IT General

Netflix has a string of exciting new films scheduled as fall sets in, from another Knives Out mystery to the recently released Thursday Murder Club. Your favorite shows, too, are getting new seasons, so you never have to worry about your home page looking dry.

This was a particularly jam-packed week of Android news! Google finally let Material 3 Expressive out of it's cage, and it's available on more Pixel phones. Gboard got some cool features, several Android tablets were announced, and we have a bunch of great editorials to read.

This was a busy week for tech news, with plenty of hardware and software announcements from IFA 2025, updates to Linux Mint and MAME, and much more. Here are the biggest stories you might have missed.

We all know Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter, but if you still look at him and see the titular wizard, you should explore his later work and really get a taste of the range and versatility that make him the stand-out actor he is. Lucky for you, I’ve got the perfect place to start, and it’s with the thriller-adventure movie Jungle, currently streaming on Prime Video ... but not for long.

SEE ALSO: 6 Dyson Supersonic dupes that are actually worth the hype

I had an overall smoother daily experience with one of the masks, and my skin made it quite apparent which mask it needed as a staple in my routine. Here are my thoughts on whether you should buy the Shark CryoGlow or CurrentBody LED mask, based on my own journey and results.

Note: This review specifically features the CurrentBody Skin: Series 2 mask.

Shark CryoGlow vs. CurrentBody: Bulbs and nanometer measurement Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

After hearing that the CurrentBody Skin mask is more expensive than the Shark CryoGlow mask (by more than $100), you'd naturally assume that the CurrentBody is more powerful. But you'd be off.

While the CurrentBody mask does have more LED bulbs on paper (237 versus the Shark's 160), none of the bulbs in the CurrentBody Skin mask are blue light bulbs. They're red and near infrared only, and not every bulb in the CurrentBody mask can emit both red and NIR (near infrared) light. There are 110 red light bulbs (633nm) and 110 NIR bulbs (830nm), plus 16 deep NIR bulbs (1,072nm) around the eyes and mouth for extra fine line attention. An upgrade from the original version of the CurrentBody mask, the Series 2 has an added chin strap to extend coverage to the jawline and maybe a tiny bit of the upper neck.

Meanwhile, the Shark mask has red (630nm), near infrared (830nm), and blue light bulbs (415nm), and every single bulb can emit any of those wavelengths at the same time. That technically totals 480 simultaneous light sources inside the Shark mask, ensuring that more of your face is being hit by any of the wavelengths. The nm (nanometer) number is a unit of measurement for each wavelength. Both masks hit the standard red light and NIR nanometer measurement generally considered "strong" enough to produce any type of at-home results. The Shark CryoGlow mask doesn't do deep near infrared at all, but remember that the CurrentBody only has 16 of those.

To add blue light to your existing CurrentBody routine, you'd have to buy the $469.99 Anti-Acne mask separately. That's nearly $1,000 compared to the CryoGlow's $349.99 price tag. So, there's that.

SEE ALSO: Dreame's three new beauty releases dupe the Dyson Airwrap and Supersonic, plus the Shark FlexStyle

In more scientific terms, red light masks are often given an irradiance measurement, or a measurement of power density at the source of the LED. All of the tri-wick bulbs packed into the CryoGlow bring it to a maximum irradiance of 128mW/cm², while the CurrentBody mask maxes out at 30mW/cm² of the Omnilux.

There is one area of the face where the CurrentBody's coverage dominates: the under eyes. The CryoGlow mask doesn't have any LEDs under the eye holes, instead using the space for cooling pads that mimic a cryotherapy de-puffing effect. They do feel amazing when you're half awake in the morning, but the results only last for a few minutes. The under-eyes are universally one of the most stubborn spots to treat with over-the-counter skincare, so an at-home red light mask could very well be someone's last-ditch effort before paying for a legit procedure. So while the CurrentBody might speak to you more if your main skincare goal is long-term reduction of dark circles or eye bags, I think the Shark's blue light option and tri-wick bulb situation gets more for your money overall.

Winner: Shark

Shark CryoGlow vs. CurrentBody: Settings and remote

This is where Shark really starts to pull ahead of CurrentBody. If you're dually concerned about fine lines and texture as well as acne, the CryoGlow is overwhelmingly the better mask.

Both masks have remotes that are attached to the mask via a cord. However, I'm not exactly sure why CurrentBody didn't just go wireless and move the remote's lone "on" button to the mask itself. It's not like the mask can do anything else but simply be on — there's just a single fixed red light and infrared setting. I understand that this is probably in the name of simplicity, but it's painfully basic to me.

It almost feels unfair to compare it to the Shark CryoGlow remote, which features a small LCD screen and a wheel to adjust cooling pad temperature and pan between three modes: Better Aging (red and infrared light), Blemish Repair (all three wavelengths in varying combinations), and Skin Sustain (all three wavelengths at the same time). Once you've chosen a setting, the screen counts down how much time you have left in your session.

The Shark CryoGlow remote. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable The CurrentBody remote. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

That lineup is going to be much more palatable to anyone who has more than one skincare concern. Personally, I desperately wanted to try an at-home LED mask for its potential mitigation of the acne that just randomly started showing up in my late 20s — but my late 20s also brought along the onset of fine forehead and smile lines, and I also wanted my makeup to stop caking in those. The Shark mask has an answer for both of those, and I love that the remote gives me the freedom to let me choose what I want to target on any given day. The CurrentBody's lack of customization is genuinely kind of shocking for the price, and felt like a downgrade after such a premium experience with the Shark for several months before it.

SEE ALSO: Hands-on with Therabody’s TheraFace Mask

Shark's settings also take slightly less time than CurrentBody's: The three Shark settings take four, six, or eight minutes, while the only CurrentBody setting takes 10 minutes. It's not a huge difference in terms of the tasks you'll be able to get done during Mask Time, but again, it's still nice to be able to gauge how many minutes are left. And while the CryoGlow's battery life is much shorter, you can at least gauge the timing before your next charge with the battery icon on the screen. When the CurrentBody mask is dead, it simply won't turn on.

Winner: Shark

Shark CryoGlow vs. CurrentBody: Design and daily wearability

From the outside, it's just a given that you'll look ridiculous while wearing any red light mask. The Shark CryoGlow is giving Jason Voorhees, while the CurrentBody Skin is more so embodying Dwight Schrute when he cuts the face off of a CPR dummy. I don't mind looking funny either way as long as a mask is physically comfortable to wear. FWIW, neither mask is unbearably heavy at all. The Shark CryoGlow is a little heavier — a bit over a pound, compared to the CurrentBody at less than a pound.

CurrentBody on the left vs. Shark on the right. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Both masks have adjustable straps, but the Shark mask's sliding adjusters (similar to the back of a baseball cap) are a much more seamless process. CurrentBody has way too many intersections of velcro, including The Big Strap that needs to be done and undone on the back of your head each time you wear it. It's just begging to get stuck in your hair, and it made me miss the simplicity of slipping the CryoGlow on and off.

The presence of a shirt/pants clip on both remotes implies that you should be able to roam the house while wearing the mask hands-free. Right? While you obviously can't expect to see perfectly out of any LED mask, I find the Shark CryoGlow to be much easier to wear than the CurrentBody Skin. When the lights are on, the CurrentBody mask is just... so much more in your face when it's on your face. The lights around the eyes are borderline blinding, so much so that anything you can see outside of the red glowy haze is tinted blue.

It looks wild, but like, in a fun way. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable My pupils cannot be serious. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

To be fair, the CryoGlow mask isn't unnoticeable while it's on, either. The shell is so thick that I have to hold my hands out annoyingly far in front of me to see what I'm doing. But I can still somewhat get stuff done while wearing the CryoGlow, like feed the cats or make my bed, whereas the CurrentBody Skin feels too trippy to do anything but sit on my phone. If you don't have a squirrel brain like I do, you may not mind having to zone out for a second — a CurrentBody mask owner on Reddit actually mentioned that they appreciate being forced to lie down for 10 minutes a day.

SEE ALSO: Shark vs. Roomba: Comparing top-rated robot vacuum lineups

The interior of the masks are also slightly different materials. The inside of the Shark is your classic slippery plastic that can be wiped down super easily for sanitation purposes. The inside of the CurrentBody mask, which touches your face directly, has a stickier silicone-y material that weirds me out. A ton of cat hair and fuzzies get stuck to it, too.

Winner: Shark

Shark CryoGlow vs. CurrentBody: Results

In my experience, the Shark CryoGlow mask works much better than the CurrentBody mask.

I got my skin into pretty amazing shape after about three months of daily CryoGlow usage. Before that, I was struggling hard to get my acne under control — it felt like a new pimple was popping up every single day. When I was consistently switching between the Shark mask's acne setting and "Better Aging" setting, I was going at least a week without a new pimple popping up.

The state of my chin and jaw before starting my CryoGlow regimen. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable The state of my chin and jaw after three months of CryoGlow usage. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

When I switched to testing the CurrentBody Skin mask, I obviously had to put the CryoGlow on pause to isolate the CurrentBody results. The CryoGlow mask works so well on acne that I was terrified to give up that blue light setting — and my fear came true.

During my CurrentBody Skin testing period, it felt like I lost a lot of the skin-clearing progress I made. Take my CryoGlow "after" photo from the right above and use it as my CurrentBody "before" photo. Below is the current status of my chin after two months of strict CurrentBody mask usage. I have one whitehead that's desperate to pop, plus red spots from recently-healed zits.

The state of my chin and jaw after two months of CurrentBody usage. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

My skin was considerably more unpredictable when I was using the CurrentBody than it was with the Shark mask, with fresh pimples consistently setting up camp on my chin and cheeks a few times per week. Granted, this is still less erratic than my acne cycle before testing either of the masks.

Since the CurrentBody Skin doesn't have blue light, I knew it wasn't going to kill pore-clogging bacteria like the CryoGlow can. But red light can still be on the defense against acne — it's said to promote the regeneration of skin cells, aid with inflammation, and maybe even help to prevent scarring from current acne. I'm super prone to post-inflammatory erythema (red spots that stay behind where a pimple used to be) that lasts for months, and I don't even feel like the CurrentBody did much to fade or prevent that.

It's not that I think the CurrentBody Skin mask did absolutely nothing. My skin held up a consistent glow and smooth-enough texture to go out bare-faced during my time with the CurrentBody, though the fine lines on my forehead and around my eyes are definitely still present. I haven't gotten Botox in my forehead for months, and I was hoping the CurrentBody would make me want to hold off on making a touch-up appointment (it didn't). And given how stark other people's CurrentBody results seem to be on social media, I expected my skin to even out much more than it did.

Winner: Shark

Shark CryoGlow vs. CurrentBody: Portability and packability

I'm terrified to go a week without the CryoGlow's acne setting. That's a testament to how reliably it prevents deep pimples from popping up on my face, but also a reminder of how deeply unfortunate it is that the CryoGlow would be ridiculously inconvenient to travel with.

The CurrentBody mask is slightly more travel-friendly than the bulky Shark mask. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable The rigid design makes the Shark less ideal for travel. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

It's not that the Shark mask weighs that much, but it's a big, bulky hunk of plastic that doesn't bend at all. It'd just take up an awkward amount of space in a suitcase, especially if you're a heavy packer and really need to consolidate for a plane ride. The Currentbody's build isn't nearly as unforgiving. It's physically thinner and flexible enough to be packed in with clothes without hogging a ton of cargo space. At any rate, both do come with a drawstring travel or storage pouch.

The CryoGlow's short battery life would also make it annoying to take on a trip. It needs to be charged every few days if you use it daily, while the CurrentBody mask's battery life barely even needs to be charged once per week.

Winner: CurrentBody

SEE ALSO: The 2025 guide to recycling electronics, beauty empties, and clothing

Acura is basically Honda’s fancier cousin, sharing plenty of parts and platforms, but sometimes taking a very different approach. Take the Honda Accord and Acura TLX—both mid-sized sedans, yet worlds apart in personality.

Are you using Ubuntu and find it too minimal and bare bones? Heard about GNOME extensions making Ubuntu more feature-rich, but you don’t know which ones to install? Well, here are nine of my favorite GNOME extensions that I always install on Ubuntu.

Remember that render during CES 2025 that visually leaked the Switch 2? That was actually a showcase for the Genki Attack Vector, a dockable Switch 2 grip case with magnetic mounting for power banks. After testing out these unique traits, I found some panned out better than others.

The label "space rock" feels like an understatement for what NASA just observed.

A rock is something you throw at a window to get someone's attention. A rock holds down your picnic blanket to keep it from flapping in the wind. This rock, at 660 feet wide, spans two American football fields — and then some. 

The asteroid, called 1997 QK1, made its nearest approach in space on Aug. 20 at 1.9 million miles away from Earth. The ancient rubble hasn't come this close to the planet in more than 350 years. 

The flyby gave astronomers a chance to inspect its size, rotation, surface, and shape. Before taking these images with the Deep Space Network's Goldstone Solar System Radar, shown below, scientists knew hardly anything about it. Now it's less of a stranger.

"The asteroid is classified as potentially hazardous," according to NASA, "but it does not pose a hazard to Earth for the foreseeable future." 

SEE ALSO: The Webb telescope snapped a baby picture. But these babies are tyrants. The flyby of asteroid 1997 QK1 gave astronomers a chance to inspect its size, rotation, surface, and shape with radar images. Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech

Millions of asteroids orbit the sun, remnants of the solar system’s birth 4.6 billion years ago. Most are harmless, tucked away in the belt between Mars and Jupiter. But sometimes, gravity shoves a rock closer to Earth.

None are currently on track to hit us. Still, astronomers are tracking close to 40,000 large space rocks and think perhaps thousands more are out there. Telescopes spot hundreds of new ones every year.

“An asteroid impact is an extremely rare event,” said Lindley Johnson, NASA’s former planetary defense officer, in 2022. “Maybe once a century is there an asteroid that we would really worry about and want to deflect.”

Despite the slim chance of one headed for Earth, these rare smacks can be disastrous. NASA estimates that a 100 to 170-foot-wide asteroid could level a small city. In 2013, a 60-foot meteor exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia, damaging buildings and injuring 1,600 people.

To guard against that possibility, countries are building warning systems and deflection plans. NASA proved such efforts could work in 2022, when its $330 million DART mission slammed into a harmless asteroid and nudged it off course. The target practice was largely deemed a success, though follow-up studies have recently shown the results are far more complicated than anyone thought. 

The clear radar images of 1997 QK1 give scientists valuable insight into how such asteroids behave — useful information for developing planetary defense strategies, regardless of whether the giant rock is dangerous. 

Through a series of 28 pictures, astronomers learned the asteroid makes a full spin every five hours and is a "contact binary" with a long peanut shape, attributed to its having two rounded lobes. One of those bulbous ends is twice the size of the other, and both ends have valleys "tens of meters deep." 

Some 15 percent of near-Earth asteroids of a similar scale or larger have this shape. That's because many of these objects aren't single solid rocks but loose piles of rubble that drift together. Over time, those piles can connect. 

The asteroid will get closer to Earth in 2039, according to NASA. At that time, it'll come within 1.5 million miles — about six times farther than the moon.

Exactly three years ago today, Elon Musk tweeted that 90 percent of his tweet replies on what was then called Twitter were bot accounts. His insistence that Twitter was essentially one large bot farm was one of his main sticking points during his Twitter acquisition. Bots, particularly porn bots, have continued to be a problem on Musk's X, so much so that even OpenAI head honcho Sam Altman took notice.

“I never really took the dead internet theory that seriously but it seems like there are really a lot of LLM-run twitter(sic) accounts now,” Altman tweeted this week.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

If Altman's comments instantly called to mind the "We're all trying to find the guy who did this" meme, you're definitely not alone.

As the CEO of the world’s most popular AI chatbot, Altman received a decent amount of roasting for his post. “That’s a really good observation — here’s why you’ve nailed it…” one user posted, mimicking ChatGPT's signature tone.

But Altman's post raised another question for a lot of users — what is dead internet theory anyway?

The origin of the dead internet theory

For the uninitiated, the dead internet theory states that an increasing amount of the content on the Internet is generated by machines, not people. That includes everything from the news you read to posts on Reddit and whole social media accounts on places like Facebook, Instagram, and X. The theory further mentions that algorithms curate this content so that you see it more often, lowering your ability to engage with real humans online. 

The exact origin of the theory is difficult to pinpoint, but some people point to this forum post on the Agora Road’s Macintosh Cafe by user IlluminatiPirate, who built off of a post by another user. In the post, IlluminatiPirate posits that the bots started running the show around 2016 when they noticed a bunch of odd conversations on the notorious online forum 4chan. 

The dead Internet started as a conspiracy theory, but it started picking up traction when publications like The Atlantic picked it up in 2021. Soon, it was being actively discussed on places like Reddit. Elon Musk fueled the fire even more during his 2022 bid to purchase Twitter when he claimed the site was hiding how many bots were truly on the platform.

Undoubtedly, bots have been a massive problem on the internet for many years. Bots in various forms have been used for black-hat SEO, misinformation campaigns from intelligence organizations, and good old-fashioned cybercrime.

Where does AI come into all of this?

In addition to AI-directed bots, the dead internet theory has evolved to include the existence of AI slop — the term for lowest-common-denominator AI content, often produced en masse by content farmers.

Think of the crappy AI image memes that go viral on Facebook, or the cheap AI videos that go viral on Reels, TikTok, YouTube, and X. AI slop comes in many forms — Studio Ghibli memes, animal videos, AI celebrity baby videos — and it's becoming ubiquitous on social media. The end result is an internet filled with low-quality and often manipulative AI content, crowded with fake comments and likes from AI porn bots, and surrounded by AI video ads. In this case, zombie internet might be a better term.

Think also of the claims that students are using ChatGPT to complete homework assignments, which were created by teachers using ChatGPT, and which will be graded using ChatGPT — all with virtually no human involvement.

The dead internet theory may seem a bit far-fetched, but bots have been a persistent enough problem on social media that honest-to-goodness studies have been done about the phenomenon, and tutorials have been written to help people identify when they’re arguing with a real person or a random AI bot from a Russian troll farm.

To date, no one is entirely sure how many bot accounts exist on social media since every platform, including Musk’s X, keeps those numbers close to the vest. However, there has been a noticeable uptick in bot activity just about everywhere, so maybe the theory is starting to become real after all. 

Disclosure: Ziff Davis, Mashable’s parent company, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.

Astronomers call a special kind of supernova a "cosmic yardstick" for good reason: The so-called Type Ia supernova gives off a predictable amount of light, making it a handy tool for measuring distances in space. 

These particular supernovas are useful but still puzzling, with scientists still unsure of what triggers their blasts. NASA estimates they happen only twice per millennium in the Milky Way.

A leading idea has been that in an orbiting pair of white dwarfs — the remains of dead sun-size stars — one bursts apart almost immediately, while the other survives, perhaps hurtling away at breakneck speed because it's no longer tethered by gravity to its companion. 

But that can't explain all Type Ia supernovas, according to researchers led by Technion — Israel Institute of Technology. By studying what could cause a dead-star remnant to suddenly go rogue — flying so fast it could escape the galaxy — the international team discovered a new scenario for a white dwarf explosion.

Based on how often Type Ia supernovas occur, scientists can infer how many runaway white dwarfs they should see overall, said Hagai Perets, who co-led new research published in Nature Astronomy. 

"When you do that, it turns out there are not enough," Perets told Mashable. "If any kind of Type Ia supernova explodes and produces this kind of hyper-velocity white dwarf, then you should have about 100 times more of those than what we actually see."

SEE ALSO: The Webb telescope snapped a baby picture. But these babies are tyrants. The European Space Agency's Gaia telescope discovered that high-velocity white dwarfs exist in 2018. Credit: ESA / ATG medialab / Gaia / DPAC / A. Moitinho illustration

A key mystery about Type Ia supernovas is that, in the dominant theory known as D6, a white dwarf would need a companion star in order to explode. This so-called D6 scenario is shorthand for "dynamically driven double-degenerate double-detonation." But so far, no one has found such a companion. 

When the European Space Agency's Gaia telescope discovered the existence of high-velocity white dwarfs in 2018, it became a possible answer for where those elusive companions went, said Samuel Boos, a UC Santa Barbara researcher not involved in the Technion study. It also supported the prediction of extreme speeds for these white dwarfs — the fastest stars in the galaxy.

"It seemingly provided the smoking gun," he told Mashable in an email.

But while Gaia revealed that runaways are indeed real, scientists debated how they were created. That's where the new Technion study comes in.

In this new study, researchers used a 3D supercomputer simulation to explore what happens when two "hybrid" white dwarfs crash into each other. These rare white dwarfs are lighter than usual, with a carbon-oxygen core wrapped in a much thicker helium layer. 

The video above shows a computer simulation for how two hybrid white dwarfs collide, trigger a supernova, and create a high-velocity white dwarf.

The team found that as the lighter of the two spirals into the heavier one, it gets "partly eaten," spilling helium onto its companion. That triggers a two-step explosion: first the outer helium, then the inner carbon. The blast completely destroys the heavier white dwarf but launches the lighter one out at around 4.5 million mph — fast enough to skip right out of the Milky Way. 

"The fact that they have such a large velocity means that they should have been created by something that is very violent, and that's why people [have thought] they were formed by some kind of supernova explosion," Hila Glanz, the other lead author of the study, told Mashable.  "So first of all, how do they survive, and why don't we see the remnant of the explosion itself?"

The team argues their hybrid collision model is a better fit for real runaway white dwarfs. The explosion is far fainter than a classic Type Ia supernova, and the ejected material spreads out thinly in space. That could explain why astronomers haven't spotted the bright, dense debris they'd normally expect after a supernova. 

Here, both stars are smaller, with one partly destroyed before the other blows up. Because they're closer together, the survivor gets kicked out faster and with more force.

The surviving white dwarf's reduced size — after being partially torn apart — also could explain why it appears hotter and puffier, consistent with three real runaway examples. The standard theory, by contrast, can't account for those properties.

"Sort of sold their skin in order to save their life," Perets said.

Astronomers recently got the first photographic evidence of a double-detonation supernova, which occurred in the Large Magellanic Cloud. Credit: ESO / Priyam Das et al. / Hubble / K. Noll et al.

Though this new idea shows how dead stars could become fugitives, it also points to a previously unknown way to create a dimmer white dwarf explosion. Understanding this diversity of Type Ia supernovas and their behavior is crucial, the researchers say, because these events are the universe's main source of iron. 

One potential takeaway is that some missing companions in classic Type Ia supernovas may arise if both white dwarfs explode, said Boos, whose work primarily focuses on the D6 scenario. He recently published a paper in The Astrophysical Journal showing that a "quadruple detonation" — where one double detonates after the other — can produce the expected brightness and chemical fingerprints just as well as a single explosion.

"It’s very possible there are few or no truly-D6 runaways (as they exploded along with the primary)," Boos said in an email, "and that all of these candidates indeed come from these hybrid mergers."

As researchers ponder the implications, they can also imagine what's next for those super-fast runaway white dwarfs. After fleeing the Milky Way, they could cross into other galaxies, but only to pass through. They're likely too fast to ever be captured again. 

"They go with a boom, go all the way, become the fastest ones," Perets said, "but then they just continue in loneliness."

Want to watch college football this season? Here are your best options: BEST FOR ESPN ESPN Unlimited $29.99 per month for 1 year (save $15) Shop Now Best for Fox and Big Ten Fox One 7-day free trial, then $199.99 per year (save $39.89) Shop Now BEST FOR SINGLE GAME FuboTV 7-day free trial, then $54.99/month for 1 month (save $30) Get Deal Best for channels Hulu + Live TV 3-day free trial, then $76.99/month Shop Now Best for affordability Sling Season Pass $329 for 5 months (save $50.95) Shop Now BEST for INTRODUCTORY OFFER YouTube TV 5-day free trial, then $49.99/month for 3 months (save $99) Shop Now

Week 2 of the new college football season has some really interesting matchups, but Oklahoma vs. Michigan might be the best of the bunch. It's the only matchup between ranked teams this weekend, and all eyes will be on freshman Bryce Underwood.

SEE ALSO: How to watch the NFL online for free

If you want to watch Oklahoma vs. Michigan for free from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.

When is Oklahoma vs. Michigan?

Oklahoma vs. Michigan takes place at 7:30 p.m. ET on Sept. 6. This game takes place at the Gaylord Family Oklahoma Memorial Stadium.

How to watch Oklahoma vs. Michigan for free

Oklahoma vs. Michigan is broadcast on ABC. Fans can live stream this game on a wide range of recommended services, some of which include free trials so you can follow the action without actually spending anything.

ESPN Unlimited (no free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: ESPN ESPN Unlimited $29.99 per month for 1 year Shop Now

Channels: ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNEWS, ESPN Deportes, SEC Network, ACC Network, ESPN on ABC, ESPN+, ESPN3, SECN+, and ACCNX

ESPN Unlimited provides access to everything that ESPN has to offer. For college football, you get live access to games on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN+, SEC Network, SECN+, ACC Network, and ABC. The Unlimited plan will set you back $29.99 per month, but for the first year, new subscribers can secure a bundle with Disney+ and Hulu for the same price.

Fox One (free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: Fox One Fox One 7-day free trial, then $199.99 per year Shop Now

Channels: Fox, FS1, FS2, Big Ten Network

Fox One provides access to live broadcasts on Fox, Fox Sports, FS1, FS2, and Big Ten Network. It costs $19.99 per month, but you can save $40 by opting for the annual plan at $199.99. You can also start with a seven-day free trial, so you've got the chance to watch select games without spending anything.

FuboTV (free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: FuboTV FuboTV 7-day free trial, then $54.99/month for 1 month Shop Now

Channels: ABC, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, CBS, CBS Sports Network, ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPNews, Fox, FS1, FS2, Marquee Sports Network, Monumental Sports, NBC, NBCSN, Pac-12 Network, SEC Network, and The CW

FuboTV offers you more than 250 channels of live TV and provides the opportunity to watch on 10 screens at once, if that's your thing. You can try FuboTV with a seven-day free trial period. 

Fubo takes sports seriously, and that's something we appreciate. With the Pro subscription, you get access to most college football broadcasts. But hardcore fans may want to consider upgrading to the Elite plan, which unlocks access to ESPNU, SEC Network, Pac-12 Network, and ACC Network. Either way, we suggest you test the waters for seven days before you make any sort of commitment.

Hulu + Live TV (free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: Hulu Hulu + Live TV 3-day free trial, then $76.99/month Shop Now

Channels: ABC, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, CBS, ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPNews, ESPN U, Fox, FS1, FS2, NBC, and The CW

Hulu + Live TV is not exactly cheap, but it does offer good bang for your buck. You need to cough up $76.99 per month (after a three-day trial), but you get access to over 95 live TV channels, plus Hulu, Disney+, and ESPN+ (all with ads). The included access to ESPN+ provides bonus access to even more college football games on top of live TV networks like ABC, FOX, ESPN, The CW, ACC Network, and more. Now that's value.

Sling (no free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: Sling Sling Season Pass $329 for 5 months Shop Now

Channels: ABC, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN 3, ESPNews, ESPN U, Fox, FS1, FS2, NBC, Pac-12 Network, SEC Network

Sling is a comprehensive sporting service that offers a whole host of benefits, but you do need to be careful when selecting a plan. The Orange and Blue packages give you access to FOX, NBC, ABC, ESPN, and more in local markets, but for access to ACC Network, SEC Network, Big Ten Network, and more, you'll need the Sports Extra package. We recommend checking your local market to ensure you get access to the channels you actually need.

YouTube TV (free trial) Opens in a new window Credit: YouTube TV YouTube TV 7-day free trial, then $49.99/month for your first 3 months Shop Now

Channels: ABC, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, CBS, CBS Sports Network, ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPNews, Fox, FS1, FS2, NBC, NBCSN, SEC Network, and The CW

YouTube TV provides access to over 100 live channels. Newsflash: that's a lot. This huge list includes most of the channels you actually need to watch live college football, including NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, and ESPN, plus networks like FS1 and SEC Network. YouTube TV also offers that all-important free trial so you can watch select games without spending anything.

How to watch Oklahoma vs. Michigan from anywhere in the world

If you're abroad for this fixture, you might need to use a VPN to unblock your favorite streaming service. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in the U.S., meaning you can unblock live streams of college football from anywhere in the world.

Live stream Oklahoma vs. Michigan from anywhere in the world by following these simple steps:

1. Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)

2. Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)

3. Open up the app and connect to a server in the U.S.

4. Sign in to your favorite streaming service

5. Watch Oklahoma vs. Michigan from anywhere in the world

ExpressVPN is the best choice for bypassing geo-restrictions to stream live sport, for a number of reasons:

• Servers in 105 countries including the U.S.

• Easy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and more

• Strict no-logging policy so your data is secure

• Fast connection speeds free from throttling

• Up to eight simultaneous connections

• 30-day money-back guarantee

A one-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for $99.95 and includes an extra three months for free — 49% off for a limited time. This plan includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee. Alternatively, you can get a one-month plan for just $12.95 (with money-back guarantee).

Opens in a new window Credit: ExpressVPN ExpressVPN (1-Month Plan) $12.95 at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee) Get Deal

We are just days away from Apple's big event where the company will officially announce its latest mobile device, iPhone 17.

Little is officially known about what the iPhone 17 will bring to Apple's iOS lineup. However, one thing is very likely based on the rumors: We will see some significant new camera features and upgrades this time around.

Here's what Mashable is hearing.

The camera bump will become a camera island

The most persistent camera-related rumor for the iPhone 17, and one that can be seen in various alleged leaked images, is how Apple's three camera lenses look on the back of the device.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

For years, Apple has designed the iPhone with what has been referred to as the "camera bump." The camera bump is a square protrusion on the back of the iPhone that houses the iPhone's camera lenses.

It appears that the iPhone 17 is reimagining the camera bump by extending it full-width across the back of the iPhone. This is already being referred to as the "camera island" by Apple fans.

Upgraded camera lenses

This one shouldn't come as too much of a surprise.

Apple has strived to upgrade at least one of its cameras lenses in each recent iteration of the iPhone. The iPhone 14 Pro's main camera was upgraded to a 48MP sensor when it was released, and the iPhone 16 Pro's ultra wide camera lens was upgraded to 48MP last year.

This year, it appears that the remaining third lens, the telephoto camera lens, will be receiving the 48MP upgrade on the iPhone 17 Pro.

Along with that 48MP bump, the telephoto lens will be able to provide users with an upgraded zoom option as well — from a 5x optical zoom in the iPhone 16 Pro to a 8x optical zoom in the iPhone 17 Pro.

The rear camera lenses aren't the only ones rumored to be receiving an upgrade, either. 

For years the front-facing TrueDepth camera has been stuck at 12MP. With the iPhone 17, that "selfie" camera is expected to get an upgrade to 24MP. And this upgrade is expected to roll out to the entire iPhone 17 family of devices.

Multi-camera video recording

Since the iPhone has come out, there have been third-party apps and other workarounds that have provided unofficial multi-cam video recording through the iPhone. 

Some apps allow users to utilize multiple devices. Other apps allow users to record through multiple camera lenses on the same iPhone. And there are even apps that provide picture-in-picture multi-cam recording that provides a front and back camera view within the same video.

It's unclear exactly what Apple has in store with its own version of multi-cam video recording, but it does appear that Apple is preparing to roll out a new feature within its Camera app that officially brings multi-cam recording to the iPhone 17.

A new Pro Camera app

Speaking of Apple's official Camera app for iOS, there's word that the company will be introducing a new Pro Camera app as well. 

While the name may suggest as much, it's unclear if only Pro models of the iPhone will be able to utilize the features of this rumored app. There's also a possibility that the Pro Camera can be rolled out within an updated version of the Final Cut Camera app.

If Apple does drop a Pro Camera app or feature along with the iPhone 17, it's likely that it will provide a professional level of control over photos and video that third-party apps like Halide, Kino, and Filmic Pro provide users.

iPhone 17 Air's singular rear camera

Much of the buzz surrounding the upcoming Apple event is the debut of Apple's new ultra-thin model of iPhone, currently being dubbed the iPhone 17 Air.

The rumors are that the iPhone 17 Air will only be 5.5mm thick at its thinnest point, with the camera bump making the device around 1.8mm thicker.

However, in order to make the iPhone 17 Air ultra-thin, it appears this slim model of iPhone will only come with a single rear-facing camera. It's a trade-off that Apple fans will have to consider.

Another new physical camera button

Full disclosure: Of all the rumored camera-oriented features potentially coming to the iPhone 17 line, this one appears the most iffy.

The iPhone 17 may see the addition of yet another physical button to go along with the Camera Control button that was introduced with the iPhone 16 models. This new rumor from a tipster claims that an additional Camera Control button is being added to the "top edge" of iPhone 17 devices in order to provide users with quicker access to the camera.

Which rumors are true? We only have a few more days to wait until we find out.

Be sure to tune into Mashable for our live coverage of the Apple event on Tuesday, Sept. 9.

"AI is going to reshape every industry and every job," Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, has said. A majority of working Americans are worried about Hoffman's prediction, according to a recent Pew Research study, with 33 percent using the term "overwhelmed" to describe their feelings on AI and its effect on their future employment prospects.

Jasmine Escalera, PhD, is a career coach who advises recruitment companies like Zety and Bold. Even though Escalera definitely feels the winds of change blowing like a tropical storm, she tells college students and job seekers to plan, not panic.

Escalera acknowledges that many career fields are already being affected by AI, leading to layoffs and the sense that once reliable work is now obsolete. Escalera recently worked with Zety on a list of 14 AI-proof careers that pay over $50K and require one skill that a chatbot cannot offer: Empathy. We spoke with Escalera about why empathy-centered jobs will be so important in the AI economy, the value of college degrees in the 21st century, and how lifesaving gig jobs — like driving an Uber or delivering DoorDash — are at risk.

Microsoft recently released a list of positions with the lowest AI applicability scores, or those unlikely to be affected by AI. Many of those positions don’t require college degrees — should that concern college students?

We just conducted a survey for Zety, the brand that I work for, and we’re seeing a major trend with Gen Z. I happen to be infatuated with Gen Z because they are really changing the scope of career trends. They themselves [are questioning things] and seeing corporate America seems to be over the place; we’re dismantling DEI, we’re going back to the office, work/life balance isn’t what it used to be or what we were hoping it would be; flexibility isn’t there. And AI is transforming the work world, and we’re not sure how it’s really going to change the world. But we do know there are specific positions, those that are highly automated, and have repetitive tasks — which are a lot of starter jobs — and that maybe there’s not going to be opportunities [for them].

We’re also dealing with a very competitive job market with tons of layoffs. That's really leading to thinking about different types of opportunities, including trade roles that [workers] can get into that seem to be more AI-resistant and allow for more flexibility and opportunity than the typical career path. I think there’s going to be a major shift and major change in the corporate white collar world, and we're going to see more of a transition into trade jobs where AI simply can’t take over the role, like a plumber.

Reddit On Zety's list of AI-proof jobs, there are medical positions listed, but physician assistants and nurses, not necessarily doctors. Could doctors be replaced or reduced by AI?

When it comes to advisement and diagnoses, AI is already starting to be integrated into the medical field; supporting doctors and even nurses and other practitioners to think through how to better diagnose and even [which] medications to prescribe to patients. I think [AI’s] role there will evolve and I think that’s going to be helpful to that specific field. There’s so much speciality that comes with that medical field at that level, at the doctor level — I can’t imagine [those jobs are] going to be completely taken away, especially because there’s so much human-to-human interaction.

When you go to a doctor’s appointment, who do you typically see first, the nurse or the technician, right? How long do you actually see the doctor? Ten minutes? We were really looking at positions with high degrees of empathy, compassion, and people-to-people engagement, and nurses and technicians actually have more than a typical doctor.

Tell us more about jobs involving empathy and why they may be more AI-resistant.

Empathy is the ability to be compassionate and sympathetic; that relatability factor. If you use ChatGPT, it can be your biggest hype person. But it isn’t necessarily relating to you. It doesn’t have that human-to-human interaction when it needs to give you honest advice or the compassion that a human can give you. So empathy, when it comes to positions and jobs, is going to be what companies, organizations, and roles are going to be gravitating to because AI simply can’t duplicate that. The other thing that companies and even employees should be thinking of is building on that empathy and any other skills that work alongside AI that will not be taken over by AI. Empathy is one of them, critical thinking, high-level strategic thinking [is another]. 

Also, when we talk about empathy, we also need to talk about the relationship-building component of jobs. We’re seeing a lot of customer service agents being taken over by chatbots, but sales positions that are really about relationship-building, those still exist because they’re not answering automated questions, they’re really building relationships with customers. So if you’re someone who’s a customer representative and you’re seeing components of your job disappearing, you really want to shift and think, How can I build a career based more on relationship-building with the skillset that I have? So pivots are going to have to be made.

Career expert Jasmine Escalera thinks compassion can help keep you employed in the AI era. Credit: Via Zety Marriage and family counselors are on Zety's list of AI-proof positions. Is that because they have to work with more than one person?

I use ChatGPT for lots of things, including inspiration and good advice. But if you’re talking about relationships — marriage, family, group counseling — those are things that need to be done with a person holding space for that particular group. It’s not something that can be done through AI. So, again, pivots, right? If you’re a one-on-one coach, you might want to start thinking about how can I really pivot so I’m holding space for groups, how can I pivot into a different area where AI is going to be less utilized in that space and continue to still have a position and a role.

SEE ALSO: 4 reasons not to turn ChatGPT into your therapist Are there any career positions you really worry about in the immediate?

I walk down the street and half the delivery people aren’t people; they’re carts that drive around Miami. So I’m really worried about individuals who have positions that are highly automated and repetitive, and AI can easily slip in and do. Cashiers. We’re seeing this a lot in our grocery stores. Customer Service. I don’t know the last time I talked to a human on the phone when I called customer service. I mentioned the food delivery robots; even frontline restaurant workers, these positions might also disappear, as well.

For everyone, every person, AI is going to affect your job [in] some way. If it hasn’t, down the line, it will. It’s important to think about how your industry and position is going to change. If you’re not sure, that’s ok. But you need to start getting inquisitive. Asking questions of industry leaders, of your boss, of your manager, of what they predict will happen and what you can start to do to make yourself valuable and work alongside the technology is the most important thing. 

Gig jobs that sustain many people — from driving Ubers to delivering DoorDash — seem to be disappearing or on the chopping block. 

I like to chat with Uber drivers because when I was out of a job I drove UberEats for a while, and that was my source of income as I looked for a new opportunity. Many [rideshare drivers] have [other] jobs and this is a secondary source of income. We also did a survey [at Zety] that was really fascinating, and showed that over 70 percent of Americans have to have a second source of income. This is a necessity, because they can’t even pay for basic life necessities with their primary job. 

So, when we think about what you brought up, are we creating an economy now where individuals are really going to be struggling? We know the vast majority of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck; what happens when you take away these opportunities?

For students and job seekers, is there organized guidance on AI coming from guidance counselors and hiring coaches?

I think the education system in the U.S. has not always helped students in the real world. That’s my own personal opinion. As far as now, if they’re helping with this specific skillset [of adapting to AI], and how to build this skillset or find alternatives, I would have to guess this isn’t at the forefront of their curriculum, which is a shame. Now, what I do think is helpful and I’m not saying this is the best option, but Gen Z-ers are getting their information from social media, from TikTok, from Instagram. We know that and a lot of people are talking about these [work] shifts. There are a lot of coaches, a lot of career coaches, a lot of great content creators.

SEE ALSO: Looking for career advice? TikTok is here to help.

For anyone who is unsure and is a high schooler or college student thinking about coming into the work world soon, make sure you’re following them. Follow people who are giving the right information and take that information to your counselors, to your teachers, to the people you trust. So you might have to be a little more proactive, but think about this: You don’t want to go to college, rack up the debt, and be left with, Now what?

Editor's note: Some of these quotes have been lightly edited for clarity and grammar.

Disclosure: Ziff Davis, Mashable’s parent company, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.

TL;DR: Get lifetime access to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Pro, and more with 1min.AI, now only $79.97.

Opens in a new window Credit: 1minAI 1min.AI Advanced Business Plan: Lifetime Subscription $79.97
$540 Save $460.03 Get Deal

If you’re using AI tools regularly, the subscription costs can start to feel like a second rent payment. 1min.AI offers a much simpler option by bringing together some of the most powerful AI models on the market into a single, easy-to-use platform. And instead of charging you every month, it’s only $79.97 (reg. $540) for a lifetime subscription.

Lifetime access to the AI you use every day

Instead of paying individually for different AI tools, 1min.AI puts them all under one roof. That includes

• OpenAI models like GPT-4o, GPT-4 Turbo, and GPT-3.5

• Claude models from Anthropic

• Gemini Pro from Google

• Llama 2 and 3 from Meta

• Mistral and Cohere’s Command model

You can use these for writing, editing, summarizing, image generation, voice-to-text, light video editing, grammar checks, and more. Everything runs in your browser, so there’s nothing to install, and you can get started right away.

Like many AI platforms, 1min.AI runs on a credit system, but it’s more generous than most. You get 4 million credits each month, plus daily login bonuses that add up to 450,000 extra credits every month. If you don’t use your credits, they roll over.

SEE ALSO: Get lifetime access to this incredible AI image generator for under $50

Whether you’re working on content creation, social media, research, or just want smarter tools in your workflow, 1min.AI gives you a wide range of features without locking you into separate subscriptions.

Until Sept. 7 at 11:59 p.m. PT, you can get a 1min.AI lifetime subscription on sale for $79.97.

StackSocial prices subject to change.

The annual smartphone arms race has, over the years, evolved into an elaborate game of catch-up between companies like Apple and Google. The Pixel will do something first, then the iPhone will do it, and then the roles might be reversed the following year. So it goes for eternity.

With the big iPhone 17 event looming next week, it's time to take stock of what the recently released Pixel 10 did well and figure out which parts of it would make sense on Apple's newest handset. Not every new Pixel 10 feature is good, and not all of the good ones are things that make sense on an iPhone, but these three would undoubtedly improve the user experience for Apple fanatics.

3 features iPhone 17 should borrow from Pixel 10

With Apple's newest phone just a couple of weeks away (presumably), let's dig in to what it should borrow from Google's latest model.

Smooth displays for all The Pixel 10's display has one major advantage over recent base-level iPhones. Credit: Joe Maldonado / Mashable

For a few years now, Apple has been way behind the curve on refresh rates in the base models of every new iPhone.

To be more specific, the iPhone 16 from a year ago still only has a 60Hz display, while even Google's budget phone, the Pixel 9a, has a 120Hz panel. This is, admittedly, not a huge deal; 60Hz is perfectly fine for everyday activities, and there's a decent chance that most people would barely notice the difference without it being pointed out to them. However, there is a difference, and it's meaningful to folks who have the eyes for it.

120Hz displays are just smoother and better to look at, even when doing simple things like doomscrolling on social media. It's just weird that Apple has locked this feature behind the Pro-label iPhones for the last few years. The good news is that all the rumors point to Apple remedying this problem with the iPhone 17. We'll all find out together next week.

Better zoom capabilities 5x optical zoom is very nice to have. Credit: Alex Perry / Mashable

Sticking to the base-level iPhones and Pixels for a moment, Google is eating Apple's lunch when it comes to camera zoom abilities.

With the Pixel 10, Google made the strong decision to add a telephoto lens to the rear camera module, giving it a total of three lenses back there. That gives it some parity with Pro-level smartphones. Its specs are not as strong as what you might find on the back of a Pixel 10 Pro, but 5x optical zoom is still leagues better than the 2x optical zoom on an iPhone 16.

I don't expect Apple to add a third lens to the back of the base-level iPhone 17, as no rumors or leaks have indicated that this is the case. But a man can dream, can't he?

SEE ALSO: Everything we know about the iPhone 17 Air so far Something to compete with Gemini Live

I am not a proponent of using AI for much of anything, but there's no doubt that Google is beating Apple in that department by a lot right now.

Perhaps the best example is Gemini Live, Google's AI-powered voice assistant that you can have somewhat naturalistic conversations with. It just recently got the ability to "see" and talk about things using a phone camera, while Siri is still...the same Siri it's always been. It's not anywhere close to as powerful as Gemini Live at this point, and that really stands out in a world where AI features are kind of the main selling point for any new smartphone, aside from camera improvements.

The good news is that we know Apple is working on a substantial AI upgrade for Siri. The bad news is that it probably won't be ready for the iPhone 17's launch later this month. All reports indicate we'll get it next spring, so that's how long we might have to wait before Apple can reasonably compete with Gemini Live.

HBO MAX BUNDLES: HBO Max is offering a few different bundle deals so you can stream from its library without making a massive dent in your wallet.

The best HBO Max deals and bundles in September 2025: Best Disney+ Bundle Deal Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max Bundle $16.99/month with ads, $29.99/month ad-free Get Deal Best Hulu Bundle Deal Hulu and HBO Max Bundle Add HBO Max to your Hulu base plan from $9.99/month Get Deal Best Student Deal HBO Max Student Save 50% on HBO Max Basic With Ads Get Deal

It's happened: Max has rebranded back to its old name of HBO Max. Forget the name change, though, because the service still has plenty of exciting films and shows to watch. From The Last of Us to Sinners to the second season of Peacemaker and so much more, HBO Max is worth the investment for those looking to dive into the most talked about pieces of entertainment.

If you've been hoping to catch Sinners — you can check out our Sinners review to see our thoughts, where we called it "easily one of the best movies of the year" — there's no better time than now to start looking at plans and bundles.

The good news is that HBO Max has a couple of different bundles available at the moment that are worth checking out, including a big bundle with Disney+ and Hulu. With streaming prices on the rise, a bundle like this can be a great way to save some cash while getting access to your favorite services.

SEE ALSO: When is the new 'Superman' streaming?: How to watch James Gunn's DCU relaunch at home

Alongside that deal and a couple more, we've also broken down HBO Max's standard plans in case you're just interested in its service on its own.

Best Disney+ bundle deal Opens in a new window Credit: HBO Max Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max Bundle $16.99/month with ads, $29.99/month ad-free Get Deal Why we like it

The HBO Max, Disney+, and Hulu bundle is a top-tier choice for those looking to have access to some of the biggest streaming services around. Starting at $16.99 per month, this bundle grants you access to Hulu, Disney+, and HBO Max's streaming services for a much lower price than what you'd pay for them on their own. If you've already got Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions, this bundle is worth every cent. If you're interested, there are two plan options to choose from:

• Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max Bundle (with ads) — $16.99 per month (save 43%)

• Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max Bundle (no ads) — $29.99 per month (save 42%)

Best Hulu bundle deal Opens in a new window Credit: Hulu Hulu and HBO Max Bundle Add HBO Max to your Hulu base plan from $9.99/month Get Deal Why we like it

If you're not interested in the Disney+, Hulu, and HBO Max mega bundle, you can just get Hulu and HBO Max together if you already have a Hulu base plan, which starts at $9.99 per month. HBO Max Basic with Ads can be added onto your plan for $9.99 per month, or you can splash out on the HBO Max Standard plan for $16.99 per month.

• Hulu with HBO Max add-on — from $9.99 per month

Best student deal Opens in a new window Credit: HBO Max HBO Max Student Discount Students save 50% on HBO Max Basic With Ads Get Deal Why we like it

It's always nice when streaming services have a deal for students, and HBO Max's offer is definitely worth taking advantage of. Students who can verify their status with UNiDAYS are eligible to get the HBO Max Basic With Ads plan for just $4.99 per month. That's a 50% discount off its usual price of $9.99 per month. After verifying your status, you'll receive a unique code that can be used to redeem the discounted plan on HBO Max.

• HBO Max Student Discount — $4.99 per month (save 50%)

HBO Max's monthly plans

HBO Max offers a few different subscription plans. If you don't mind having to sit through ads, HBO Max's Basic With Ads plan starts at $9.99 per month or the annual plan runs for $99.99 per year, which ultimately saves you $19. If you can't stand ads and don't mind throwing down a bit more cash, the Standard plan will cost you $16.99 per month or $169.99 per year, which saves you $33. If you really want to go big on an HBO Max plan, you can spring for the fancy Premium plan, which costs $20.99 per month or $209.99 per year.

Below we've broken down what comes with each of these plans, per HBO Max's website, so you can know a bit more before you buy.

Basic With Ads — $9.99 per month, $99.99 per year

• Stream on two devices at once

• Full HD 1080p resolution

Standard (Ad-free) — $16.99 per month, $169.99 per year

• Stream on two devices at once

• Full HD 1080p resolution

• 30 downloads to watch on the go

Premium (Ad-free) — $20.99 per month, $209.99 per year

• Stream on four devices at once

• 4K Ultra HD video quality (as available)

• Dolby Atmos immersive audio (as available)

• 100 downloads to watch on the go

If you're wondering where to start once you've set yourself up with a HBO Max subscription, we've got an excellent selection of recommendations to point you in the right direction. Looking for a great TV show to kickstart your next binge-watching session? Have a look through our roundup of the 20 best TV shows streaming on HBO Max. Or if you prefer movies, we narrowed down the 25 best movies on HBO Max to make your next movie night a spectacular one.

With multiple tiers and several price hikes over the past few years, it can be difficult to navigate the labyrinth that is Netflix pricing.

Luckily, you've come to the right place. Below, you'll find a comprehensive breakdown of how much Netflix costs per month, what each tier will get you, and how these prices stack up against other streaming services. So if you're looking to switch subscription tiers, start a new subscription, or just figure out if you're getting enough bang for your buck, read on.

SEE ALSO: How to cancel your Netflix account How much does Netflix's standard plan with ads cost per month?

The cheapest of Netflix's subscriber tiers is the standard plan with ads. For $7.99 per month, you'll get access to all of Netflix's mobile games and most of its movies and TV shows. Some are not available at this level; a lock icon will pop up on unavailable titles.

This tier also allows you to watch Netflix on two supported devices at a time, as well as download titles on two supported devices at a time. Video quality-wise, you can watch in full HD 1080p.

SEE ALSO: The best Netflix TV shows of 2025 (so far) How much does Netflix's standard plan cost per month?

Netflix's standard plan costs $17.99 per month. With that, you lose the ads and get access to unlimited movies, TV shows, and mobile games. Just like with the ad-supported tier, you can watch and download titles on two supported devices at a time. The video quality level doesn't change either, staying at 1080p.

With this tier, you also get the option to add an extra member who doesn't live with you to the account. That costs $6.99 per month with ads, or $8.99 per month without ads. (So yes, you may still be paying for ads as part of the ad-free tier.)

SEE ALSO: The 30 best comedies streaming on Netflix right now How much does Netflix's premium plan cost per month?

Netflix's most expensive plan costs $24.99 per month. With this plan, you get unlimited access to movies, TV shows, and mobile games, all with no ads in sight. You can watch Netflix on four supported devices at a time, and download titles on six supported devices at a time. The video quality gets upped here as well, as viewers can watch film and TV in 4K (Ultra HD) and HDR). Netflix spatial audio is also available at this tier.

This tier also allows you to add up to two extra members who don't live with you. The pricing on that remains the same from the standard tier: $6.99 each per month with ads, or $8.99 each per month without ads.

SEE ALSO: The best action movies on Netflix right now How do Netflix's plan costs stack up against other streaming services?

Now you know how much Netflix's plans cost per month. But how do they measure up against the horde of other streaming services out there? Let's break it down.

When it comes to ad-supported tiers, Netflix is on the cheaper side, matching up with streaming competitors Peacock and Paramount+ (both $7.99 per month). A Prime Video subscription by itself without an Amazon Prime membership costs $8.99 per month, while Hulu, Disney+, and HBO Max's ad-supported tiers all cost $9.99 per month.

Netflix's standard tier, on the other hand, is on the more expensive side. At $17.99 per month, it's costlier than Peacock's premium tier ($10.99), Paramount+'s premium tier ($12.99), Disney+'s premium tier ($15.99), and HBO Max's standard tier ($16.99). Prime Video doesn't have "tiers," but you can pay an additional $2.99 to your monthly subscription to get rid of ads, which still makes it cheaper than Netflix's ad-less tier. The only service with a more expensive ad-free tier is Hulu, at $18.99 per month.

Not every streaming service has a third, ultra-premium tier. (Many just call their "standard" tier "premium.") However, of those that do, Netflix remains the most expensive. At $24.99 per month, it surpasses Peacock's premium plus tier ($16.99) and HBO Max's premium tier ($20.99).

Imagine you're in desperate need of money. Your mortgage is overdue, and foreclosure is closing in. You can't get a job, and calling friends and family for a loan is getting you nowhere but despised. Then, a man shows up at your front door, offering the solution to your problems — an almost obscene amount of cash. There's just one catch. Well, two: He wants to live in your basement for a couple of months, and he looks like Willem Dafoe.

Considering all the wild roles this rightfully celebrated American actor has played — from a deranged lighthouse keeper, to a gender-bending detective, to Spider-Man supervillain the Green Goblin, to Jesus himself — that face alone is reason enough for audiences to thrill. The possibilities are endless for what Dafoe might bring to the screen. But with him comes plenty of reason to worry for the hero of The Man in My Basement. 

SEE ALSO: 'The Man in My Basement' trailer: Corey Hawkins and Willem Dafoe star in this TIFF-bound psychological thriller

What follows is a blend of haunted house tropes, psychological horror, and spiritual debate that makes this thriller bold but not always successful. Still, it will leave audiences with haunting questions about what is for sale and what can't be bought. 

The Man in My Basement delivers on its promise with star power.  Willem Dafoe and Corey Hawkins co-star in "The Man in My Basement." Credit: Andscape/Hulu

In her directorial debut feature, filmmaker Nadia Latif adapts Walter Mosley's novel The Man in My Basement, with the author himself as her co-writer. And she kicks off her film with keen casting. Corey Hawkins (Straight Outta Compton) and Willem Dafoe co-star in The Man in My Basement, with the former playing Charles Blakey, a Sag Harbor native who did the college thing but failed to launch. So now, while his peers own homes, operate businesses, and get engaged, he’s back in his late mother's house, unemployed, unhappy, and alone. Well, almost alone. There are strange thumping sounds coming from upstairs. And then there's the man at his front door, and he knows a suspicious amount about Charles' basement. 

SEE ALSO: Willem Dafoe and Robert Eggers reveal their inspirations for 'Nosferatu'. It goes deeper than you may think.

With a gleaming sense of entitlement, Anniston Bennet (Dafoe) is a white businessman who is instantly a worrisome omen, offering a devil's bargain. What would he be up to in this Black man's basement? He's evasive on that question. But as the two share Charles' family home over the course of several pivotal weeks, answers will come out, and heinous secrets will be unveiled. 

The Man in My Basement is a slow-burning haunted house story.  Willem Dafoe and Corey Hawkins co-star in "The Man in My Basement." Credit: Andscape / Hulu

Despite the warm woods and golden stained glass windows that make this eighth-generation home a wonder, Latif employs gothic elements of psychological terror and restrained spooky visuals to make her house suitably scary. A bump in the night here, a walking disembodied voice there, and even a straining hand crawling slowly towards the haunted homeowner will brew suspense. But that's all upstairs. Down in the basement, Bennet is in a cage. 

While Latif uses the familiar iconography of ghost movies to create an eerie atmosphere, her movie stands out in the basement bits. There, Bennet has imprisoned himself, determined to pay for crimes he won't immediately confess. Meanwhile, Charles is understandably freaked out by this employment of his home. A battle of wills ensues as these two men face off over what can be redeemed and what needs to be paid.

In these scenes, Hawkins stands up to Dafoe with an energy ardent but nervous, while the four-time Academy Award nominee's mysterious antagonist is eerily calm. The two discuss philosophy, history, morals, and race relations in sequences that feel like they're lifted from a stage play, grounded in this space of the basement, depending on the delivery of dialogue over visual storytelling. This is at times compelling, perhaps intended to play like the gnarly conversations between Hannibal Lecter and Clarice Starling of The Silence of the Lambs. However, Latif won't deliver the gore or overt horror such a comparison might suggest. 

Latif pulls from Poltergeist, except for this one thing.

The Man in My Basement offers atmosphere and dramatic tension, but little in the way of bone-rattling scares. In the tradition of gothic horror, Latif probes the psychological isolation Charles feels as a Black man who’s fallen short of the expectations his proud family and robust Sag Harbor community had for him. But there are elements of more graphic ghost stories, like Poltergeist, in here too. Specifically, Latif gives her own spin on the skin-peeling gag before a mirror, and like Carol Anne, Charles receives messages from the dead through his TV. (Here is the rare place where onscreen violence plays out…literally onscreen, which while unnerving, also creates a distance between the protagonist and the horrors.) 

However, Latif rejects a climax with the kind of scary spectacle audiences of ghost movies or psychological thrillers might well expect. The showdown between Charles and Bennet is one of words, not violence, and while this is in line with the philosophical elements of Mosley's novel, it feels undercooked with other themes involving Charles' family being cut. Or perhaps the visual allusions to much scarier movies sets up an expectation that Latif either can't or won't satisfy. 

Instead, the ending plays best as the chin-scratching conclusion of a character-driven drama, which is what The Man in My Basement feels like when Charles gets away from his haunted house and out into his community. Combatting his own loneliness with dates with a local antique dealer (Nanny's Anna Diop), house parties, or a visit to an ailing neighbor, the film becomes less about horror and more about the tragedy of his own self-imposed loneliness. Latif's ending fits with these sequences, but all of these disparate influences together don't make for a masterful quilt of horror and drama — it's more like an intriguing but confounding collage in the end. Still, I can see what Latif was aiming for. 

A film in two parts represents the two paths Charles could take. One is to follow the dark lessons of the man in the basement, believing pursuit of wealth can justify any number of sins, and wealth can be used to buy absolution. The other is one where riches are not counted in gold but by maintaining strong roots in culture and community. These messages exist in The Man in My Basement, but aren't successfully knitted together among the clashing tones. So for all the atmosphere and the grounded yet disturbing performances, the movie fumbles its finale, delivering neither nerve-shredding scares nor a heart-filling nor -wrenching resolution. Still, there's richness in the attempt, and I can't wait to see what Latif does next.

The Man in My Basement was reviewed out of the 2025 Toronto International Film Festival. It will open in select theaters on Sept. 12. A release on Hulu and Disney+ will follow this fall.

Even if you're not sold on robotic vacuum cleaners, manual vacuuming still doesn't have to feel like a chore. Dare I say that the best cordless vacuums should ideally toe the line of fun? The sense of satisfaction that stems from visible pet hair pickup and crisp carpet lines, the lightweight freedom of sweeping wherever you want with one hand — our dopamine receptors can't resist.

I trust robot vacuums, but I trust myself more

Whether you should get a robot vacuum or a stick vacuum boils down to one question: How picky are you about cleaning?

Everyone can probably acknowledge the appeal of not lifting a finger to clean their floors. But to some, that convenience may not be worth the cringe sparked by watching a robot vacuum ignore a crumb or eat a phone charger. Despite notable upgrades in smart mapping and cleaning performance over the past half-decade, even the best robot vacuums of 2025 can't match the precision of the best cordless stick vacuums operated by, you know, an actual human with a brain.

Cordless vacuums also just have the physical advantage in a lot of tricky spots. If you'd like to keep up with couch cushions, car seats, stairs, or the dusty abyss lying behind every door, a stick vacuum that can go handheld (and go outside) is the only option with that flexibility.

SEE ALSO: As a Dyson stan, I wouldn't tell anyone to buy the Dyson 360 Vis Nav robot vacuum

But to be real, your willingness to do all the cleaning yourself also matters — if you dread vacuuming by hand so much that you'll just put off doing it, your floors might actually be cleaner with a robot vacuum. I personally have both at the ready at all times and can argue for the value and practicality on either side, depending on the situation. And while the convenience of robot wouldn't want to completely live without the convenience robot vacuums provide when I'm frazzled, I haven't been able to shake the reflex to reach for a cordless vacuum in more cases than not.

I'm continuously testing an assortment of top-rated vacuum cleaners in my own apartment and have settled on the core recommendations that'll work for any budget. Here are the best stick vacuums to buy in 2025 based on cleaning performance, handheld flexibility, and more.

Other cordless vacuums I've tested

I've tested several other vacuum cleaners that didn't make the most recent cut for this list. Some, like the Shark Detect Pro with auto-empty station and LG All-in-One Cord Zero with auto-empty station, were a top recommendation at one point, but have since been overshadowed by newer, more powerful models that are a better bang for your buck.

There are also a few Dyson vacuums from years past that still garner substantial search interest, but that I no longer think are worth your money compared to what else is out there. The Dyson V8 and (seemingly discontinued) Dyson V10 that my parents have lying around have a tendency to push large debris like cat food and rocks around, and leave behind a layer of pet hair on many dark rugs. While these Dysons may have been powerhouses in the late 2010s, $300 could get you a more powerful option — maybe even automatic emptying, like with the Shark Detect Pro I just mentioned. The only upside would be that Dyson includes the motorized hair screw tool with the V8 and V10.

I also bumped the Dyson V15 Detect Submarine out of the list. The Roborock 2-in-1 cordless mop that took its place just offers a more seamless mopping system all around. The swappable wet roller head that turns the V15 Detect into a "mop" completely cuts off airflow to the dust bin of the vacuum, meaning there's no real wet suction going on. During my testing, this just pushed liquid around instead of soaking up spills, which then led to a soggy manual cleaning process that was super prone to leaks and weird smells. It just required way too much maintenance by hand, compared to the self-cleaning features of the Roborock F25 Ace Combo.

I also test robot vacuums. Are they as powerful?

I also test a ton of robot vacuums at home. While I think the convenience of robot vacuums is worth for, say, keeping up with the layer of dust and crumbs that accumulate during the work week, I have found that cordless vacuums are consistently tougher on elusive debris like pet hair or fine powders. This is especially when they've been pressed down into rug fibers or have been caked into corners.

Cordless stick vacuums are generally more powerful than robot vacuums. The upright design is optimal for airflow and has the real estate to house larger motors and more complex cyclone systems that create extra force on top of suction power alone. A robot vacuum's motor can't exceed the three or four-inch clearance that the vac needs to scoot its whole body under furniture. The motor of an upright vacuum typically lives completely separately from the vacuum head and roller brush and is thus under fewer constraints.

Physics aside, you could argue that a cordless vacuum is less likely to leave debris behind because a person is actively assessing where the suction needs to be focused. This includes tricky spots that aren't even on a robot vacuum's radar, like staircases or cars.

There are some one-to-one comparisons where a robot vacuum could be as powerful or more powerful than a stick vacuum. For instance, I've tested both the Roborock Saros 10R robot vacuum and Roborock F25 Ace cordless vacuum, and both offer 20,000 Pa suction power. But robot vacuums with that kind of power typically reside in the $1,000+ category, while it's much more affordable to hit that number with a stick vacuum. Even with identical stats on paper, the cordless vacuum would probably have a higher pickup rate over time just because the person operating it can see when more passes are necessary.