quickly earned critical raves and a second season.

Granted, there were some rough spots. The entire season was overhauled during the 2023 Hollywood strikes, and at times it felt like two very different shows. A weird serial killer subplot was primarily just distracting. There was also the controversial decision to kill off a major character from the original Netflix series in the first episode. But that creative choice cleared the decks to place the focus squarely on Matt’s and Fisk’s parallel arcs, and the two central actors do not disappoint.

Matt decides to focus on his legal work while Fisk is elected mayor of New York City, intent on leaving his criminal life behind. But each struggles to remain in the light as the dark sides of their respective natures fight to be released. The result is an entertaining, character-driven series that feels very much a part of its predecessor while still having its own distinctive feel.

Jennifer Ouellette

Boots (Netflix)

army boot camp recruits running as part of their training in yellow t shirts and red shorts

Credit: Netflix

I confess I might have missed Boots had it not been singled out and dismissed as “woke garbage” by the Pentagon—thereby doubling the show’s viewership. I was pleased to discover that it’s actually a moving, often thought-provoking dramedy that humanizes all the young men from many different backgrounds who volunteer to serve their country in the US military. The show is based on a memoir (The Pink Marine) by Greg Cope White about his experiences as a gay teen in the military in the 1980s when gay and bisexual people weren’t allowed to serve. Boots is set in the early 1990s just before the onset of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” era.

Miles Heizer stars as Cameron Cope (Cope White’s fictional alter ego), a closeted gay teen in Louisiana who signs up as a recruit for the US Marine Corps with his best (straight) friend Ray (Liam Oh). He’s not the most promising recruit, but over the course of eight episodes, we see him struggle, fail, pick himself back up, and try again during the grueling boot camp experience, forming strong bonds with his fellow recruits but all the while terrified of being outed and kicked out.

Heizer gives a powerful performance as Cameron, enhanced by the contrast with Max Parker’s stellar portrayal of the tightly wound Sergeant Liam Robert Sullivan—a decorated Marine inexplicably reassigned to train recruits while harboring his own secrets. Nor is Miles’ story the only focus: We learn more about several characters and their private struggles, and those inter-relationships are the heart and soul of the show. Netflix canceled the series, but this one season stands tall on its own.

Jennifer Ouellette

Only Murders in the Building S5 (Hulu)

young woman and two older men posing against backdrop of iconic NYC buildings

Credit: Hulu

This charming Emmy-nominated comedy series has made our “Best of TV” list every season, and 2025 is no exception. Only Murders in the Building (OMITB) stars Steve Martin, Martin Short, and Selena Gomez as Charles, Oliver, and Mabel, all residents of the same Manhattan apartment complex, the Arconia. The unlikely trio teams up to launch their own true crime podcast whenever someone dies in the building under suspicious circumstances, chronicling their independent investigation to solve the murder. There’s no shortage of podcast fodder, as this single building has a shockingly high murder rate.

S5 focused on the death of the building’s doorman, Lester (Teddy Coluca), found floating in the Arcadia’s fountain in the season finale. The discovery of a severed finger leads our team to conclude that Lester was murdered. Their quest involves a trio of billionaires, the mayor (Keegan-Michael Key), a missing mafioso (Bobby Cannavale) and his widow (Tea Leoni), and maybe even the building’s new robotic assistant, LESTR (voiced by Paul Rudd). As always, the season finale sets up next season’s murder: that of rival podcaster Cinda Canning (Tina Fey), who lives just long enough to reach the Arcadia’s gates and place one hand into the courtyard—technically dying “in the building.” One assumes that OMITB will eventually run out of fresh takes on its clever concept, but it certainly hasn’t done so yet.

Jennifer Ouellette

The Sandman S2 (Netflix)

Morpheus holds the key to Hell.

Credit: Netflix

I unequivocally loved the first season of The Sandman, the Netflix adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s influential graphic novel series (of which I am a longtime fan). I thought it captured the surreal, dream-like feel and tone of its source material, striking a perfect balance between the anthology approach of the graphic novels and grounding the narrative by focusing on the arc of its central figure: Morpheus, lord of the Dreaming. It was a long wait for the second and final season, but S2 retains all those elements to bring Dream’s story to its inevitably tragic yet satisfying end.

As always, the casting is extraordinary and the performances are note-perfect across the board. And Netflix did not skimp on the visuals, which bring the graphic novel imagery to vivid life. I still appreciate how the leisurely pacing lets the viewer relax and sink into this richly layered fictional world. Part I kicked off with an Endless family reunion that led Dream into revisiting Hell and agreeing to his sister Delirium’s request to look for their absent brother, Destruction. That sets in motion a chain of events that leads to the tragedy that unfolds in Part II. The bonus episode, in which Death gets one day (every hundred years) to be human—an adaptation of the standalone Death: The High Cost of Living—serves as a lovely coda to this unique series, which is pretty much everything I could have wanted in an adaptation.

Jennifer Ouellette

Ludwig (BBC)

middle aged man in dress shirt and short sleeved sweater meticulously working on a puzzle on an easel

Credit: BBC

Ludwig is a clever twist on the British cozy mystery genre. David Mitchell stars as John Taylor, a reclusive eccentric who creates puzzles for a living under the pseudonym “Ludwig.” When his identical twin brother, Cambridge DCI James Taylor (also Mitchell), goes missing, his sister-in-law Lucy (Anna Maxwell Martin) convinces John to go undercover. John reluctantly pretends to be James to gain access to the police department in hopes of finding out what happened to his twin. He inevitably gets drawn into working on cases—and turns out to be exceptionally good at applying his puzzle skills to solve murders, even as his anxiety grows about his subterfuge being discovered.

The best crime shows deftly balance cases-of-the-week with longer character-driven story arcs, and Ludwig achieves that balance beautifully. The writers brought in a puzzle consultant to create the various crosswords that appear in the series, as well as a special cryptic crossword done in character as Ludwig that appeared in The Guardian. The first season ended with a bit of a cliffhanger about what’s really been going on with James, but fortunately, the BBC has renewed Ludwig for a second season, so we’ll get to see more of our cryptic crime-solver.

Jennifer Ouellette

Poker Face S2 (Peacock)

red haired woman in thigh boots and leather jacket standing in front of a classic blue sports car

Credit: Peacock

Poker Face is perfect comfort TV, evolving the case-of-the-week format that made enduring early TV hits like Columbo and Murder, She Wrote iconic. The second season takes the endlessly likeable BS-detector Charlie Cale (Natasha Lyonne) to the end of the road after she overcomes fleeing the mob in her 1969 Plymouth Barracuda. Along the way, Charlie pals around with A-list guest stars and solves crimes, winding her way from Florida to New York as each delightful new caper serves not to ramp up tension but to disrupt how viewers anticipate Charlie will move. Some might think that the lack of tension made the season weaker. But creator Rian Johnson recently revealed that he expects Poker Face to cast a new lead detective every two years. That makes it seem clear that Charlie’s second season was more about release.

In the most memorable episode of the season, “Sloppy Joseph,” the front row of an elementary school talent show suddenly becomes a bloody splash zone when a bullied boy is framed for killing the class pet, a gerbil, with a giant mallet. That scene is perhaps an apt metaphor for Johnson’s attempt to keep modern-day viewers from turning away from their TVs by shattering expectations. It’s unclear yet if his formulaic TV hijinks will work, but if anyone decides to pick up Poker Face after Peacock declined to renew it, Peter Dinklage is next in line to become the world’s greatest lie detector.

Ashley Belanger

The Gilded Age S3 (HBO)

young woman with her parents in evening dress standing in an opera box

Credit: HBO

I was a latecomer to this eminently watchable show created by Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park), who also gave us the Emmy-winning sensation Downton Abbey. Instead of following the adventures of post-Edwardian British aristocracy and their domestic servants, the focus is on ultra-wealthy Americans and their domestic servants in the 1880s and the social tensions that arise from the “old money” versus “new money” dynamic of this rapidly changing period. The Gilded Age has been described as an “operatic soap” (rather than a soap opera), replete with a hugely talented ensemble cast donning lavish costumes and cavorting in extravagantly opulent settings. It’s unadulterated, addictive escapism, and the series really hit its stride in S3.

Old Money is represented by Agnes van Rhijn (Christine Baranski), a wealthy widow who lives with her spinster sister Ada (Cynthia Nixon); orphaned niece Marian (Louisa Jacobson); and son and heir Oscar (Blake Ritson), a closeted gay man seeking to marry a rich heiress. Living just across the street is New Money, personified by robber baron/railroad tycoon George Russell (Morgan Spector) and his socially ambitious wife Bertha (Carrie Coon) and their two children. You’ve got Marian’s friend Peggy (Denee Benton) representing the emerging Black upper class and a colorful assortment of domestics in both houses, like aspiring inventor Jack (Ben Ahlers), who dreams of greater things.

Fictionalized versions of notable historical people occasionally appear, and two figure prominently: Caroline Astor (Donna Murphy), who ruled New York society at the time, and her simpering sycophant Ward McAllister (Nathan Lane). (The Russells are loosely inspired by William and Ava Vanderbilt.) The stakes might sometimes seem small—there’s a multi-episode arc devoted to which of two competing opera houses New York’s social elite will choose to sponsor—but for the characters, they are huge, and Fellowes makes the audience feel equally invested in the outcomes. There were a few rough edges in the first season, but The Gilded Age quickly found its footing; it has gotten better and more richly textured with each successive season and never takes itself too seriously.

Jennifer Ouellette

Outrageous (Britbox)

Aristocratic Family photo circa 1930s with everyone lined up along the grand staircase

Credit: Britbox

The Mitford sisters were born to be immortalized one day in a British period drama, and Outrageous is happy to oblige. There were six of them (and one brother), and their scandalous exploits frequently made global headlines in the 1930s. This is ultimately a fictionalized account of how the rise of Hitler and British fascism fractured this once tight-knit aristocratic family. The focus is on smaller, domestic drama—budding romances, failed marriages, literary aspirations, and dwindling fortunes—colored by the ominous global events unfolding on a larger scale.

Nancy (Bessie Carter) is the primary figure, an aspiring novelist with a cheating husband who feels increasingly alienated from her older sister and bestie Diana (Joanna Vanderham). Diana married a baron but becomes enamored of Oswald Mosley (Joshua Sasse), leader of the British fascist party, embarking on a torrid affair. Another sister, Unity (Shannon Watson), is also seduced by Nazi ideology and has a major crush on Hitler. Meanwhile, Jessica (Zoe Brough) is drawn to the Communist cause, which rankles both her siblings and her traditionally conservative parents.

Things come to a head when Unity goes to study in Germany and becomes completely radicalized, even publishing a vicious anti-semitic screed that shames the family. Diana also goes all-in on fascism when she leaves her husband for Mosley, whom Nancy loathes. Jessica elopes with her Communist cousin to Spain to be on the front lines of that civil war, leading to a lifelong estrangement from Diana. Nancy, the political moderate, is caught in the middle, torn between her love for her sisters and her increasing discomfort with Diana and Unity’s extreme political views.

The Mitford sisters were prolific letter writers all their lives, so there was plenty of material for screenwriter Sarah Williams to draw on when fictionalizing their stories at such a pivotal point in the family’s (and the world’s) history. Outrageous is quite historically accurate in broad outlines, and there are plenty of moments of wry, understated humor amid the family tensions. The gifted cast makes the sisters come alive in all their flawed humanity. There’s no word yet on a second season, and this one ends on a suitable note, but there’s so much more story left to tell, so I hope Outrageous returns.

Jennifer Ouellette

A Man on the Inside S2 (Netflix)

White haired older man in a nice blue suit and tie standing in front of a blackboard filled with equations in a college classroom

Credit: Netflix

I’ll admit I wasn’t sure how well A Man on the Inside would fare with its sophomore season after knocking it out of the park in S1. I should have known showrunner Mike Schur (The Good Place) could pull it off. Ted Danson plays Charles Nieuwendyk, a recently widowed retired engineering professor. In S1, he was hired by private detective Julie Kovalenko (Lilah Richcreek Estrada) to go undercover at a San Francisco retirement community to solve the mystery of a stolen ruby necklace. In S2, Charles returns to his academic roots and goes undercover at fictional Wheeler College to solve the mystery of a stolen laptop—a crime that just might have implications for the survival of the college itself.

Charles even falls in love for the first time since his wife’s death with music professor Mona Margadoff (Mary Steenburgen, Danson’s wife IRL), despite the two being polar opposites. The show continues to be a welcome mix of funny, sweet, sour, and touching, while never lapsing into schmaltz. The central Thanksgiving episode—where Mona meets Charles’s family and friends for the first time—is a prime example, as various tensions simmering below the surface erupt over the dinner table. Somehow, everyone manages to make their respective peace in entirely believable ways. It’s lovely to see a series grapple so openly, with so much warmth and humor, with the loneliness of aging and grief and how it can affect extended family. And the show once again drives home the message that new beginnings are always possible, even when one thinks one’s life is over.

Jennifer Ouellette

Andor S2 (Disney+)

Star Wars rebel Cassian in the cockpit of a spacecraft

Credit: Lucasfilm/Disney+

When real-life political administrations refer to officials as Darth Vader in unironically flattering terms, maybe George Lucas made the Dark Lord of the Sith a little too iconic. Showrunner Tony Gilroy made no such effort in his depiction of the fascists in Andor.

During Andor‘s run, which ended this year with S2, the Empire is full of sad corporate ladder climbers who are willing to stab another in the back to get to the next rung of the Imperial hierarchy. The show makes it clear that these are not people to emulate. If more fans watched the show, maybe that message could have landed for them.

For people who grew up with Star Wars and want something more to chew on in our adulthood than endless callbacks to the original trilogy, Andor is revelatory. It colors the war of light versus dark with large amounts of gray because sometimes, as one character puts it, you have to use the tools of your enemy to defeat them (save for genetically gifted farmboys). Maybe most of Star Wars was always supposed to be for kids, but prestige TV viewers got a glimpse of what the universe could feel like if it took itself more seriously. Rather than use the broad strokes of a war of good versus evil, Andor painted between the lines to demonstrate how systemic oppression can look a lot more personal than firing a giant space laser.

For all its great writing and themes, Andor also delivered high stakes and suspense. Although we already knew the outcome of the story, we still held our breath during tense scenes with characters who make the ultimate sacrifice for a future they will never see.

Jacob May

National Finals Rodeo (The Cowboy Channel)

exterior view of Thomas & Mack area in Las Vegas with banner proclaiming the 2024 Wranger National Finals rodeo

Credit: Sean Carroll

My personal end-of-year TV list would never be complete without a nod to The Cowboy Channel, i.e., the only place where armchair enthusiasts like myself can follow our favorite cowboys and cowgirls throughout the rodeo season. The goal is to rack up enough money to qualify for the Wrangler National Finals Rodeo (NFR), held at the Thomas & Mack Center in Las Vegas every December. This year, I’ve picked the channel’s stellar annual coverage of the NFR itself to highlight. The entire season comes down to this: an intense 10-day competition in which the top 15 athletes in each event duke it out night after night in hopes of winning a coveted championship gold buckle. And night after night, The Cowboy Channel is there with live commentary and post-round analysis.

What I love most is just how unpredictable the NFR can be. Part of that is the substantial monetary rewards that come with round wins; an athlete coming in at #1 in earnings can see even a substantial lead evaporate over just a few nights. Part of it has to do with who wins the average, i.e., who performs the best over ten nights collectively in each event. Winning the average comes with a substantial payout that can lead to unexpected upsets in the final results. But mostly it’s just the human factor: The best in the world can have a bad night, and young rookies can have the night of their lives. An ill-timed injury can knock an athlete out of the competition entirely. And sometimes the judges make inexplicably bad calls with major consequences (*coughStetson Wright in Round 6 saddle bronc *cough*).

It’s all part of the excitement of rodeo. The Cowboy Channel’s in-depth coverage lets us experience all that drama even if we can’t attend in person and lets us savor how the story unfolds in each subsequent round. We celebrate the wins, mourn the losses, and cheer mightily for the final champions. (Stetson did just fine in the end.) Then we gear up to do it all over again next year.

Jennifer Ouellette

Top Guns: The Next Generation (National Geographic/Disney+)

backs of four fighter pilots walking toward a fighter jet

Credit: National Geographic

The blockbuster success of the 1986 film Top Gun—chronicling the paths of young naval aviators as they go through the grueling US Navy’s Fighter Weapons School (aka the titular Top Gun)—spawned more than just a successful multimedia franchise. It has also been credited with inspiring future generations of fighter pilots. National Geographic took viewers behind the scenes to see the process play out for real with the documentary series Top Guns: The Next Generation.

Each episode focuses on a specific aspect of the training, following a handful of students from the Navy and Marines through the highs and lows of their training. That includes practicing dive bombs at breakneck speeds, successfully landing on an aircraft carrier by “catching the wire,” learning the most effective offensive and defensive maneuvers in dogfighting, and, finally, engaging in a freestyle dogfight against a seasoned instructor to complete the program and (hopefully) earn their golden wings. NatGeo was granted unprecedented access, even using in-cockpit cameras to capture the pulse-pounding action of being in the air, as well as more candidly intimate behind-the-scenes moments as the students grapple with their respective successes and failures. It’s a riveting watch.

Jennifer Ouellette

Alien: Earth (FX/Hulu)

young woman standing in a futuristic corridor bathed in white light

Credit: FX/Hulu

My first draft of what was supposed to be a 300-ish word blurb describing why Alien: Earth is fantastic ended up exploding into a Defector-esque narrative deep dive into my ever-evolving relationship with Alien 3 as a film and how Alien: Earth has helped reshape my appreciation for that poor broken baby of a movie by mixing the best of its visual techniques into A:E’s absolutely masterful cocktail of narrative stylings—but I’ll spare you all of that.

Here’s the short version without the bloviating: Alien: Earth is the thing I’ve been waiting for since I walked out of the theater after seeing Alien 3 in the summer of 1992. Unlike Alien Resurrection, any of the AvPs, or the wet-fart, falls-apart-like-mud-in-the-third-act swing-and-miss of Alien: Romulus, A:E gets nearly everything right. It’s grounded without being stodgy; exciting without being stupid; referential without being derivative; fun without being pandering; respectful of the lore while being willing to try something new; and, above all else, it bleeds craftsmanship—every frame makes it obvious that this is a show made by people who love and care for the Alien universe.

The thing that grabs me anew with every episode is the show’s presentation and execution—a self-aware blending of all the best things Scott, Cameron, and Fincher brought to their respective films. As I get older, I’m drawn more and more to entertainment that shows me interesting things and does so in ontologically faithful ways—and oh, does this show ever deliver.

Each episode is a carefully crafted visual and tonal mix of all the previous Alien films, with the episodes’ soundtracks shifting eras to match the action on-screen—like Alien 3’s jumpy choir flash-cut opening credits melding into Aliens’ lonely snare drums. The result is a blended world made of all the best things I remember from the films, and it works in the same way the game Alien: Isolation worked: by conjuring up exactly what the places where we used to have nightmares looked and felt like, and then scaring us there again.

I have heard that The Internet had some problems with the show, but, eh, everybody’s going to hate something. I vaguely remember some of the complaints having to do with how some of the new alien life-forms seem to be scarier or deadlier than our beloved and familiar main monster. All I’ve got for that one is a big fat shrug—I’m fine with our capital-A-aliens sharing the stage with some equally nasty new creatures. The aliens are always more interesting as devices to explore a story than as dramatic ends themselves, and I mean, let’s face it, in the past 40-plus years, there’s not much we haven’t seen them do and/or kill. They’re a literary force, not characters, and I’m way more interested in seeing how they shape the story of the people around them.

The tl;dr is that Alien: Earth is awesome, and if you haven’t watched it, you absolutely should. And when I was a kid, I used to regularly get put in time-out in recess for stiff-arming other kids while pretending to be a power loader, so you should consider my tastemaking credentials in this matter unimpeachable.

Lee Hutchinson

Squid Game S3 (Netflix)

assembly of asian people in matching jumpsuits preparing to compete in a deadly game

Credit: Netflix

In the most violent series to ever catch the world’s attention by playing beloved children’s games, it turns out that the most high-stakes choice that creator Hwang Dong-hyuk could make was to put a child in the arena. For Squid Game‘s final season, Hwang has said the season’s pivotal moment—a pregnant girl birthing a baby during a game of hide-and-seek with knives—was designed to dash viewers’ hopes that a brighter future may await those who survive the games. By leaving the task of saving the baby to the series hero, Seong Gi-hun, whose own strained relationship with his daughter led him into the games in the first season, Squid Game walked a gritty tightrope to the very end.

The only real misstep was involving the goofiest set of cartoon villain VIPs more directly in the games. But we can forgive Hwang the clunky Dr. Evil-like dialogue that slowed down the action. He’s made it clear that he put everything into developing dramatic sequences for the game players—losing teeth, barely eating, rarely sleeping—and he fully admitted to The New York Times that “I have a cartoonish way of giving comic relief.

Ashley Belanger

The Diplomat S3 (Netflix)

blonde woman on cell phone with a concerned look on her face

Credit: Netflix

Let’s be clear: The Diplomat is a soap opera. If you’re not into cliffhangers, intense levels of drama, and will-they-won’t-they sexual tension, it’s probably not going to be for you. Sometimes there’s so much going on that it becomes almost farcical. If that doesn’t scare you off, what do you get in return?

Superb actors given rich and intriguing characters to inhabit. A political drama that nicely finds a balance between the excessive idealism of The West Wing and the excessive cynicism of Veep. A disturbingly realistic-feeling series of crises that the characters sometimes direct, and sometimes hang on for dear life as they get dragged along by. And, well, the cliffhangers have been good enough to get me tuning in to the next season as soon as it appears on Netflix.

Kerri Russell plays the titular diplomat, who is assigned to what seems like a completely innocuous position: ambassador to one of the US’s closest allies, the UK. Rufus Sewell portrays her husband, a loose-to-the-point-of-unmoored cannon who ensures the posting is anything but innocuous. Ali Ahn and Ato Assandoh, neither of whom I was familiar with, are fantastic as embassy staff. And as the central crisis has grown in scale, some familiar West Wing faces (Allison Janey and Bradley Whitford) have joined the cast. Almost all of the small roles have been superbly acted as well. And for all the dysfunction, cynicism, and selfish behavior that drive the plot forward, the politics in The Diplomat feels like pleasant escapism when compared to the present reality.

John Timmer

Murderbot (Apple TV)

shot of head and upper torso of white armored robot and a faceless mask

Credit: Apple TV+

Apple TV+’s Murderbot, based on Martha Wells’ bestselling series of novels The Murderbot Diaries, is a jauntily charming sci-fi comedy dripping with wry wit and an intriguing mystery. Murderbot the TV series adapts the first book in the series, All Systems Red. A security unit that thinks of itself as Murderbot (Alexander Skarsgård) is on assignment on a distant planet, protecting a team of scientists who hail from a “freehold.”

Mensah (Noma Dumezweni) is the team leader. The team also includes Bharadwaj (Tamara Podemski) and Gurathin (David Dastmalchian), who is an augmented human plugged into the same data feeds as Murderbot (processing at a much slower rate). Pin-Lee (Sabrina Wu) also serves as the team’s legal counsel; they are in a relationship with Arada (Tattiawna Jones), eventually becoming a throuple with Ratthi (Akshaye Khanna). Unbeknownst to the team, Murderbot has figured out how to override his governor module that compels it to obey the humans’ commands. So Murderbot essentially has free will.

The task of adapting Wells’ novellas for TV fell to sibling co-creators Paul Weitz and Chris Weitz. (Wells herself was a consulting producer.) They’ve kept most of the storyline intact, fleshing out characters and punching up the humor a bit, even recreating campy scenes from Murderbot’s favorite show, The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon. (John Cho and Clark Gregg make cameos as the stars of that fictional show-within-a-show.) The entire cast is terrific, but it’s Skarsgård’s hilariously deadpan performance that holds it all together as he learns how to relate to the humans—even forming some unexpectedly strong bonds.

Jennifer Ouellette

Down Cemetery Road (Apple TV)

short gray-haired room in black coat staring through a mesh fence

Credit: Apple TV

Fans of Slow Horses (see below), rejoice: with Down Cemetery Road, Apple TV has blessed us with another exciting mystery thriller series based on the works of Mick Herron—in this case, his 2003 novel introducing private investigator Zoë Boehm (Emma Thompson). Ruth Wilson co-stars as Sarah, an artist rather unhappily married to a finance bro. A neighboring building is destroyed by an explosion, and Sarah tries to deliver a get-well card to a little girl who survived from her young classmates. She’s inexplicably rebuffed, and her dogged attempts to figure out what’s going on lead her to seek the help of Zoë’s PI partner and estranged husband Joe (Adam Godley). What Joe finds out gets him killed, setting Sarah and Zoë on a collision course with high-placed government officials trying to cover up a pending scandal.

Thompson and Wilson make a dynamic pair. This is Thompson’s meatiest role in a while: Her Zoë is all flinty cynicism and tough exterior, masking an inner vulnerability she’s learned to keep buried. Wilson’s Sarah is the polar opposite in many ways, but she’s equally dogged, and both women are eccentrics who tend to rub people the wrong way. They’re united in a common goal: find the missing girl and bring her kidnappers (and Joe’s killer) to justice. Down Cemetery Road takes a bit of time to set up its premise and its characters, but the pace builds and builds to a big, satisfying finale. It’s not quite on the level of Slow Horses, but it’s pretty darned close.

Jennifer Ouellette

Pluribus (Apple TV)

blond woman on cell phone in yellow jacket looking dismayed

Credit: Apple TV

After watching five episodes of the nine-episode first season of Apple TV’s Pluribus, I’m still not sure if I should be rooting for protagonist Carol Sturka or not. On the one hand, Carol is one of the last true “individuals” on Earth, fighting to maintain that individuality against a creepy alien pseudo-virus that has made almost everyone else part of a creepy, psychically connected hive mind. Reversing that effect, and getting the world “back to normal,” is an understandable and sympathetic response on Carol’s part.

On the other hand, it’s unlear that being absorbed into the hive mind is a change for the worse, on a humanity-wide scale. Unlike Star Trek’s Borg—who are violent, shambling drones that seem to have an overall miserable existence—the new hive-mind humanity is unfailingly pacifist, intelligent, capable, and (seemingly) blissfully, peacefully happy. In a sense, this virus has “solved” human nature by removing the paranoia, fear, anger, and distrust that naturally come from never truly knowing what’s going on in your neighbor’s head.

The fact that Pluribus has so far been able to navigate this premise without coming down strongly on one side or the other is frankly incredible. The fact that it has done it with consistent humor, thrills, and amazing cinematography transforms it into a must-watch.

Kyle Orland

Slow Horses S5 (Apple TV)

scruffy bearded older man in a beige trenchcoat walking down busy London street

Credit: Apple TV

There are many things I enjoy about Slow Horses, the Apple TV thriller about some not-great spies based on Mick Herron’s novels of the same name. The plots are gripping. The acting can be sublime. It’s shot well. And in its fifth season, which began streaming this September, Slow Horses engages more with the author’s humor than in seasons past. But with a plot involving the honeypotting of the deluded computer expert almost-extraordinaire Roddy Ho (played to perfection by Christopher Chung), that would be hard to avoid.

Slough House is a rundown MI5 office used as a dumping ground for employees in disgrace—the slow horses. They can’t be fired, but they can quit, and working for Jackson Lamb (Gary Oldman) is meant to make that happen. Lamb is a veteran of the dirtiest days of the Cold War, knowing not only where most of the bodies are buried but having helped put a few of them there himself. His legendary field prowess is only dwarfed by his repellent personality, mocking and belittling everyone in sight—but often deservedly so.

Each member of his team is there for a different sin, and throughout the season—which involves a plot to destabilize the British government, ripped from an MI5 playbook—we see evidence of why they’ve been consigned to the slow horses. These are not invincible operators, just flawed human beings, perfectly capable of screwing up again and again. And yet, our lovable bunch of losers usually manages to come through in the end, showing up “the Park”—MI5’s (fictional) head office in London’s Regent’s Park, which is usually a step behind Lamb’s quick and devious thinking.

The adaptation is faithful enough to the books to give me deja vu during the first episode, and with just six episodes in a season, the payoff comes relatively quickly. I can’t wait for season 6.

Jonathan Gitlin 

Severance S2 (Apple TV)

man in business suit holding blue helium balloons while standing in an antiseptic white corridor

Credit: Apple TV

The second season of Severance was never going to be able to live up to the constant, slow rollout of gut punches that characterized the first season. Those first 10 episodes ably explored the most important implications of the titular severance procedure, which splits a single person into separate “innie” and “outtie” consciousnesses with distinct sets of memories. The audience got to explore those implications along with the “innie” characters, who were struggling against the boundaries of their odd cubicle life right up until that thrilling final shot.

With so much now revealed and understood, a lot of that fire fell out of the second season of the show. Sure, there were still some loose ends to tie up from the mysteries of the first season, and plenty of new, off-puttingly weird situations on offer. And the new season definitely has quite a few high points, like the big twist revealed when the “innies” get to have a rare outdoor excursion or the extended flashback showing a character trapped in a seemingly endless sequence of social tests she can’t remember afterward.

But S2 also spent entire episodes exploring backstories and mysteries that didn’t have nearly as much emotional or plot impact. By the time the final episode arrived—with a rescue sequence that required an inordinate amount of suspension of disbelief—I found myself wondering just how much more interesting juice there was to squeeze from the show’s brilliant original premise. I worry that the show is trending in the direction of Lost, which drew things out with a lot of uninteresting padding before finally resolving the plot’s core puzzle box in an unsatisfying way. I’m still along on that ride for now, but I really hope it’s going somewhere soon.

Kyle Orland

And now for our top choice of the year:

The Residence (Netflix)

black woman crouched over on white house lawn with a flashlight at night

Credit: Netflix

Paul William Davies created this delightful mystery comedy, loosely based on a bestselling nonfiction book by Kate Andersen Brower about the maids, butlers, cooks, florists, doormen, engineers, and others dedicated to ensuring the White House residence runs smoothly. In the middle of a state dinner for the visiting Australian prime minister, White House Chief Usher A.B. Wynter (Giancarlo Esposito) is found dead in the third-floor game room. Everyone initially assumes it was suicide.

Enter private detective Cordelia Cupp (Uzo Aduba), who most definitely does not think it was suicide and proceeds to investigate. She has about a dozen suspects, and her blunt, rather eccentric personality means she’s not remotely intimidated by the august setting of this particular murder. Cupp even takes the odd break in sleuthing to do a bit of birdwatching on the White House grounds. (It’s her goal to see all the birds President Teddy Roosevelt recorded during his tenure.) Birdwatching is more than a lifelong hobby for Cupp; it’s central to her character and to how she approaches solving crimes. Bonus: Viewers learn a lot of fascinating bird trivia over eight episodes.

Davies has devised a clever narrative structure, telling the story in flashbacks during a Congressional hearing (presided over by former US Sen. Al Franken playing a fictional senator from Washington state). It’s a good mystery with plenty of unexpected twists and snappy dialogue. Each episode title refers to a famous murder mystery; the camerawork is inventive and fun; and everyone in the cast knocks it out of the park. I especially loved pop star Kylie Minogue’s cameo playing a fictional version of herself as a state dinner guest. Davies apparently couldn’t convince her fellow Australian Hugh Jackman to also make a cameo. But Ben Prendergast’s winking portrayal of “Hugh Jackman”—only seen from behind or with his face obscured—is actually funnier than having the real actor.

It would be a mistake to dismiss The Residence as a mere bauble of a murder mystery just because of its playful, lighthearted tone. The show really does capture what is special and unique about the people who keep the White House residence functioning and why they matter—to each other and to America. Cupp’s final speech after unmasking the killer drives home those points with particular poignancy.

Netflix sadly canceled this excellent series, so there won’t be a second season—although I’m not sure how the writers could improve on such a tour de force. Do we really need Cupp to solve another elaborate murder in the White House? If I’m being honest, probably not. But she’s such a great character. I’d love to see more of her, perhaps in a Knives Out-style franchise where the location and main suspects continually change while the central detective stays the same. Somebody make it so.

Jennifer Ouellette

Photo of Jennifer Ouellette

Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban.

TV Technica: Our favorite shows of 2025 Read More »

keeping-up-against-the-joneses:-balsa’s-2025-fundraiser

Keeping Up Against the Joneses: Balsa’s 2025 Fundraiser

Several years ago Zvi Mowshowitz founded Balsa Research, a tiny nonprofit research organization currently focused on quantifying the impact of the Jones Act on the American economy, and working towards viable reform proposals.

While changing century-old policy is not going to be easy, we continue to see many places where there is neglected groundwork that we’re well positioned to do, and we are improving at doing it with another year of practice under our belts.

We’re looking to raise $200,000 to support our work this giving season, though $50,000 would be sufficient to keep the lights on, and we think we are also well positioned to do more with more funding.

Funds raised this round will support Balsa’s policy advocacy, either in Jones Act and shipping or potentially in other planned cause areas of housing reform and NEPA reform if there is capacity to significantly expand.

Donate here to fund our mainline policy work.

One additional possibility for Balsa, that would be funded entirely separately if it did happen, is for Zvi Mowshowitz to use Balsa as a piece of philanthropic infrastructure to help guide new philanthropic money coming online in 2026 if there is demand. Contact us (hello@balsaresearch.com) if you would like to be involved in such an effort in any capacity, or want to authorize this as a potential use of your funds.

Donate here if you are interested in helping us with fully flexible funding.

Quite early in the year, Balsa’s plans for Jones Act investigative work was derailed by a certain Section 301 Investigation, which I wrote about here. In short, the USTR was proposing two significant changes to maritime transport: a $3-5 million fee for Chinese-built ships to deliver imports to American ports, and new, Jones Act-tier restrictions to up to 20% of American maritime exports. All of American industry focused on lobbying against the legibly bad first proposal, sadly no one else was on the ball about how bad the second proposal was because it required a slightly more sophisticated argument. So Balsa stepped in and wrote up a public comment and presented it to the USTR during their public hearing on the proposal. At least in part due to our research and our outreach to maritime industry players, this proposal was basically entirely axed.

After our mid-year write-up on the whole adventure, Balsa did also end up submitting a second comment in response to what we felt was a deeply counterproductive tariff scheme in the updated proposal. This was the first arc played out in miniature; after functionally scrapping both major proposals from the first round, the USTR was proposing that an increasing percentage of American LNG must be shipped out on U.S.-built LNG tankers (there are currently zero in the fleet and no capacity for the shipyards to build any new ones) and that all port crane parts made in China be subject to 100% tariffs. Everyone focused on lobbying against the first policy change which was obviously bad, the second was bad in a more subtle way. So it was up to Balsa to point out that the exact setup of the port crane tariffs were structured in a way counterproductive to the stated U.S. policy, would incentivize American ports to buy their cranes from Chinese manufacturers instead of manufacturers in allied countries (there is no domestic port crane manufacturing capacity), and negatively impact port revitalization investments that need to happen.

One piece of good news is that President Trump signed a trade deal with China in November, which resulted in a one-year suspension of all of the punitive measures proposed in the Section 301 investigation. We think there’s a good chance that the suspension might become indefinite, but it still seemed like a good use of our time to write up our objections should the measures resume in 2026.

We also worked on the Jones Act. We launched a new RFA to investigate the labor impacts of the Jones Act. This is meant to complement our first RFA, which invites academics to look at the economic impacts of the Jones Act. You may also recall that we had already given out grants for two different studies under the first RFA, on economic impacts. These papers are still in the process of being written. We remain confident in both teams and look forward to seeing their results in 2026.

We shored up a few places where we felt like some of the groundwork done by others on the Jones Act were either neglected or outdated. We published two pieces: The Jones Act Index, which works as a very short overview of all the myriad dysfunctions of the current domestic maritime industry, and an operational analysis of what exactly the 93 extant Jones Act eligible vessels get up to.

Besides all that, there is of course the frustratingly intangible work of networking and building a deeper understanding of the shape of the problem. We conducted over forty conversations with stakeholders across the maritime policy landscape, including domestic shipping operators, port executives, and congressional staff. These conversations directly informed our operational analysis of Jones Act vessels and helped us identify which reform framings resonate (and which don’t) with different constituencies. We’ve compiled this primary research into internal documentation mapping stakeholder positions, constraints, and potential pressure points—groundwork that will directly inform our policy binder and draft reform proposals.

Additionally, in the last few months of the year, we brought on a very part-time contractor to help with shipping out more of our policy work.

A breakdown of our 2025 spend to the nearest thousand, for a total of ~$143k:

  • $87,000 in wages (Jenn at 35 hours a week and a policy analyst at 10 hours a week)

  • $0 for Zvi Mowshowitz

  • $45,000 in research grants to RFA applicants

  • $7000 in travel and conference expenses

  • $2000 in accounting services

  • $1000 in legal, compliance, and nonprofit registration fees

  • $1000 in software, subscriptions, and office supplies

Considering Balsa’s size, unless fundraising goes exceedingly well, we plan to stay focused on the Jones Act and maritime policy until we crack this nut (i.e. deliver the policy binder) instead of diverting attention across different policy streams.

Currently, the people working on Balsa work are me (full time-ish), our contractor who works ten hours a week, plus Zvi Mowshowitz in an advisory capacity. In 2026, we’d like to bring this person or another policy analyst on full time, because my own time is somewhat constrained by the overhead of maintaining a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. The amount of funding we have in reserve gives us a decent amount of runway, but is insufficient for our grantmaking and hiring ambitions.

We’re looking to raise $200,000, which would be enough to bring on our contractor full-time and give us a reasonable amount of buffer for additional research funding that we would like to disburse. However, we think $50,000 is the minimum for Balsa to be viably funded to the end of 2026.

Here’s what we plan on doing in 2026, should we hit our fundraising goal:

This is the core deliverable that everything else feeds into, that was waylaid by our Section 301 work. The binder will include a short executive summary of the case for reform; one-pagers on specific impacts; a longer technical document synthesizing our funded research and the existing literature; and a FAQ addressing common objections. Much of the work is filling gaps identified through stakeholder conversations, and interpreting the information for specific audiences.

Both teams are expected to submit their papers in 2026. Once results are in, we’ll write accessible summaries for non-academic audiences, brief interested Hill offices, and incorporate findings into the policy binder.

The labor angle is underexplored in existing Jones Act research and useful for engaging unions constructively. We’re looking for proposals examining questions like: How many jobs does the Jones Act actually protect, and in which states? What’s the counterfactual employment picture under reform? What are the job creation effects in industries currently harmed by high shipping costs? A rigorous study here could shift the conversation toward a more nuanced understanding of net labor market effects.

The one-year suspension of Section 301 measures expires in late 2026, and if negotiations with China stall, the proposed port fees and export restrictions could return; we’ll track developments and be prepared to submit updated comments or testimony. The SHIPS for America Act proposes expanded cargo preference requirements facing similar vessel availability problems to those we identified in Section 301, and we’re developing analysis of cargo preference laws we can deploy if this legislation gains momentum. The goal is readiness to contribute when high-leverage, without letting monitoring consume time that should go toward the policy binder.

We can do even more with additional resources:

  • We can fund additional academic studies to strengthen the empirical case for reform, complementing our existing research initiatives, as we discover new opportunities. We estimate that each additional study costs around $30,000 to fund.

  • Zvi is not taking any payment for his work currently, but at a sufficiently high level of funding, this could change and he would dedicate more of his attention to the project. In addition, there is still an abundance of policy analysts in DC who are out of work, that we can hire more of.

  • With more funding and interest, we’d also look into spinning up a 501c4 to use going forwards for more direct political advocacy. Though of course the 501c4 would then require its own fundraising work, since we can’t mix the funds.

Donating is not the only way to give. If you have experience with maritime shipping, naval procurement, connections to labor unions, or anything else you think might be relevant to Jones Act reform, we’d be interested in talking to you and hearing your perspective. Get in touch at hello@balsaresearch.com and let us know how you might be able to help, whether that’s sharing your insights, making introductions, or contributing in other meaningful ways.

If you’re an economist positioned to publish in peer-reviewed journals, please consider applying to our economy or labor RFAs, and doing direct research on the issue. If you have friends who fit that profile and might be interested in this kind of work, please consider forwarding the RFAs their way.

Balsa Research is still a very small organization (me, another policy analyst at ten hours per week, and Zvi in an unpaid, very part-time advisory role) and our progress this year has been possible only through the generous support of our donors and the many people who have shared their time and expertise with us. We’re grateful for this community of supporters and collaborators who continue to believe in the importance of this work.

Discussion about this post

Keeping Up Against the Joneses: Balsa’s 2025 Fundraiser Read More »

fcc’s-import-ban-on-the-best-new-drones-starts-today

FCC’s import ban on the best new drones starts today

DJI sent numerous requests to the US government to audit its devices in hopes of avoiding a ban, but the federal ban was ultimately enacted based on previously acquired information, The New York Times reported this week.

The news means that Americans will miss out on new drone models from DJI, which owns 70 percent of the global drone market in 2023, per Drone Industry Insights, and is widely regarded as the premium drone maker. People can still buy drones from US companies, but American drones have a lackluster reputation compared to drones from DJI and other Chinese companies, such as Autel. US-made drones also have a reputation for being expensive, usually costing significantly more than their Chinese counterparts. DaCoda Bartels, COO of FlyGuys, which helps commercial drone pilots find work, told the Times that US drones are also “half as good.”

There’s also concern among hobbyists that the ban will hinder their ability to procure drone parts, potentially affecting the repairability of approved drones and DIY projects.

US-based drone companies, meanwhile, are optimistic about gaining business in an industry where it has historically been hard to compete against Chinese brands. It’s also possible that the ban will just result in a decline in US drone purchases.

In a statement, Michael Robbins, president and CEO of the Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), which includes US drone companies like Skydio as members, said the ban “will truly unleash American drone dominance” and that the US cannot “risk… dependence” on China for drones.

“By prioritizing trusted technology and resilient supply chains, the FCC’s action will accelerate innovation, enhance system security, and ensure the US drone industry expands rather than remaining under foreign control,” Robbins said.

Understandably, DJI is “disappointed” by the FCC’s decision, it said in a statement issued on Monday, adding:

While DJI was not singled out, no information has been released regarding what information was used by the Executive Branch in reaching its determination. Concerns about DJI’s data security have not been grounded in evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market.

FCC’s import ban on the best new drones starts today Read More »

openai’s-child-exploitation-reports-increased-sharply-this-year

OpenAI’s child exploitation reports increased sharply this year

During the first half of 2025, the number of CyberTipline reports OpenAI sent was roughly the same as the amount of content OpenAI sent the reports about—75,027 compared to 74,559. In the first half of 2024, it sent 947 CyberTipline reports about 3,252 pieces of content. Both the number of reports and pieces of content the reports saw a marked increase between the two time periods.

Content, in this context, could mean multiple things. OpenAI has said that it reports all instances of CSAM, including uploads and requests, to NCMEC. Besides its ChatGPT app, which allows users to upload files—including images—and can generate text and images in response, OpenAI also offers access to its models via API access. The most recent NCMEC count wouldn’t include any reports related to video-generation app Sora, as its September release was after the time frame covered by the update.

The spike in reports follows a similar pattern to what NCMEC has observed at the CyberTipline more broadly with the rise of generative AI. The center’s analysis of all CyberTipline data found that reports involving generative AI saw a 1,325 percent increase between 2023 and 2024. NCMEC has not yet released 2025 data, and while other large AI labs like Google publish statistics about the NCMEC reports they’ve made, they don’t specify what percentage of those reports are AI-related.

OpenAI’s update comes at the end of a year where the company and its competitors have faced increased scrutiny over child safety issues beyond just CSAM. Over the summer, 44 state attorneys general sent a joint letter to multiple AI companies including OpenAI, Meta, Character.AI, and Google, warning that they would “use every facet of our authority to protect children from exploitation by predatory artificial intelligence products.” Both OpenAI and Character.AI have faced multiple lawsuits from families or on behalf of individuals who allege that the chatbots contributed to their children’s deaths. In the fall, the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on the harms of AI chatbots, and the US Federal Trade Commission launched a market study on AI companion bots that included questions about how companies are mitigating negative impacts, particularly to children. (I was previously employed by the FTC and was assigned to work on the market study prior to leaving the agency.)

OpenAI’s child exploitation reports increased sharply this year Read More »

call-of-duty-co-creator-and-battlefield-lead-vince-zampella-dies-in-car-crash

Call of Duty co-creator and Battlefield lead Vince Zampella dies in car crash

Vince Zampella, a video game developer who has co-created or helmed some of the most popular franchises in the world, died in a car crash on a Los Angeles highway at 12: 45 pm Pacific time on Sunday, December 21. He was 55 years old.

According to the California Highway Patrol, Zampella was in a car on Angeles Crest Highway when the vehicle veered off the road and crashed into a concrete barrier. No other vehicles were reported to be part of the crash.

A passenger was ejected from the vehicle, while the driver was trapped inside after the vehicle caught fire. The driver died at the scene, and the passenger died after being taken to the hospital. The report did not indicate whether Zampella was the passenger or the driver.

Angeles Crest Highway is a scenic road under the San Gabriel Mountains on the eastern end of LA and is commonly used for Sunday leisure drives. The vehicle involved in the crash was a 2026 Ferrari 296 GTS.

A storied career in game development

Early in his career, Zampella worked at SegaSoft and Panasonic, and he was the lead designer for the influential World War II shooter Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, which was released in 2002. But it was the famed studio Infinity Ward that turned him into a household name for gamers. He co-founded Infinity Ward with Jason West and Grant Collier in 2002.

Call of Duty co-creator and Battlefield lead Vince Zampella dies in car crash Read More »

two-space-startups-prove-you-don’t-need-to-break-the-bank-to-rendezvous-in-space

Two space startups prove you don’t need to break the bank to rendezvous in space

It may be happening quietly, but there is a revolution taking place with in-space transportation, and it opens up a world of possibilities.

In January, a small spacecraft built by a California-based company called Impulse Space launched along with a stack of other satellites on a Falcon 9 rocket. Upon reaching orbit, the rocket’s upper stage sent the satellites zipping off on their various missions.

And so it went with the Mira spacecraft built by Impulse, which is known as an orbital transfer vehicle. Mira dropped off several small CubeSats and then performed a number of high-thrust maneuvers to demonstrate its capabilities. This was the second flight by a Mira spacecraft, so Impulse Space was eager to continue testing the vehicle in flight.

Giving up control

This was all well and good up until this summer, when a funny thing happened. Impulse handed control of Mira over to another company, which had installed its own software package on the vehicle. And this second company, Starfish Space, took control.

This was more than a little weird, acknowledged Eric Romo, the president and chief operating officer of Impulse Space, in an interview.

“I would walk past mission control, and our teams would be on a call together, and I would just pop my head in and say, ‘Hey, don’t crash spaceship, please,’” Romo said. “It was definitely a new thing.”

But Starfish Space did not crash Mira. Rather, it activated its camera on board the spacecraft and started flying the vehicle. To what end? Founded in 2019, the Washington-based company seeks to build affordable spacecraft that can service satellites in space, providing propulsion or other aids to extend their lifetimes.

Now, flying Mira, the company sought to demonstrate that a single lightweight camera system, along with its closed-loop guidance, navigation, and control software, could autonomously rendezvous with another spacecraft. In this case, it was the very first Mira spacecraft launched by Impulse in November 2023. This vehicle no longer has propellant on board to control its orientation, but its solar panels periodically receive enough charge to allow it to communicate with Impulse’s engineers in California.

Two space startups prove you don’t need to break the bank to rendezvous in space Read More »

the-evolution-of-expendability:-why-some-ants-traded-armor-for-numbers

The evolution of expendability: Why some ants traded armor for numbers

“Ants reduce per-worker investment in one of the most nutritionally expensive tissues for the good of the collective,” Matte explains. “They’re shifting from self-investment toward a distributed workforce.”

Power of the collective

The researchers think the pattern they observed in ants reflects a more universal trend in the evolution of societal complexity. The transition from solitary life to complex societies echoes the transition from single-celled organisms to multicellular ones.

In a single-celled organism, a cell must be a “jack-of-all-trades,” performing every function necessary for survival. In a multicellular animal, however, individual cells often become simpler and more specialized, relying on the collective for protection and resources.

“It’s a pattern that echoes the evolution of multicellularity, where cooperative units can be individually simpler than a solitary cell, yet collectively capable of far greater complexity,” says Matte. Still, the question of whether underinvesting in individuals to boost the collective makes sense for creatures other than ants remains open, and it most likely isn’t as much about nutritional economics as it is about sex.

Expendable servants

The study focused on ants that already have a reproductive division of labor, one where workers do not reproduce. This social structure is likely the key prerequisite for the cheap worker strategy. For the team, this is the reason we haven’t, at least so far, found similar evolutionary patterns in more complex social organisms like wolves, which live in packs—or humans with their amazingly complex societies. Wolves and people are both social, but maintain a high degree of individual self-interest regarding reproduction. Ant workers could be made expendable because they don’t pass their own genes—they are essentially extensions of the queen’s reproductive strategy.

Before looking for signs of ant-like approaches to quality versus quantity dilemmas in other species, the team wants to take an even closer look at ants. Economo, Matte, and their colleagues seek to expand their analysis to other ant tissues, such as the nervous system and muscles, to see if the cheapening of individuals extends beyond the exoskeleton. They are also looking at ant genomes to see what genetic innovations allowed for the shift from quality to quantity.  “We still need a lot of work to understand ants’ evolution,” Matte says.

Science Advances. 2025. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adx8068

The evolution of expendability: Why some ants traded armor for numbers Read More »

lg-tvs’-unremovable-copilot-shortcut-is-the-least-of-smart-tvs’-ai-problems

LG TVs’ unremovable Copilot shortcut is the least of smart TVs’ AI problems

But Copilot will still be integrated into Tizen OS, and Samsung appears eager to push chatbots into TVs, including by launching Perplexity’s first TV app. Amazon, which released Fire TVs with Alexa+ this year, is also exploring putting chatbots into TVs.

After the backlash LG faced this week, companies may reconsider installing AI apps on people’s smart TVs. A better use of large language models in TVs may be as behind-the-scenes tools to improve TV watching. People generally don’t buy smart TVs to make it easier to access chatbots.

But this development is still troubling for anyone who doesn’t want an AI chatbot in their TV at all.

Some people don’t want chatbots in their TVs

Subtle integrations of generative AI that make it easier for people to do things like figure out the name of “that movie” may have practical use, but there are reasons to be wary of chatbot-wielding TVs.

Chatbots add another layer of complexity to understanding how a TV tracks user activity. With a chatbot involved, smart TV owners will be subject to complicated smart TV privacy policies and terms of service, as well as the similarly verbose rules of third-party AI companies. This will make it harder for people to understand what data they’re sharing with companies, and there’s already serious concern about the boundaries smart TVs are pushing to track users, including without consent.

Chatbots can also contribute to smart TV bloatware. Unwanted fluff, like games, shopping shortcuts, and flashy ads, already disrupts people who just want to watch TV.

LG’s Copilot web app is worthy of some grousing, but not necessarily because of the icon that users will eventually be able to delete. The more pressing issue is the TV industry’s shift toward monetizing software with user tracking and ads.

If you haven’t already, now is a good time to check out our guide to breaking free from smart TV ads and tracking.

LG TVs’ unremovable Copilot shortcut is the least of smart TVs’ AI problems Read More »

we-asked-four-ai-coding-agents-to-rebuild-minesweeper—the-results-were-explosive

We asked four AI coding agents to rebuild Minesweeper—the results were explosive


How do four modern LLMs do at re-creating a simple Windows gaming classic?

Which mines are mine, and which are AI? Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

The idea of using AI to help with computer programming has become a contentious issue. On the one hand, coding agents can make horrific mistakes that require a lot of inefficient human oversight to fix, leading many developers to lose trust in the concept altogether. On the other hand, some coders insist that AI coding agents can be powerful tools and that frontier models are quickly getting better at coding in ways that overcome some of the common problems of the past.

To see how effective these modern AI coding tools are becoming, we decided to test four major models with a simple task: re-creating the classic Windows game Minesweeper. Since it’s relatively easy for pattern-matching systems like LLMs to play off of existing code to re-create famous games, we added in one novelty curveball as well.

Our straightforward prompt:

Make a full-featured web version of Minesweeper with sound effects that

1) Replicates the standard Windows game and

2) implements a surprise, fun gameplay feature.

Include mobile touchscreen support.

Ars Senior AI Editor Benj Edwards fed this task into four AI coding agents with terminal (command line) apps: OpenAI’s Codex based on GPT-5, Anthropic’s Claude Code with Opus 4.5, Google’s Gemini CLI, and Mistral Vibe. The agents then directly manipulated HTML and scripting files on a local machine, guided by a “supervising” AI model that interpreted the prompt and assigned coding tasks to parallel LLMs that can use software tools to execute the instructions. All AI plans were paid for privately with no special or privileged access given by the companies involved, and the companies were unaware of these tests taking place.

Ars Senior Gaming Editor (and Minesweeper expert) Kyle Orland then judged each example blind, without knowing which model generated which Minesweeper clone. Those somewhat subjective and non-rigorous results are below.

For this test, we used each AI model’s unmodified code in a “single shot” result to see how well these tools perform without any human debugging. In the real world, most sufficiently complex AI-generated code would go through at least some level of review and tweaking by a human software engineer who could spot problems and address inefficiencies.

We chose this test as a sort of simple middle ground for the current state of AI coding. Cloning Minesweeper isn’t a trivial task that can be done in just a handful of lines of code, but it’s also not an incredibly complex system that requires many interlocking moving parts.

Minesweeper is also a well-known game, with many versions documented across the Internet. That should give these AI agents plenty of raw material to work from and should be easier for us to evaluate than a completely novel program idea. At the same time, our open-ended request for a new “fun” feature helps demonstrate each agent’s penchant for unguided coding “creativity,” as well as their ability to create new features on top of an established game concept.

With all that throat-clearing out of the way, here’s our evaluation of the AI-generated Minesweeper clones, complete with links that you can use to play them yourselves.

Agent 1: Mistral Vibe

Play it for yourself

Just ignore that Custom button. It’s purely for show.

Just ignore that Custom button. It’s purely for show. Credit: Benj Edwards

Implementation

Right away, this version loses points for not implementing chording—the technique that advanced Minesweeper players use to quickly clear all the remaining spaces surrounding a number that already has sufficient flagged mines. Without this feature, this version feels more than a little clunky to play.

I’m also a bit perplexed by the inclusion of a “Custom” difficulty button that doesn’t seem to do anything. It’s like the model realized that customized board sizes were a thing in Minesweeper but couldn’t figure out how to implement this relatively basic feature.

The game works fine on mobile, but marking a square with a flag requires a tricky long-press on a tiny square that also triggers selector handles that are difficult to clear. So it’s not an ideal mobile interface.

Presentation

This was the only working version we tested that didn’t include sound effects. That’s fair, since the original Windows Minesweeper also didn’t include sound, but it’s still a notable relative omission since the prompt specifically asked for it.

The all-black “smiley face” button to start a game is a little off-putting, too, compared to the bright yellow version that’s familiar to both Minesweeper players and emoji users worldwide. And while that smiley face does start a new game when clicked, there’s also a superfluous “New Game” button taking up space for some reason.

“Fun” feature

The closest thing I found to a “fun” new feature here was the game adding a rainbow background pattern on the grid when I completed a game. While that does add a bit of whimsy to a successful game, I expected a little more.

Coding experience

Benj notes that he was pleasantly surprised by how well Mistral Vibe performed as an open-weight model despite lacking the big-money backing of the other contenders. It was relatively slow, however (third fastest out of four), and the result wasn’t great. Ultimately, its performance so far suggests that with more time and more training, a very capable AI coding agent may eventually emerge.

Overall rating: 4/10

This version got many of the basics right but left out chording and didn’t perform well on the small presentational and “fun” touches.

Agent 2: OpenAI Codex

Play it for yourself

I can’t tell you how much I appreciate those chording instructions at the bottom.

I can’t tell you how much I appreciate those chording instructions at the bottom. Credit: Benj Edwards

Implementation

Not only did this agent include the crucial “chording” feature, but it also included on-screen instructions for using it on both PC and mobile browsers. I was further impressed by the option to cycle through “?” marks when marking squares with flags, an esoteric feature I feel even most human Minesweeper cloners might miss.

On mobile, the option to hold your finger down on a square to mark a flag is a nice touch that makes this the most enjoyable handheld version we tested.

Presentation

The old-school emoticon smiley-face button is pretty endearing, especially when you blow up and get a red-tinted “X(“. I was less impressed by the playfield “graphics,” which use a simple “*” for revealed mines and an ugly red “F” for flagged tiles.

The beeps-and-boops sound effects reminded me of my first old-school, pre-Sound-Blaster PC from the late ’80s. That’s generally a good thing, but I still appreciated the game giving me the option to turn them off.

“Fun” feature

The “Surprise: Lucky Sweep Bonus” listed in the corner of the UI explains that clicking the button gives you a free safe tile when available. This can be pretty useful in situations where you’d otherwise be forced to guess between two tiles that are equally likely to be mines.

Overall, though, I found it a bit odd that the game gives you this bonus only after you find a large, cascading field of safe tiles with a single click. It mostly functions as a “win more” button rather than a feature that offers a good balance of risk versus reward.

Coding experience

OpenAI Codex has a nice terminal interface with features similar to Claude Code (local commands, permission management, and interesting animations showing progress), and it’s fairly pleasant to use (OpenAI also offers Codex through a web interface, but we did not use that for this evaluation). However, Codex took roughly twice as long to code a functional game than Claude Code did, which might contribute to the strong result here.

Overall: 9/10

The implementation of chording and cute presentation touches push this to the top of the list. We just wish the “fun” feature was a bit more fun.

Agent 3: Anthropic Claude Code

Play it for yourself

The Power Mod powers on display here make even Expert boards pretty trivial to complete.

The Power Mod powers on display here make even Expert boards pretty trivial to complete. Credit: Benj Edwards

Implementation

Once again, we get a version that gets all the gameplay basics right but is missing the crucial chording feature that makes truly efficient Minesweeper play possible. This is like playing Super Mario Bros. without the run button or Ocarina of Time without Z-targeting. In a word: unacceptable.

The “flag mode” toggle on the mobile version of this game is perfectly functional, but it’s a little clunky to use. It also visually cuts off a portion of the board at the larger game sizes.

Presentation

Presentation-wise, this is probably the most polished version we tested. From the use of cute emojis for the “face” button to nice-looking bomb and flag graphics and simple but effective sound effects, this looks more professional than the other versions we tested.

That said, there are some weird presentation issues. The “beginner” grid has weird gaps between columns, for instance. The borders of each square and the flag graphics can also become oddly grayed out at points, especially when using Power Mode (see below).

“Fun” feature

The prominent “Power Mode” button in the lower-right corner offers some pretty fun power-ups that alter the core Minesweeper formula in interesting ways. But the actual powers are a bit hit-and-miss.

I especially liked the “Shield” power, which protects you from an errant guess, and the “Blast” power, which seems to guarantee a large cascade of revealed tiles wherever you click. But the “X-Ray” power, which reveals every bomb for a few seconds, could be easily exploited by a quick player (or a crafty screenshot). And the “Freeze” power is rather boring, just stopping the clock for a few seconds and amounting to a bit of extra time.

Overall, the game hands out these new powers like candy, which makes even an Expert-level board relatively trivial with Power Mode active. Simply choosing “Power Mode” also seems to mark a few safe squares right after you start a game, making things even easier. So while these powers can be “fun,” they also don’t feel especially well-balanced.

Coding experience

Of the four tested models, Claude Code with Opus 4.5 featured the most pleasant terminal interface experience and the fastest overall coding experience (Claude Code can also use Sonnet 4.5, which is even faster, but the results aren’t quite as full-featured in our experience). While we didn’t precisely time each model, Opus 4.5 produced a working Minesweeper in under five minutes. Codex took at least twice as long, if not longer, while Mistral took roughly three or four times as long as Claude Code. Gemini, meanwhile, took hours of tinkering to get two non-working results.

Overall: 7/10

The lack of chording is a big omission, but the strong presentation and Power Mode options give this effort a passable final score.

Agent 4: Google Gemini CLI

Play it for yourself

So… where’s the game?

So… where’s the game? Credit: Benj Edwards

Implementation, presentation, etc.

Gemini CLI did give us a few gray boxes you can click, but the playfields are missing. While interactive troubleshooting with the agent may have fixed the issue, as a “one-shot” test, the model completely failed.

Coding experience

Of the four coding agents we tested, Gemini CLI gave Benj the most trouble. After developing a plan, it was very, very slow at generating any usable code (about an hour per attempt). The model seemed to get hung up attempting to manually create WAV file sound effects and insisted on requiring React external libraries and a few other overcomplicated dependencies. The result simply did not work.

Benj actually bent the rules and gave Gemini a second chance, specifying that the game should use HTML5. When the model started writing code again, it also got hung up trying to make sound effects. Benj suggested using the WebAudio framework (which the other AI coding agents seemed to be able to use), but the result didn’t work, which you can see at the link above.

Unlike the other models tested, Gemini CLI apparently uses a hybrid system of three different LLMs for different tasks (Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, 2.5 Flash, and 2.5 Pro were available at the level of the Google account Benj paid for). When you’ve completed your coding session and quit the CLI interface, it gives you a readout of which model did what.

In this case, it didn’t matter because the results didn’t work. But it’s worth noting that Gemini 3 coding models are available for other subscription plans that were not tested here. For that reason, this portion of the test could be considered “incomplete” for Google CLI.

Overall: 0/10 (Incomplete)

Final verdict

OpenAI Codex wins this one on points, in no small part because it was the only model to include chording as a gameplay option. But Claude Code also distinguished itself with strong presentational flourishes and quick generation time. Mistral Vibe was a significant step down, and Google CLI based on Gemini 2.5 was a complete failure on our one-shot test.

While experienced coders can definitely get better results via an interactive, back-and-forth code editing conversation with an agent, these results show how capable some of these models can be, even with a very short prompt on a relatively straightforward task. Still, we feel that our overall experience with coding agents on other projects (more on that in a future article) generally reinforces the idea that they currently function best as interactive tools that augment human skill rather than replace it.

Photo of Kyle Orland

Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, writing primarily about the business, tech, and culture behind video games. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He once wrote a whole book about Minesweeper.

We asked four AI coding agents to rebuild Minesweeper—the results were explosive Read More »

neural-dsp-models-john-mayer’s-entire-amp-and-effects-rig—and-it-sounds-great

Neural DSP models John Mayer’s entire amp and effects rig—and it sounds great


Mayer gets the “Archetype” treatment.

Guitarists today are spoiled for choice, and that goes doubly true for players who use computer-based amp modeling software. I’m one such player, and I don’t miss the size, weight, deafening volume, or cost of owning an amp and cabinet collection, to say nothing of all those pedals and cables. For clean to mid-gain tones alone, I already have more terrific options than I need, including Neural DSP’s Tone King and Cory Wong and Mateus Asato, Polychrome DSP’s Lumos, and Universal Audio’s new Paradise Guitar Studio. All work slightly differently, but they can each output record-ready tones that are really, really close to the (often incredibly expensive) hardware that they model, and they each give you plenty of great-sounding presets to start from.

So do we really need one amp sim package?

Neural DSP thinks we do, because the Finnish company just dropped a major new release yesterday called Archetype: John Mayer X. It doesn’t model Mayer’s type of gear but his actual hardware units, along with all the actual settings he uses in the studio and on stage. It even has some presets that he designed. Which is great if you want to sound like John Mayer—but what does the software offer for those of us not trying to cover Continuum?

To find out, I spent a few hours playing with Mayer X, and I came away impressed. Neural DSP has released so many metal amp sims in the last few years that I’ve come to associate the company with downtuned chugga-chugga. Don’t get me wrong: I like long hair, skulls, and palm-muted riffs as much as the next person, but it’s nice to have some variety.

Mayer X’s effects pedal lineup.

Mayer X brings that variety by modeling three of Mayer’s amps: a 1964 Fender Vibroverb, a Dumble Steel String Singer #002, and a not-yet-released prototype Two-Rock. Each amp also comes with a model of its associated speaker cabinet, in front of which you can freely position zero, one, or two microphones to shape the recorded sound and to control the room tone as desired.

This is standard practice for Neural DSP’s “Archetypes” line, but one wrinkle is the new “three-in-one amp” mode that blends the sounds from all amps at once. Here’s the marketing speak: “It merges all three amps and their matching cabinets with Mayer’s exact settings, mic placements, and EQ decisions, creating a unified, dimensional sound that reflects his full signal path without requiring individual amp balancing.” In this mode, each amp gets a single knob, but you are always free to turn this off and use one particular amp instead, which exposes more controls for that unit.

Also new here is an effect that Neural calls the “Gravity Tank.” This effects unit combines Mayer’s “favorite spring reverb” with the harmonic tremolo found in the Victoria Reverberato. It sounds great; while I like spring reverbs for character, especially on guitar parts, some are a bit too “drippy” for me. And although this one definitely sounds like a spring, it’s subtle and spacious rather than clangy or overly metallic, and the tremolo—which you can sync to your DAW’s tempo—sounds terrific too.

The Gravity Tank.

Instead of a compressor pedal at the front of the amp, as in many Neural DSP plugins, the Mayer X Archetype features a rack-mounted compressor (this one is modeled off the famous Distressor) that comes after the amp. The controls are much simpler than a real Distressor, but under the hood, Neural says that it is using “Mayer’s exact attack, release, and sidechain settings”; users, however, only need to spin the Input and Output dials.

Above the compressor is an EQ, but unlike Neural’s usual practice, this is not a multiband graphic EQ. Instead, it’s a four-band semi-parametric EQ with knobs rather than sliders, plus a high-pass and low-pass filter. The EQ is said to “balance the naturally full low end of [Mayer’s] amplifiers.”

There are effects pedals here, too—five are up front, before the amps. You get a volume boost pedal meant especially to thicken the tone of single-coil pickups like those found on Fender Stratocasters or PRS Silver Sky guitars (which Mayer also helped design). Then you get an “antelope filter” that provides a sort of auto-wah effect; usually, I hate these sorts of things, but this one sounds good enough that I could see myself using it on lead lines without feeling like I’m some kind of ’70s funk refugee.

After that come two drive pedals that are modeled on the Klon Centaur, the Ibanez TS-10, and the Marshall Bluesbreaker MK1. That’s right: You get three effects units jammed into two virtual pedals, because one of the pedals has a toggle switch to offer two different tones.

Finally, there’s a bucket brigade delay meant largely for slapback echoes, while a separate post-amp effects section offers more traditional delay and reverb (both hall and plate) for space.

All three amps.

While you won’t find this exact gear and these exact settings elsewhere, several of the amp simulation suites mentioned at the top of this piece provide plenty of “ballpark” options. (Paradise Guitar Studio, for instance, also models a Klon Centaur pedal and offers boost pedals and even more overdrive pedal options, along with spring reverb and bucket brigade delays.)

Whether you need (or “need”) Mayer X depends on just what other gear you have and what kind of tone you’re chasing. To me, the presets in Mayer X sound just slightly more modern than Paradise Guitar Studio, which especially emphasizes “classic” rock sounds from the ’60s to the ’90s. And Mayer X offers so many more amps and effects than Neural DSP’s Tone King, which I previously used for some of these sorts of sounds.

One of the best things about this package is that it is not “hyped” to sound over the top in standalone guitar demos, which is why its sounds fit so well into mixes. Reverb, delay, tremolo, boost, and drive are subtle and judicious, as is compression. Nearly everything is usable if you play anywhere in the pop/blues/rock/funk landscape. Even effects like freeze delay and the antelope filter—two types of effects that generally feel irrelevant or gimmicky to me—here inspire actual creativity. This is my personal taste talking—yours may differ—but the entire Mayer X package offers tone colors I would actually use in projects rather than garish neons that sound “impressive” but are unlikely to work as-is in any given song.

So if you’re looking for Mayer’s brand of smooth-but-full blues-inspired leads or his edge of breakup rhythm tones, John Mayer X is certainly a good way to get it in one package. This doesn’t feel like a cash-in, either; the quality and variety is immediately apparent, especially in new or custom bits like the boost pedal, the antelope filter, the Gravity Tank, and the “three-in-one” amp.

Just to see what I could do with almost no tweaking, I played around with presets for a couple of hours and came up with this short demo that features rhythm, double-tracked rhythm, filtered, overdriven rhythm, and delayed lead sounds. I even laid down a little bass (Mayer X does include a few bass-specific presets to get you started). To me, everything works well right out of the box, and the sounds blend well with each other (and with bass/drum tracks) in the mix, something not always true of presets. A little EQ and some mild master bus processing, and I ended up with the demo below:

Redditors who have played with the plugin so far seem impressed. “Absolutely blown away. Every single amp, mic, cab and pedal option is usable and sounds amazing,” wrote one.

“I’m a mostly clean-to-slight-crunch player, and this is by FAR the most plug-in-and-get-great-sounds-out-of-it NDSP plugin for that style that I’ve tried,” wrote another.

But they also echo my chief complaint. The downside of all these guitar sim plugins is that they are getting increasingly expensive. Universal Audio’s recent Paradise Guitar Studio claims a full price of $199 (I say “claims” because most of the company’s products are on sale most of the time). John Mayer X is going for €169 + tax in the US ($198 at current currency rates), and even more in Europe, while Neural DSP’s previous Archetype, the Misha Mansoor X, is only €125 ($146). Perhaps in this Archetype, the “X” stands for “expensive”?

The new compressor and EQ.

That’s a lot of scratch for a plugin, though of course this one models gear worth many thousands of dollars and is far cheaper than buying modeling hardware like Neural DSP’s own Quad Cortex. (Those inclined to wait may be able to pick up Mayer X during one of Neural DSP’s biannual sales, often at 50 percent off.) And this one certainly sounds great.

If you’re one of those who suffer from gear acquisition syndrome (GAS), potent in both its physical and digital forms, these $150–$200 plugins add up quickly. Buy four or five and you’re into some real money! So if you already have other clean to mid-gain amp sims that work well for you, wisdom might suggest making your peace with what you have rather than looking for incremental improvements every time a new plugin appears. (There’s always a 14-day trial if you want to test Mayer X first.)

But if you’re newer to the amp sim market or have money to blow on your hobby or just love Mayer’s tones, Mayer X is certainly a wonderful place to start. Will you sound like Mayer? Probably not, given how much “tone” actually resides in the fingers, but you will get a great creative toolkit for bringing out the best in your own sound.

The real takeaway here is that technology has made it an amazing time to be a guitar player. We’re blessed for choices, and those choices get better every day.

Photo of Nate Anderson

Neural DSP models John Mayer’s entire amp and effects rig—and it sounds great Read More »

bursting-ai-bubble-may-be-eu’s-“secret-weapon”-in-clash-with-trump,-expert-says

Bursting AI bubble may be EU’s “secret weapon” in clash with Trump, expert says


Spotify and Accenture caught in crossfire as Trump attacks EU tech regulations.

The US threatened to restrict some of the largest service providers in the European Union as retaliation for EU tech regulations and investigations are increasingly drawing Donald Trump’s ire.

On Tuesday, the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) issued a warning on X, naming Spotify, Accenture, Amadeus, Mistral, Publicis, and DHL among nine firms suddenly yanked into the middle of the US-EU tech fight.

“The European Union and certain EU Member States have persisted in a continuing course of discriminatory and harassing lawsuits, taxes, fines, and directives against US service providers,” USTR’s post said.

The clash comes after Elon Musk’s X became the first tech company fined for violating the EU’s Digital Services Act, which is widely considered among the world’s strictest tech regulations. Trump was not appeased by the European Commission (EC) noting that X was not ordered to pay the maximum possible fine. Instead, the $140 million fine sparked backlash within the Trump administration, including from Vice President JD Vance, who slammed the fine as “censorship” of X and its users.

Asked for comment on the USTR’s post, an EC spokesperson told Ars that the EU intends to defend its tech regulations while implementing commitments from a Trump trade deal that the EU struck in August.

“The EU is an open and rules-based market, where companies from all over the world do business successfully and profitably,” the EC’s spokesperson said. “As we have made clear many times, our rules apply equally and fairly to all companies operating in the EU,” ensuring “a safe, fair and level playing field in the EU, in line with the expectations of our citizens. We will continue to enforce our rules fairly, and without discrimination.”

Trump on shaky ground due to “AI bubble”

On X, the USTR account suggested that the EU was overlooking that US companies “provide substantial free services to EU citizens and reliable enterprise services to EU companies,” while supporting “millions of jobs and more than $100 billion in direct investment in Europe.”

To stop what Trump views as “overseas extortion” of American tech companies, the USTR said the US was prepared to go after EU service providers, which “have been able to operate freely in the United States for decades, benefitting from access to our market and consumers on a level playing field.”

“If the EU and EU Member States insist on continuing to restrict, limit, and deter the competitiveness of US service providers through discriminatory means, the United States will have no choice but to begin using every tool at its disposal to counter these unreasonable measures,” USTR’s post said. “Should responsive measures be necessary, US law permits the assessment of fees or restrictions on foreign services, among other actions.”

The pushback comes after the Trump administration released a November national security report that questioned how long the EU could remain a “reliable” ally as overregulation of its tech industry could hobble both its economy and military strength. Claiming that the EU was only “doubling down” on such regulations, the EU “will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less,” the report predicted.

“We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation,” the report said.

However, the report acknowledged that “Europe remains strategically and culturally vital to the United States.”

“Transatlantic trade remains one of the pillars of the global economy and of American prosperity,” the report said. “European sectors from manufacturing to technology to energy remain among the world’s most robust. Europe is home to cutting-edge scientific research and world-leading cultural institutions. Not only can we not afford to write Europe off—doing so would be self-defeating for what this strategy aims to achieve.”

At least one expert in the EU has suggested that the EU can use this acknowledgement as leverage, while perhaps even using the looming threat of the supposed American “AI bubble” bursting to pressure Trump into backing off EU tech laws.

In an op-ed for The Guardian, Johnny Ryan, the director of Enforce, a unit of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, suggested that the EU could even throw Trump’s presidency into “crisis” by taking bold steps that Trump may not see coming.

EU can take steps to burst “AI bubble”

According to Ryan, the national security report made clear that the EU must fight the US or else “perish.” However, the EU has two “strong cards” to play if it wants to win the fight, he suggested.

Right now, market analysts are fretting about an “AI bubble,” with US investment in AI far outpacing potential gains until perhaps 2030. A Harvard University business professor focused on helping businesses implement cutting-edge technology like generative AI, Andy Wu, recently explained that AI’s big problem is that “everyone can imagine how useful the technology will be, but no one has figured out yet how to make money.”

“If the market can keep the faith to persist, it buys the necessary time for the technology to mature, for the costs to come down, and for companies to figure out the business model,” Wu said. But US “companies can end up underwater if AI grows fast but less rapidly than they hope for,” he suggested.

During this moment, Ryan wrote, it’s not just AI firms with skin in the game, but potentially all of Trump’s supporters. The US is currently on “shaky economic ground” with AI investment accounting “for virtually all (92 percent) GDP growth in the first half of this year.”

“The US’s bet on AI is now so gigantic that every MAGA voter’s pension is bound to the bubble’s precarious survival,” Ryan said.

Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, could exploit this apparent weakness first by messing with one of the biggest players in America’s AI industry, Nvidia, then by ramping up enforcement of the tech laws Trump loathes.

According to Ryan, “Dutch company ASML commands a global monopoly on the microchip-etching machines that use light to carve patterns on silicon,” and Nvidia needs those machines if it wants to remain the world’s most valuable company. Should the US GDP remain reliant on AI investment for growth, von der Leyen could use export curbs on that technology like a “lever,” Ryan said, controlling “whether and by how much the US economy expands or contracts.”

Withholding those machines “would be difficult for Europe” and “extremely painful for the Dutch economy,” Ryan noted, but “it would be far more painful for Trump.”

Another step the EU could take is even “easier,” Ryan suggested. It could go even harder on the enforcement of tech regulations based on evidence of mismanaged data surfaced in lawsuits against giants like Google and Meta. For example, it seems clear that Meta may have violated the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), after the Facebook owner was “unable to tell a US court that what its internal systems do with your data, or who can access it, or for what purpose.”

“This data free-for-all lets big tech companies train their AI models on masses of everyone’s data, but it is illegal in Europe, where companies are required to carefully control and account for how they use personal data,” Ryan wrote. “All Brussels has to do is crack down on Ireland, which for years has been a wild west of lax data enforcement, and the repercussions will be felt far beyond.”

Taking that step would also arguably make it harder for tech companies to secure AI investments, since firms would have to disclose that their “AI tools are barred from accessing Europe’s valuable markets,” Ryan said.

Calling the reaction to the X fine “extreme,” Ryan pushed for von der Leyen to advance on both fronts, forecasting that “the AI bubble would be unlikely to survive this double shock” and likely neither could Trump’s approval ratings. There’s also a possibility that tech firms could pressure Trump to back down if coping with any increased enforcement threatens AI progress.

Although Wu suggested that Big Tech firms like Google and Meta would likely be “insulated” from the AI bubble bursting, Google CEO Sundar Pichai doesn’t seem so sure. In November, Pichai told the BBC that if AI investments didn’t pay off quickly enough, he thinks “no company is going to be immune, including us.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Bursting AI bubble may be EU’s “secret weapon” in clash with Trump, expert says Read More »

google-releases-gemini-3-flash,-promising-improved-intelligence-and-efficiency

Google releases Gemini 3 Flash, promising improved intelligence and efficiency

Google began its transition to Gemini 3 a few weeks ago with the launch of the Pro model, and the arrival of Gemini 3 Flash kicks it into high gear. The new, faster Gemini 3 model is coming to the Gemini app and search, and developers will be able to access it immediately via the Gemini API, Vertex AI, AI Studio, and Antigravity. Google’s bigger gen AI model is also picking up steam, with both Gemini 3 Pro and its image component (Nano Banana Pro) expanding in search.

This may come as a shock, but Google says Gemini 3 Flash is faster and more capable than its previous base model. As usual, Google has a raft of benchmark numbers that show modest improvements for the new model. It bests the old 2.5 Flash in basic academic and reasoning tests like GPQA Diamond and MMMU Pro (where it even beats 3 Pro). It gets a larger boost in Humanity’s Last Exam (HLE), which tests advanced domain-specific knowledge. Gemini 3 Flash has tripled the old models’ score in HLE, landing at 33.7 percent without tool use. That’s just a few points behind the Gemini 3 Pro model.

Gemini HLE test

Credit: Google

Google is talking up Gemini 3 Flash’s coding skills, and the provided benchmarks seem to back that talk up. Over the past year, Google has mostly pushed its Pro models as the best for generating code, but 3 Flash has done a lot of catching up. In the popular SWE-Bench Verified test, Gemini 3 Flash has gained almost 20 points on the 2.5 branch.

The new model is also a lot less likely to get general-knowledge questions wrong. In the Simple QA Verified test, Gemini 3 Flash scored 68.7 percent, which is only a little below Gemini 3 Pro. The last Flash model scored just 28.1 percent on that test. At least as far as the evaluation scores go, Gemini 3 Flash performs much closer to Google’s Pro model versus the older 2.5 family. At the same time, it’s considerably more efficient, according to Google.

One of Gemini 3 Pro’s defining advances was its ability to generate interactive simulations and multimodal content. Gemini 3 Flash reportedly retains that underlying capability. Gemini 3 Flash offers better performance than Gemini 2.5 Pro did, but it runs workloads three times faster. It’s also a lot cheaper than the Pro models if you’re paying per token. One million input tokens for 3 Flash will run devs $0.50, and a million output tokens will cost $3. However, that’s an increase compared to Gemini 2.5 Flash input and output at $0.30 and $2.50, respectively. The Pro model’s tokens are $2 (1M input) and $12 (1M output).

Google releases Gemini 3 Flash, promising improved intelligence and efficiency Read More »