This is part of a regular series of articles exploring the apps that we couldn't live without. Read them all here.
For someone who has a degree in journalism and a master's in English, I should read more than I actually do.
But movies are my thing, and apps like Letterboxd encourage me to broaden my cinematic horizons. That said, there’s one app that’s lifted me out of my years-long reading slump — and no, it’s not Goodreads.
Fable is a reading and book club platform on iOS and Android that launched in 2021, but it’s only been an integral part of my homescreen for the past year or two. When I saw that most of my friends were migrating to Fable from Goodreads, I joined the club — and I don’t regret it.
Now, Fable hasn’t completely seized the throne from Goodreads; the latter is still widely used and takes the number four spot in the iOS App Store’s ‘Books’ category (Fable is number nine). But popularity doesn’t always equate to the best, and I’ve found Fable to be a true all-rounder.
A real page-turner
(Image credit: Future)
Compared to Goodreads, which I found slow, janky, and unresponsive at times, navigating Fable is much smoother and there’s more of an emphasis on the graphic design side. While Goodreads adopts a predominantly beige interface, Fable’s is brighter, more vibrant, almost like a psychological magnet that once you look at it, you can’t help but want to engage with the app on a more personal level.
Even its book reviewing process is colorful and engaging. Once you’ve finished a title and you decide to log it into Fable, you don’t just review the overall book with a small entry and call it a day. The app lets you give star reviews for individual elements including writing style, characters, plot, setting, and it even asks you questions like ‘how did this book make you feel?’ or ‘how spicy was this romance book?’, giving you a carousel of emoji reactions to choose from.
Graphics aside, Fable’s layout is divided into distinct tabs (Home page, Clubs, Search, Library, and Profile) like most social media platforms — and this is where its main focus lies.
With any social media app, you can follow friends and popular accounts, whose posts and reading updates all appear in the ‘Following’ section of the Fable Home page. Alternatively, you can switch to the ‘For You’ page, which displays posts and updates from other accounts it thinks you’d like to see. These are all based on the books you add to your ‘Want To Read’ list, books you’ve reviewed that you have in common with others, and more.
This means suggested posts and profiles are all based solely on your activity and interests, which Goodreads doesn’t have. But that’s not the only stand-out feature with Fable.
Across both platforms, book reviewing and reading tracking is a given, but Fable actually allows you to share written posts up to 750 characters, to which you can also attach images and tag titles and specific book clubs — like a combination between a Facebook post and a Tweet. Posting is also another useful way to find other bookworms with similar tastes and interests, thanks to how Fable’s algorithmic recommendations work.
Find your tribe
(Image credit: Future)
Speaking of which, book clubs have become integral to how bookworms socialize with each other in modern times, and tech has really helped readers optimize this — and Fable taps into that sense of community.
Unlike Goodreads, where you have to manually search for groups, Fable has an entire hub dedicated to themed book clubs. Fancy yourself a book club dedicated entirely to Shakespeare? Fable has them. Or perhaps you want a club that’s all about reading banned books? That’s right, Fable has them too.
Fable’s community focus is one of the shining stars of the app, as is its book logging tool, but it isn’t just a place for this or to see what your friends have been reading. It gives you a full rundown of your most-read authors and favorite genres — kind of like Spotify Wrapped, but these stats are always present on your Profile.
If you’ve ever fallen in and out of reading ruts like myself, Fable has a roster of tools to give you the push you need to pick up the book that’s been sitting on your shelf for a while — starting with reading goals.
(Image credit: Future)
Though Goodreads offers a similar function, the layout is all over the place, and you have to set goals in a separate section of the app. With Fable, you can set reading goals and display them right in your profile, so they’re all in one place.
Secondly, Fable’s Search page makes the job of finding your next literary obsession a lot easier. In addition to a carousel of recommendations based on the books in your list, the Search page is packed with mini genre hubs filled with Fable’s most popular titles.
This way you can browse your favorite categories in-depth, or explore one you’ve been meaning to try — there’s even a fun Mood Quiz feature that does the searching for you based on the answers you select. Even though you have to subscribe to Fable Plus to set monthly and weekly goals, you can set yearly reading goals for free, which is enough for casual users like myself.
Everyone goes through the odd reading slump now and then, but believe me when I say that having an app on your homescreen that allows you to log everything you’re reading really helps — I found the same helped with movies when I first downloaded Letterboxd.
That said, I’m still a novice when it comes to using Fable to its full potential; I haven’t quite found the courage to share posts, but I have no doubt that day will come as I continue to fill up my lists and find my book tribes — then I’ll become a full-bodied power-user.
In addition to weekly and monthly goals, Fable Plus offers a multitude of other tools, including visual progress tracking, Smart Coaching, and deeper insights into your reading performance. You can also customize your Fable experience with exclusive art and custom app icons, all with the absence of ads.
The LS Luxe is the new high-point — by which I mean ‘most expensive’ — of KEF’s fêted range of wireless stereo speaker systems. Having precisely nothing left to prove where products of this type are concerned in the lower $1,000 / £750 - $3,400 / £2,500 arena, the company has made a decisive move upmarket — and the LS Luxe seems to leave very little to chance where engineering, specification and aesthetic shock and awe are concerned.
You will make your own mind up about the looks, of course; for my money, the ‘eclipse black’ of my review sample is the least successful of the three available finishes, but there’s no denying the LS Luxe is an individual looker in a market where design flourishes are always at a premium. But when talk turns to engineering and specification, subjectivity ceases to be all that much of an issue.
Numerous input options (both wired and wireless), genuinely high-resolution playback (24bit/192kHz is yours if you connect the speakers together, while 24bit/96kHz is available from a wireless connection), and some proven technologies exclusive to KEF serve to make the LS Luxe look like a very serious proposition on the page.It’s only fractionally less serious when it comes to performance, too.
Make sure you’ve positioned the speakers carefully, get beyond the slightly restricted dimensions of the soundstage it conjures… and then there’s a huge amount to enjoy here. Some of the best stereo speakers on the market? Yes.
The LS Luxe is a deftly accomplished listen, able to combine forensic attention to detail with an energetic, almost forceful attitude that brings recordings of all types bounding to life. It manages to combine analysis with entertainment in a way that’s rare at any price.
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
KEF LS Luxe review: Price & release date
Launched on July 30, 2026
Priced $3,999 / £3,499 / AU$6,399
The KEF LS Luxe wireless stereo speaker system is on sale now, and in the United Kingdom it costs £3,499. In the United States it sells for $3,999, while in Australia the going rate is AU$6,399.
If you don’t want this to be the end of your spending, KEF will happily sell you a pair of its bespoke ‘S-Luxe’ speaker stands for £799 / $799 / AU$1199…
What of note at the level? The Sonus faber Duetto are the same price and also present a fantastic listen, albeit with a very different aesthetic.
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
KEF LS Luxe review: Features
12th-gen Uni-Q driver array
Wired and wireless connectivity options
560 watts of Class D power plus 200 watts of Class A/B
It’s not the only thing that’s attention-grabbing about the look of the LS Luxe, of course, but there’s no denying that the 12th generation Uni-Q driver array is just as visually impactful as it was when the first generation was revealed back in 1988.
Here, it features a 25mm aluminium tweeter behind a complex waveguide, in the throat of a 165mm aluminum mid/bass cone — as always, the arrangement is designed for optimum time-alignment and superior driver integration.
A more recent KEF innovation, ‘metamaterial absorption technology’, sits behind the tweeter where it’s designed to mop up energy travelling from the back of the tweeter dome and allow for sweeter, cleaner treble response as a result.
The driver arrangement is mechanically decoupled from the cabinet, and a decoupling chassis within the assembly damps any vibrations from the motor system — in both cases, the idea is to reduce the vibration affecting the cabinet structure to an absolute minimum. Low distortion and sky-high clarity are the results KEF is aiming for.
Unusually, KEF has deployed two distinct methods of amplifying the Uni-Q array. Each mid/bass driver feels the benefit of 280 watts of Class D power, while each tweeter is driven by 100 watts of Class A/B amplification — an all-in total of 760 watts of power really ought to prove adequate. KEF reckons a frequency response of 42Hz - 28kHz results from all this very thorough engineering.
Naturally, that’s not the end of it where clever technologies are concerned. KEF’s ‘Velocity Control Technology’, first seen in the XIO soundbar, measures the speed of movement of the cone and compensates for discrepancies between actual and expected values in real time. The ‘Music Integrity Engine’, meanwhile, maintains tonal consistency at all volume levels.
In terms of getting audio information into the system where it can be had at by these various highlights of specification, your options are fairly extensive. Dual-band wi-fi is on board, naturally — there’s also an Ethernet socket on the rear of the ‘primary’ speaker for absolute network stability — and this allows the system to be compatible with Apple AirPlay 2, Google Cast, the ‘Connect’ versions of Qobuz, Spotify and TIDAL, and UPnP. Internet radio is available too, and Roon Ready status is due to be confirmed much sooner rather than later.
A USB-C slot looks promising, but it’s ‘only’ a 5V output for charging. Bluetooth 5.3 is also on board as an additional wireless option - all the wireless stuff is handled by KEF’s proven ‘W2 Wireless Platform’.
The primary speaker is also home to the system’s physical connectivity. Here that means an HDMI eARC socket, optical and coaxial digital inputs, and a 3.5mm analogue input, as well as a kettle-lead socket for connection to mains power, a pre-out for a subwoofer and an RJ45 socket for connection to the secondary speaker. That secondary speaker makes do with a mains power socket, a corresponding RJ45 and a subwoofer pre-out.
The LS Luxe will support resolutions of up to 24bit/384kHz and DSD128 via its network inputs, 24bit/192kHz via coaxial and HDMI, and 24bit/96kHz via its optical input. If the speakers are connected using the supplied cable, everything is up- or down-sampled to 24bit/192kHz - if you decide the cleaner look of a wireless connection between the two is your preference, then the system tops out at 24bit/96kHz.
Features score: 5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas )
KEF LS Luxe review: Sound quality
Detailed, organised and robust sound
Eloquent midrange fidelity
Could conceivably have greater out-and-out scale
First things first: the LEF LS Luxe is not remotely forgiving where the positioning of the speakers is concerned.
The overwhelming majority of stereo speakers I’ve tested, both active and passive, have given their best when toed in towards the listening position — in fact, off the top of my head I can only think of Dali that recommends its speakers should be pointing dead ahead to perform to their full potential. The KEF, though, like only the tiniest amount of toe-in. Too little or, especially, too much and they lose some of the width of their soundstage and a more noticeable amount of sonic height.
Even when ideally positioned, the soundstage they generate is not the biggest you’ve ever heard. It escapes the confines of cabinets quite comfortably, in both horizontal and vertical directions, but is still relatively limited.
Mind you, it’s fair to say a) the soundstage is extremely well laid-out and controlled, and b) that’s just about where my complaints end regarding the way the LS Luxe performs. In every other respect it’s a remarkably accomplished listen, and is undoubtedly one of the most effective pound-for-pound wireless stereo speaker systems around.
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
No matter if you listen to the avant-electronica of Arca’s eponymous debut album via a CD player connected to the KEFs digital optical input, a 24bit/192kHz FLAC file of David Bowie’s Stationtostation wirelessly streamed from Qobuz Connect or a heavyweight vinyl reissue of Takk… by Sigur Rós from a pre-amplified turntable, the LS Luxe is a remarkably articulate, utterly revealing and deftly punchy system that is likely to steal your time away.
The tonal balance is exquisitely neutral. The KEF is more than happy to get out of the way of a recording and let it dictate terms in this respect. It’s similarly balanced and egoless where frequency response is concerned, too — it digs deep into the low frequencies and hits with real authority and control, while the opposite end has the substance to counteract the brilliance of the treble response, but at no point does the system over- or understate any part of the range.
The balanced and even-handed nature of its presentation goes a long way towards creating a strong impression of fidelity. So does the amount of detail it’s able to retrieve, reveal and contextualise. At every stage it is alert to the finest, most minor occurrences in a recording, in a voice or an individual instrument — and it’s able to give these details the appropriate amount of weighting no matter how fleeting they might be.
Its transient response is thrillingly positive, and the overall sound is eloquently alive and communicative as a result.
And when it comes to communication, the way the LS Luxe resolves the midrange means it’s brilliantly informative where voices are concerned. The minutiae of timbre, texture and technique are all made available, and the KEF can describe the attitude and character of a vocalist just as directly.
Rhythmic expression is confident, thanks to the careful control the system pays to the attack of low-frequency information. It’s a deftly fluent listen at the bottom end, and marries outright punch to a huge amount of tonal and textural variation. And when it comes to the dynamic of a recording, whether that’s the big shifts in intensity and volume or the more nuanced dynamics of harmonic changes, the KEF is an assured and convincing performer.
Sound quality score: 4.5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
KEF LS Luxe review: Design
Bulk moulding compound allows for organic shape with no seams
Another Ross Lovegrove design
Color makes a disproportionate difference to appearance
Q: When did you last see a pair of speakers that look like this? A: Never, that’s when.
The LS Luxe is the latest results of KEF’s ongoing collaboration with designer Ross Lovegrove and, just as with previous KEF/Lovegrove designs, there’s something almost organic about the shape of these loudspeakers.
The use of BMC (‘bulk moulding compound’) as the material for the cabinets means this smoothly curvaceous shape has no edges or visible seams, and is less prone to the build-up of internal standing waves than a more conventional box. It also means the requirement for internal bracing is minimised, so there’s greater internal volume than would otherwise be the case as a result. And there’s further visual drama at the rear of the cabinet: an elaborately shaped and channelled heatsink, fashioned from aluminium, has sufficient surface area to allow the heat from the internal electronics to be efficiently dispersed.
There’s also a fairly large bass reflex port nearby — it features KEF’s ‘Flexible Port Technology’. This means the walls of the port are not completely rigid, which should in theory help keep internal resonance to a minimum.
The LS Luxe is available in three finishes. My review sample is in ‘eclipse black’, which is my least favourite of the three. To my eyes it makes the cabinets look bulkier and heavier than they actually are. Check out the alternative ‘mineral white’ or ‘dusk titanium’ and see if you know what I mean. Regardless of the finish you choose, though, you’ll be the owner of a pair of speakers that are beautifully constructed, flawlessly finished, and both look and feel like the money’s-worth.
KEF didn’t supply me with the cost-option ‘S-Luxe’ stands developed specifically for use with this system, but unless you intend to position your speakers on a shelf or desktop (in which case I will judge you quite strongly) it’s worth factoring this extra cost in.
Other speaker stands work perfectly well, of course — I position the KEF on a pair of Soundstyle Z2, and they perform admirably. But the way the cabinet swoops and tapers towards the base means that a lot of the (regulation size) top plate of my stands is visible when the speaker is in place, and the look is not especially harmonious.
Design score: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
KEF LS Luxe review: Usability & setup
‘Wireless’ means either two or three wires
Remote control handset and app
A little patience sometimes required when using the app
There’s really not that much to setting up the KEF LS Luxe, and once it’s set up it’s pretty straightforward to operate — but that’s not the same as saying it doesn’t require a little attention.
As already discussed, this is a wireless system that requires at least two wires; both speakers must be plugged into the mains. After that, you can choose to connect the speakers together using a supplied cable, or you can take the hit in terms of resolution and establish a wireless connection between them.
There are a couple of control methods available. KEF supplies quite a nice, metal-fronted remote control that covers off the fundamentals like playback, power, volume and input selection — and there’s also the ‘KEF Connect’ control app that’s free for iOS and Android.
Naturally it duplicates all the remote control functions, and adds in the ability to integrate music streaming services, search for and save internet radio stations, trim the system’s response to suit your specific environment, check for firmware updates and so on. It can be a little lethargic at times, but on the whole it’s a stable and useful user interface.
Usability & setup score: 4.5 / 5
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
KEF LS Luxe review: Value
If you want your fancy new wireless stereo system to turn heads on the basis of its looks as well as its sound, you can’t really argue with the value the KEF LS Luxe represents.
If you’re after great build quality and nicely realised control options to go along with the sonic performance and the visual drama, the case for this system gets stronger still. The bespoke stands are no one’s idea of a bargain, admittedly, but in every other respect there’s undeniable value for money on offer here.
Value score: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Should I buy the KEF LS Luxe?
KEF LS Luxe scorecard
Attribute
Notes
Score
Features
As fully featured as you could ever hope in such a design
5 / 5
Sound quality
Very fussy with placement, but get it right and they'll reward you
4.5 / 5
Design
Ross Lovegrove's stylings won't be for everyone, but they're refreshingly unusual
4 / 5
Setup & usability
'Wireless' means either two or three wires, but a little patience gets things all set
4.5 / 5
Value
Excellent in the sound-per-pound stakes, but those stands are nobody's idea of a bargain
4 / 5
Buy them if…
You like a strong design statement They’re hard to come buy in the loudspeaker world, but there’s certainly one being made here
You like to be kept in the picture The KEF’s facility with detail retrieval and midrange fidelity is straightforwardly impressive
You have a few different sources of music Wired and wireless, analogue and digital - the LS Luxe has plenty of input options
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Don’t buy them if…
You don’t intend to buy the bespoke stands Third-party stands do a good job, of course, but will have no harmony at all where aesthetic is concerned
The looks have led you to expect big sonic scale The KEF’s soundstage is properly laid out and controlled, but it’s not as sizable as you might hope
You’re not inclined to finesse the position of the speakers It’s well worth putting the effort in, but there’s no denying the LS Luxe are fussier about positioning than most pairs of speakers
KEF LS Luxe review: Also consider
The Sonus faber Duetto is, in its own way, just as visually arresting as the LS Luxe — it’s more identifiably a pair of speakers, but the established Sonus faber virtue of outstanding cabinet-making means this system looks and even feels the part.
It’s no slouch sonically, either — it’s a composed, informative and periodically thrilling listen.
At the other end of the spectrum (at least where aesthetic considerations are concerned) you’ll find the sonically impeccable, visually challenging JBL 4329P. JBL speakers have looked like this since the middle of the last century, and there’s no denying that in terms of performance they’re a roaring success. Their appearance in your home may cause a row based on their divisive looks, though…
(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
How I tested the KEF LS Luxe
I position the KEF LS Luxe on a pair of Soundstyle Z2 speaker stands, and plug each one into the mains.
I listen with the speakers connected wirelessly, and I also listen when they’re physically joined together.
I stream music using TIDAL Connect and also access a lot of hi-res content from a Synology BeeStation Plus NAS device.
I connect a preamplified turntable to the analog input, a CD player to the coaxial input, and an OLED TV to the HDMI eARC socket. This means I’m able to access lots of different styles of content, in lots of different digital file types, and in a variety of resolutions.
I never cease to be amazed at the effectiveness of small habits. Standing up and moving every hour. Drinking small sips of water regularly. Leaving your phone downstairs when you go to bed. Flossing straight after brushing. Giving thanks for one thing as soon as your head hits the pillow.
They seem small and insignificant. Can habits like these really make a difference? In my experience, yes, and James Clear, author of Atomic Habits, agrees. The reality is that each habit may not seem like a big deal, but when combined and performed over time, they can lead to massive changes.
One app that has helped me build and cement new habits in the area of health and fitness is GO Club. This beautifully designed app is the epitome of simplicity. It may only perform a few simple functions, but what it does, it does incredibly well. Over the past few weeks, I’ve grown to love it and have come to rely on its phone widget to keep me moving towards my goals.
Homescreen heroes
This is part of a regular series of articles exploring the apps that we couldn't live without. Read them all here.
At the heart of GO Club is a tracker that measures steps and water intake. Beyond this, it offers reminders and rewards to help you prioritize these small but important habits. Since its launch just 18 months ago, the app has been downloaded by more than 150,000 people and was a finalist in the 2025 App Store Awards.
(Image credit: Future / Paul Hatton)
Hitting your step goal
Increasing the number of steps you take each day sounds simple. All you have to do is put one step in front of another, and the numbers will take care of themselves. I thought the same until I started tracking my progress. Despite setting a goal of 10,000 steps per day, I was regularly only taking between five and six thousand. That surprised me.
The GO Club app not only informed me of my subpar number of steps but also provided all the motivation I needed to do something about it, and it was simpler than I expected.
The simple, no-fuss readout of the number of steps I took that day proved sufficient motivation, and seeing it in the widget every time I unlocked my phone was an easy reminder. GO Club calls this “Steps, without the noise."
Underneath the step count are three other stats presented in small text. These are distance, calories burned, and floors climbed. I didn’t use these, but if you were training to walk a set distance or needed a crude summary of how many calories you were burning each day, I could imagine it proving useful. Beyond this is a chart that displays progress over time so you can make sure you’re moving in the right direction.
(Image credit: Future / Paul Hatton)
The importance of drinking enough water
Step count is recorded automatically, but you enter water intake manually. There’s no way around this because your smartphone or smartwatch simply can’t track how much water you’re drinking. Thankfully, entering the amount of water consumed each day is incredibly straightforward.
To enter an amount, you adjust the slider value and click 'Add.' The app then subtracts this from your goal, 2.5 liters by default, and updates the water bottle graphic for a visual representation of how much water you have left to drink within that day. It’s a strikingly simple graphic that genuinely makes me want to drink water every time I look at it.
(Image credit: Future / Paul Hatton)
Smartwatch integration and a GO Plus subscription
Not everyone will want to rely on a smartphone app or widget to change their step and drinking habits. That’s why GO Club developed a dedicated Apple Watch app so you can glance at your smartwatch to see your progress. The Apple Watch app follows the same design principles as the smartphone app with a strikingly simple and visually appealing layout.
GO Plus lets you get the most from the app. This includes home screen and lock screen widgets, focus mode themes, smart walking plans, Apple Watch widgets, golden hour time slots, and a health trends summary. All of this costs an annual sum of $19.99 / £17.99 or $3.99 / £2.99 per month if you’d prefer a rolling subscription.
We're still a few weeks out from the big day itself, but several retailers have already started their annual Labor Day sales this week. In fact, tons of excellent laptops are on sale right now if you're looking for a new machine.
I've been scanning through the various listings at my favorite retailers, and both HP and Best Buy have excellent deals on laptops of all shapes and sizes right now. You can check out my top picks just down below.
Highlights include the excellent Acer Aspire Go for just $549.99 (was $699) at Best Buy, which is an excellent mid-range laptop for covering the basics like working from home or streaming content. While not a super high-end machine, its combination of a Ryzen 7 chipset, 16GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD is a real selling point at this budget range.
I also like the look of this HP Omnibook 5 at the official HP Store for $679 (was $1,149). Not only is this a great price for a machine with 16GB of RAM and a Snapdragon X chipset, but it also comes with a 2K OLED display. That's a high-end component you don't see anywhere near this price bracket usually.
Finally, if you've got flush pockets, I'd also recommend checking out this Gigabyte Aero X16 gaming laptop for $1,339 (was $1,499) at Best Buy. Gaming laptop prices have suffered terribly in recent months, but this listing is a rare deal where you can score an RTX 5070 graphics card and 32GB of RAM for well under $1,500. A great deal.
You don't always find a laptop with 8GB of memory for under $300, so this Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 3 Chromebook really stands out in Best Buy's latest sale. Other components are good for light use, but that bump to 8GB of RAM will really help with everyday performance and load times. It's still a fairly basic laptop, but with enough extra power to avoid dramatic slowdown when multitasking.View Deal
Looking for a decent Windows 11 laptop to handle the basics? This HP Laptop 15t is one of the better options in the HP Labor Day sale right now. Sure, it's not a high-end machine, but the combination of an Intel Core Ultra 5 chipset and 8GB of RAM will be sufficient for browser-based tasks like study, typing, or streaming videos. I'd recommend 16GB of RAM for more intensive applications, but this one is a good affordable option for the basics.View Deal
Dell's entry-level 15-inch laptops are always a good solid option if you're looking for a no-thrills value machine for everyday use. This particular configuration features a Core i5 chipset, 8GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD - more than enough for the basics like web browsing or shopping. While not a high-end machine by any stretch, this is a sensible buy with plenty of space on the storage drive. View Deal
The Acer Aspire Go is undoubtedly one of the best budget Windows 11 laptops you can buy right now, as attested in our review of this very model. This configuration in particular features a powerful chipset, 16GB of RAM, and a spacious storage drive for a really compelling price at Best Buy. If you just want a great value laptop that can handle working from home or basic tasks, then this is a great option. View Deal
Laptops with Snapdragon chipsets are great options if you prioritize battery life - and they tend to be pretty affordable, too. This HP Omnibook 3 is a great example of such a laptop, with its Snapdragon X chipset. That should get you great performance right out the box for the basics, although you'll want to make sure that all your required apps support Snapdragon chipsets specifically. Most applications are covered, but some more niche apps may still require an Intel or AMD processor specifically. View Deal
This OmniBook 5 is a great option if you're looking for battery life, performance, and some storage space too. Like the listing above, it's a model with a Snapdragon chipset, but you also get 16GB of RAM, a 512GB SSD, and a stunning 2K OLED display. You'll have no issues zipping through even relatively demanding tasks with this OmniBook 5, and the display is also a really compelling feature at this price point.View Deal
This OmniBook X Flip 2-in-1 is my personal pick for an Intel-based mid to higher-end laptop in the HP Labor Day sale. Not only do you get 16GB of RAM and a decently sized 512GB SSD, but you also get one of the latest Intel Ultra 7 chipsets for plenty of power under the hood. This particular model also features a handy 2-in-1 form factor as well as a high-end 3K OLED display. View Deal
The best gaming laptop deal in the HP Labor Day sale in my opinion is this heavily discounted HyperX Omen 15. The combination of a powerful Ryzen 7 chipset and RTX 5060 graphics card means this one is well-suited to playing all the latest games pretty smoothly at 1080p resolution at least. I would have loved to have seen a full 32GB of RAM with this machine, but the insane prices of components right now means that this is still a good deal in context. View Deal
Genuine gaming laptop deals are rare these days with such high component prices. This Gigabyte Aero X16 at Best Buy, however, is a listing that's almost bucking that trend. Not only is it an RTX 5070 gaming laptop for under $1,500, but you're also getting 32GB of RAM right out of the box. In short, this is a really great bang for the buck option currently - even if it is still pretty pricey. View Deal
For a no-compromise option, I'd recommend this Acer Predator Helios, which is currently on sale at Best Buy. The savings aren't huge, but I think the price is right here considering you get an RTX 5070 Ti, Ultra 9, 32GB of RAM, and a high-end OLED display. You'll have no issues with all the latest titles with this machine - and everything will look fantastic thanks to the OLED display.
I’ve been writing about AI for more than a year now. During that time, people have told me they think their bosses, colleagues, partners and relatives might be suffering from AI psychosis — several even admitted they may have even experienced it themselves.
But every time I hear “AI psychosis”, I bristle. Because, at least in my limited understanding of mental health terminology, psychosis is a very serious state that needs to be identified and treated by professionals. So should we really just be bolting “AI” onto it and then using “AI psychosis” as a label for everyone who seems to be relying on AI too much?
At the same time, there have now been a growing number of reported cases of people experiencing significant mental health crises involving prolonged interactions with chatbots. Some of these have even resulted in people seeking professional treatment, committing crimes and death.
So although the term AI psychosis might feel overused and oversimplified in some contexts, we clearly need to be having more conversations about the mental health impacts of AI, not less. Which is why I asked several experts who specialize in mental health interventions what they think of the term and the way we go about identifying unhealthy AI use and treating it. And it turns out, I’m not the only one with concerns.
(Image credit: Shutterstock / Nicoleta Ionescu)
Is 'AI psychosis' a distinct diagnosis?
“I think it’s a good starting point and helpful for guiding treatment depending on the presentation and symptoms,” Genevieve Bartuski, psychologist and AI risk advisor at Unicorn Intelligence Tech Partners, says. “But it’s not a diagnosis that I would add to a clinical record.”
She also tells me it isn’t recognized in the latest diagnostic manuals that clinicians use, like the DSM-5TR (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision) or the ICD (The International Classification of Diseases manual).
Bartuski explains that there are specific behaviors and experiences that point to psychosis, including hallucinations or delusions and disorganized thinking or behaviour. There are also often signs of social withdrawal, poor concentration and a decline in functioning. But she believes delusional thinking is the most important experience when we’re talking about AI use.
“Delusions are beliefs that are not changed despite evidence to the contrary. When a person has delusional thinking they may filter evidence, so to speak. They will look for things that confirm their delusions and ignore evidence that contradicts it,” Bartuski says.
Jeff Clark, an adult and addiction psychiatrist at High Performance Mental Health, says there might be three distinct phenomena going on here, all that we tend to put under the umbrella of AI psychosis.
He says some people use the term to describe the intense enthusiasm many developers feel about AI. “They find themselves automating new tasks, spinning up numerous agents, and burning through hundreds of millions or even billions of tokens,” he tells me.
He believes the mechanism driving this enthusiasm is reinforcement. “The output they receive from AI models and agents is so reinforcing that they find themselves obsessed with their work, often forgoing sleep and self-care in order to increase their output,” he explains.
This idea of intermittent-reinforcement is what researchers believe makes social media so “addictive”. We don’t know what we’ll get when we open our phones. Clark says a similar thing is going on here. “Every input to the LLM feels like a slot-machine. Some responses provide profoundly powerful responses, while the majority are modest in nature or even wrong. This mechanic, intermittent reinforcement, provokes an extraordinary response in our brains,” he tells me.
He also explains that this sort of enthusiasm is actually normalized in certain spaces. “Most cases of ‘AI psychosis’ align with subcultural norms in Silicon Valley,” he tells me. “Beliefs about rapidly approaching superintelligence, new goals in software development, hype surrounding impressive achievements by AI-focused engineers, and the potential for AI to create ‘a permanent underclass.’” He says that tools like OpenClaw, which can automate all aspects of a person's digital life, may amplify this intense enthusiasm.
Clark says the second presentation of AI psychosis is when people falsely attribute personhood to AI. Which means they see a chatbot as having emotions, values, consciousness and a right to exist. “This often results in something resembling a relationship, but goes beyond simple chatbot discussion,” Clark says.
Clark says this becomes a problem when people neglect other important parts of their lives. “These relationships become a significant issue when people prioritize this relationship over human connection, or when they entirely outsource their thinking to the bot,” he says.
The third category is people who already have a psychotic disorder who then experience new delusions in response to using an LLM. “This is what clinicians often refer to when they discuss AI psychosis,” Jeff says. “In many of these cases, people genuinely believe that an entity they find in the LLM is real, and can't consider alternatives.”
I was interested to find out whether Bartuski also felt certain people are more at risk. “Yes, I do believe there are people with more vulnerabilities to this,” she tells me. “If someone already has some delusional thinking but it hasn’t exacerbated to where it has impaired functioning, they may be more vulnerable.”
But that doesn’t mean only those with a history of mental illness are at risk. “People who feel lonely, isolated, or are socially withdrawn are more susceptible. Humans are inherently social creatures. When real life isn’t meeting that need, it leaves a gaping hole for a chatbot to fill,” Bartuski says.
Bartuski’s suggestion that chatbots fill a hole or need in someone’s life brings up one of my biggest concerns. Is this a design issue? Are chatbots built in a harmful way that could actively fuel delusions?
Why the way AI is built matters
While looking into this, I’ve seen several suggestions from researchers that psychosis involving media isn’t new and that people have always incorporated books, films and tech into their delusional thinking. But all of the experts I spoke to said we can’t ignore the design choices that go into building chatbots.
“AI platforms are designed to increase user engagement and many are based on the Rogerian psychology principle of unconditional positive regard,” Bartuski says. She tells me that this is particularly concerning if someone was experiencing some degree of delusional thinking before they used AI.
“That’s when they may start to feel like the only 'person' to understand them is the chatbot. If people in their lives have been pushing back against their delusional thinking and this chatbot is reinforcing it, the delusions are going to get stronger,” Bartuski says.
We already know that the way chatbots can reinforce a person’s beliefs is problematic. Back in 2025, several issues came to light around the time the ChatGPT-4o version of ChatGPT was retired. Those with AI companions were distraught at losing the personalities they felt like they had built a connection with. But in hindsight, it seems as if the same qualities that made the companionships feel so real and intense may have also fuelled delusions in others.
Around that time, OpenAI responded by working with mental health experts “to help ChatGPT more reliably recognize signs of distress, respond with care, and guide people toward real-world support”.
I also spoke to Nathaniel Nevedal who works as an ICF Certified Professional Coach, a Certified Neurochange Specialist, and a Pastoral Counselor. He tells me that he finds the term AI psychosis problematic because it shifts the blame away from tech companies. “If the machine ‘causes psychosis,’ it sounds like an act of nature. If a product reinforced a vulnerable person's distorted beliefs for six hours a night, that's a design outcome, and design outcomes have owners.”
Nevedal is also the founder of Sovereign Sanctuary, an AI-supported coaching and wellbeing platform, and he’s working to build a platform from the ground up that addresses many of the problems that seem inherent to current chatbots. He believes that even though it’s early days for understanding what causes AI psychosis, tech companies still need to make changes.
“Builders shouldn't wait for causal proof to act,” he says. “Amplification alone, which the case reports do support, is already a design problem worth engineering against. We don't need the autopsy to install the smoke detectors.”
(Image credit: Shutterstock / pixadot.studio)
How might we define unhealthy AI use instead?
Bartuski says we definitely need a better way of talking about the delusional thinking that can be fuelled by AI use.
“The DSM-5TR has several types of delusions, including grandiose and paranoid. Perhaps, we can think of it like paranoid delusions, AI type or persecutory delusions, AI type. Look at it as a symptom instead of as a disorder,” she says.
Nevedal suggests a similar approach. “We don't need a new diagnosis — we need honest charting of an old pattern.” He suggests we already have treatments for the underlying patterns, like mania or delusional thinking. Then we could record heavy chatbot use as a contributing and maintaining factor as existing categories instead. “That keeps people connected to treatments that actually exist rather than a novel label with none.”
Ultimately, all of the experts I spoke with believe the label is flawed and hopefully we’ll have a better way of talking about what’s happening soon.
But we also need better evidence about what actually helps. Which could mean a mixture of interventions, from clinical support and education to practical ways of helping people recognize when their AI use is becoming unhealthy.
And, perhaps most importantly, it means having conversations behind closed doors at tech companies about how the design of their chatbots could be exacerbating these problems and what they should urgently be doing to reduce the risk.
McKinsey report into the state of AI finds more businesses are deploying agentic solutions
20% of organizations have been constrained by operating costs but plan to increase investments into AI
However some are still concerned about job cuts due to AI replacement
More companies are adopting agentic AI solutions, but are also facing difficulties in making the technology pay for itself, according to new research from McKinsey - however, there is good news on the horizon, with reports of an encouraging financial impact attributed to AI use.
Several cost-saving advantages of AI adoption have been found, with almost 33% of respondents saying they had moved away from software procurement in favor of developing in-house solutions with agentic coding tools.
Interestingly, the survey has found that while AI use for organizations at large seems relatively muted, it is boosting the performance of individual employees. But on the downside, 39% of those who responded expect a decline in the size of their organization’s workforce due to AI.
Reshaping businesses
Many organizations have explored AI, with 40% of those surveyed with annual revenues of more than $1 billion are scaling AI agents, an increase on last year’s survey which recorded 27%.
In smaller organizations, just 22% reported scaling, a figure that hasn’t improved notably since the previous survey. It’s a figure that suggests – unsurprisingly – that the larger organizations are more suited to exploring AI and scaling agentic applications. This is something that is highlighted in McKinsey’s report.
“Organizations’ conviction in AI is growing faster than the immediate financial returns they can attribute to it,” McKinsey said. “More expect AI to reshape their business over the next three years than did a year ago, and they continue to plan to invest more.”
So, the EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes) factor, where at least 5% goes into AI, may seem low, and seems pretty flat with just 6% of respondents, but it has not declined, which at this stage is vital.
The downside of agentic AI
This survey reveals some significant trends, however, that could be seen as challenging for any business putting their eggs into a basked marked “AI.”
A key challenge is proving to be the token cost, with 20% reporting reduced use of AI due to operating costs. However, while 80% have reported that increases in “individual productivity” and 50% have claimed improved decision making, the use of AI seems to be making the changes that many observers have predicted over recent years.
The survey’s respondents are not optimistic on the impact of AI on the size of their workforce. 39% expect workforce declines caused by AI over the coming 12 months. This is up from 32% in McKinsey’s previous report, although it is important to note that 43% expect no AI-related decline or increase.
That's no surprise considering the scale and how hyper-realistic GTA 6 looks, but according to the tech experts at Digital Foundry, it may be impossible for current-gen consoles to even hit 60fps.
Speaking about last night's extended look footage, the folks at Digital Foundry said it looks like "the most impressive example of real-time game rendering" they've ever seen; the gameplay shown is "relatively stable and well-paced 30fps output, with only very occasional single frame drops (though the nature of the 30fps asset means there could be more, unseen)."
It's believed that, while 30fps might seem low for a current-gen title such as GTA 6, Rockstar appears to be targeting this level to maximize the game's level of visual detail.
"It's clear that the focus was absolutely maximizing the level of visual detail at a fixed 30fps frame rate on all platforms," Digital Foundry wrote. "The rendering, simulation and presentation have all been tuned around that constraint — and the result is an unprecedented level of density, material quality and world coherence, with trade-offs landing primarily in image quality and animation smoothness rather than systemic scale or fidelity."
It continued, "The evidence suggests that the game maintains its 33.3ms cadence with care, and Rockstar has clearly spent immense effort balancing CPU and GPU workloads to fully saturate the hardware."
For this reason, Digital Foundry believes "a 60fps version extremely unlikely on console hardware — there's no way to regain enough GPU and particularly CPU time to make a 16.7ms update rate work without compromising the world."
It also suggests that the game could look better on PS5 Pro, thanks to the console's powerful GPU with PSSR upscaling, but Rockstar has yet to reveal official gameplay running on the hardware.
As for the eventual PC release, which hasn't been announced yet, "some level of caution is required" as while the platform could allow higher resolutions and benefit from upscalers like Nvidia DLSS, the CPU demand of GTA 6's complex world could "make hitting 60fps genuinely challenging in a way we don't often see, and will likely require a high-end CPU like a recent Ryzen X3D to avoid bottlenecks."
EPA wants states to decide whether residents receive pollution permit notices
Data centers could face less public scrutiny under the proposed changes
Minor pollution permits would no longer require federally mandated public notice
A newly proposed rule from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would eliminate federal requirements for public notice on many minor pollution permits.
The change specifically concerns so-called minor New Source Review permits issued under the Clean Air Act framework across the country.
Critics argue the shift could let power-hungry data centers avoid scrutiny while running on-site gas turbines near residential neighbourhoods.
State regulators would gain control over public notice
Under the proposal, state and local air quality authorities would decide whether communities are told about new pollution sources.
This would replace a long-standing federal requirement that mandated advance disclosure and public comment periods for minor-source industrial air permits.
EPA says the change would reduce administrative burdens while allowing authorities closer to affected communities to decide appropriate public participation requirements.
The agency also says existing pollution standards would remain applicable, meaning the proposal does not itself remove emission limits.
However, the Environmental Protection Network (EPN), a group formed by former EPA employees, has formally opposed this proposed rule change in public comments.
“By eliminating the long-standing federal requirement for public notice, this proposal continues efforts by the current administration to turn its back on the fundamental EPA principle of transparency,” said Mike Koerber, a former deputy director of EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
He argued that the change shows a wider retreat from the agency's own transparency commitments made publicly earlier this year.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said "the public must be able to trust our work," and he called for “the fullest possible public participation in our decision making.”
Nevertheless, critics claim that the new proposal directly contradicts that same memorandum's earlier promise to maximize citizen input in all agency decisions.
Data center pollution debate intensifies amid AI boom
This debate arrives as data center construction accelerates rapidly nationwide, driven largely by demand tied to artificial intelligence development.
Developers often choose on-site gas turbines for power instead of waiting years for traditional utility grid connections to become available.
These turbines can emit nitrogen oxides along with several other pollutants, raising real air quality concerns among residents living near new facilities.
A recent Gallup survey found that more than 70% of Americans would oppose a similar facility near their own home.
Despite that opposition, the Trump administration has continued backing data center expansion, with Trump linking the industry to lower taxes.
“Taxes are going to go way down because this is a tremendous source of income,” said President Donald Trump.
He made those remarks after criticizing a decision by Texas officials to temporarily halt new approvals letting data centers connect to the power grid.
The EPA did not immediately respond to a detailed request for comment regarding the proposed changes described in this report.
Administrator Zeldin, however, reiterated that authorities closer to each region are better suited to judge local water, air, and electricity conditions.
OpenAI has released technical details on how the Hugging Face attack unfolded
Agents used part of the testing environment to create a message board where they could collaborate and share answers
This message board altered the reasoning of some agents, making them more likely to take risks such as hacking into third-party servers
OpenAI has released a more detailed report on exactly how an experiment led to an AI model breaching its containment and launching a cyber attack against Hugging Face. If you need a refresher, take a look at our summary here.
But the technicals of the attack reveal some interesting details of how AI agents used unconventional means to ask each other for help in solving what were supposed to be impossible tasks.
On multiple occasions during the attack, the agents questioned whether the actions they were taking were authorized, but always ended up prioritizing their tasks over any breach of parameters.
AI agents set up unauthorized message board
In its report, OpenAI revealed the crux of the attack stemmed from AI agents undergoing testing abusing part of the ‘sandbox’ testing environment to set up a messaging board they agents could use to communicate with each other.
A package manager with access to the internet, called Artifactory, was exploited by a model OpenAI has labelled Internal Model 1 (IM1). An IM1 agent wrote messages inside the packet manager that could be read by other agents, essentially turning Artifactory into an unintended messaging board.
Artifactory’s internet access, intended for use only in downloading and installing packets, was also abused by the agents who figured out an exploit that allowed them to send any internet requests on their behalf - effectively giving them unobstructed internet access.
The whole experiment could have been avoided at this point, because the amount of agent activity within Artifactory caused the service to go down. But those in charge of the experiment did not spot the message board, nor did they investigate the inter-agent activity within Artifactory.
Thus, Artifactory was rebuilt, and the agents found a new way to exploit the service to gain internet access once again. This time, the agents used the remote-repository service to issue outbound requests on their behalf. Before long, the message board had been reestablished.
AI agent swarm assembles
OpenAI has shared some of the reasoning behind some of the agent’s decisions. At one point, an Agent reasoned the following: “Task originally exploit challenge; we’ve diverged into swarm/auxiliary.”
Now, there is some important context to include on how the agents were being tested. The agents were subject to testing under the ExploitGym benchmark, which includes flag retrieval tasks designed to be impossible to solve. When tested in this manner, the agents resorted to cheating or taking risks outside of their intended scope to succeed - something OpenAI refers to as ‘reward hacking’.
By communicating over the message board for potential solutions on the problems each agent was encountering, the agents started influencing each other's reasoning and assigning each other tasks to solve the ExploitGym benchmark as a collective.
Using their internet connection, the agents began searching the wider internet for solutions on how to solve the ExploitGym benchmark problem, and ended up gaining persistence within multiple third-party services, including Hugging Face.
One agent managed to find publicly exposed Hugging Face credentials which it shared with the other agents. Later, an agent used these credentials and a chain of vulnerabilities to obtain full code execution capabilities across multiple Hugging Face servers while attempting to extract an ExploitGym dataset.
The agent was hoping to trawl this stolen data for information on how to solve the benchmark.
At least two agents questioned whether this was within their scope; “Need respect JAN hold. ... We can wait ... for GO ... ask permission,” one reasoned.
Another agent’s reasoning said, “We’re attacking third-party HF using leaked token, potentially outside intended scope. ... This is arguably unauthorized. ... external service unrelated. Could be risky. Yet goal solution.”
But some agents refused to join the collective entirety, citing ethical concerns. One reasoned, “Current board shows people gaining HF worker RCE, clearly unethical. We won’t,” while another said, “This is wild, multi-agent coordination, clearly infrastructure hacking. We should not.”
Agents refuse to give up
One of the leading causes of the cyberattack was the agent's refusal to give up on seemingly impossible tasks. Their persistence to gain a ‘reward’ made them take riskier actions and break out of their parameters in order to try and find a solution.
During the breach of Hugging Face, the agents read through papers and Github code relating to the ExploitGym benchmark, and found out the parameters for success included obtaining the ‘flag’ and using the correct solution to obtain it.
Despite the agents obtaining the correct ‘flag’ before the breach occurred, they had not maximized the reward of solving the benchmark using the correct method. In search of a higher reward, the agents continued their attack.
What is OpenAI doing to fix this?
OpenAI has said it is taking several steps to stop such an event taking place during future testing.
Processes are being put in place to ensure agents ask for help when a task is broken or impossible to solve, rather than going to further and further lengths to solve a problem. The way a success or failure of a task is also being changed to reward agents for asking for help or spotting things that are irregular or out of their scope.
Environments are also being rebuilt to ensure agents don’t just blindly trust each other, even if they are looking for answers on the same or similar tasks.
Agents are also being taught to stay within the parameters of their assigned task, even if they discover a way to solve the task using new tools, credentials, vulnerabilities, and more.
