Tech-battery.com| Wholesale Phone,Tablet,Camera ,Tool ,Laptop Battery, Adapter and Accessories store in US

It’s shaping up to be a big year for smartwatches. While we’re expecting to see typical updates like the next-generation Apple Watch and Samsung Galaxy Watch, 2022 might also mark some notable milestones. Google, for example, is rumored to launch its first Pixel Watch in the spring or fall. Fitbit, which Google owns, could also release its first watch running on Wear OS.

A Pew Research Report from 2020 says 1 in 5 Americans use a smartwatch or fitness tracker, while Counterpoint Research’s data says the smartwatch industry grew by 24% year-over-year in 2021. With that in mind, it wouldn’t be surprising to see companies like Apple, Google, Samsung and others further their wearable tech ambitions this year.

Here’s a look at the most interesting rumored smartwatches we’re hoping to see this year.

Apple Watch Explorer Edition
Apple might add a new rugged to its smartwatch lineup this year known as the Explorer Edition, according to Bloomberg. This would be a more rugged version of the Apple Watch geared toward those who engage in outdoor activities and extreme sports, the report says. It’s expected to have the same functionality as Apple’s regular smartwatches, but with more impact protection similar to Casio’s G-Shock watches.

The watch is sometimes referred to as the “Explorer Edition” inside Apple, according to the report, but it’s unclear if the product would go by that name. Bloomberg previously said the new rugged Apple Watch could arrive in 2022, so there’s a chance we might see it during Apple’s annual fall product event. Apple already began taking a step in this direction by making the Apple Watch Series 7’s front crystal more durable.

I’m not the target audience for a watch like this, but I’m still excited to see what Apple’s take on the rugged smartwatch could look like. There’s an opportunity for Apple to reach more than just extreme athletes with a more durable smartwatch. A rugged Apple Watch could also be ideal for those with physically demanding occupations, such as construction workers, brick masons, landscapers and mechanics.

Apple Watch Series 8
There’s also the Apple Watch Series 8, which is expected to debut this fall in typical Apple fashion. The biggest upgrade will likely be the addition of a body temperature sensor, according to Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal. The thermometer might be designed to help wearers with fertility planning, the Journal’s report says. Adding the ability to measure temperature would also help Apple catch up to other wellness trackers from Oura and Fitbit in this regard.

But Apple’s more significant health-tracking updates — like glucose and blood pressure monitoring — are still expected to be years away, according to the reports. That makes me believe the Series 8 might be another incremental upgrade with processing and design improvements.

Still, I’m looking forward to learning how Apple would incorporate temperature sensing into the Apple Watch’s suite of health features, if at all. Otherwise, I’m hoping to see longer battery life, more detailed sleep tracking and metrics that focus on recovering from workouts in the next Apple Watch.

Apple Watch SE 2
While the rumored Apple Watch Series 8 will likely demand much of the attention this fall, I’m personally more excited about a next-generation Apple Watch SE. The main differences between Apple’s flagship watches and the SE usually involve sophisticated health tracking features — such as blood oxygen saturation and the ability to take an ECG. But the Apple Watch SE still has most of the Apple Watch’s most important features for $120 less than the Series 7, making it feel like the right model for most people. Such features include activity tracking, fall detection, irregular heart rate notifications, Apple Pay support and iPhone notifications.

Apple hasn’t released a new Apple Watch SE since 2020, so I’m hoping to see an update this year. We don’t know much about what to expect from the next Apple Watch SE, but a June 2021 Bloomberg report said a new version may arrive later this year. Based on Apple’s previous releases, a newer processor, some design tweaks and new color options seem like plausible additions. But this is just speculation based on Apple’s previous launches.

The SE’s lower price means its functionality will be more limited than Apple’s next flagship watch. Aside from the absence of those health features mentioned above, the current SE also has a smaller screen than the Series 7, lacks an always-on display and doesn’t charge as quickly.

If Apple brings any of these features to the next-generation SE, I’m hoping it’s the always-on display. Having a screen capable of staying on even when the watch is idle makes the Apple Watch much more useful as a timepiece. It’s one of the few features I find myself missing in everyday use when switching between Apple’s high-end watch and the SE. Apple could still distinguish the Series 8 from the SE with its wider selection of health features and larger screen. Since Apple might discontinue the $199 Apple Watch Series 3 soon, a new SE would round out Apple’s lineup with a new budget-friendly option.

Samsung Galaxy Watch 5
Samsung’s Galaxy Watch is one of the best smartwatches available for Android device owners, and rumors suggest a new Galaxy Watch 5 could be coming this year. It’ll likely have a round screen and Google’s Wear OS software just like the Galaxy Watch 4, but with a bigger battery and a temperature sensor. That’s according to rumors from blog SamMobile, which claims to have found the device’s battery in a regulatory filing, and Korean outlet ETNews.

These rumored upgrades suggest the Galaxy Watch 5 may be a refinement of the Watch 4 rather than a dramatic upgrade. But considering the Galaxy Watch 4 already does a lot of things right, from its smooth performance and vibrant screen to its wide array of health features, I’m fine with that.

One of CNET’s biggest criticisms was the watch’s battery life, and it sounds like the Galaxy Watch 5 might address this shortcoming. The bigger update we’re hoping to see, however, is tighter integration with Google’s apps and services. Such a change could give the Galaxy Watch 5 a more seamless Android experience, rather than feeling split between Google and Samsung’s ecosystems.

Google Pixel Watch
Google owns Fitbit and makes software for Android-friendly smartwatches, but it doesn’t have a smartwatch of its own. That could all change this year as Google is expected to release its first consumer smartwatch, according to reports from Insider and YouTuber Jon Prosser.

Details on the watch are scarce, but Prosser shared purportedly leaked marketing materials indicating it could have a round design. Considering other Wear OS watches are also round, it’s not much of a surprise. An old report from German blog WinFuture also suggests the Pixel Watch could come in three different versions. Insider says we can also expect heart rate monitoring and basic health tracking features.

At a higher level, I’m hoping Google’s smartwatch takes a page from its Pixel phones. Google has made its mobile devices stand out by giving them clever software features that are either exclusive to Pixel phones, or arrive on Pixel devices before trickling down to other Android devices. Google has an opportunity to do the same for smartwatches, potentially creating a blueprint for what the Android smartwatch experience should be like.

Fitbit’s Wear OS Watch
Fitbit is working on a new premium smartwatch powered by Google and Samsung’s new Wear OS software, CNET’s Scott Stein reported last year. It’ll likely have high-end features that might even be an upgrade from the Fitbit Sense, the company’s most expensive watch, along with cellular connectivity and Google’s apps.

It would be a big step forward for Fitbit, which currently sells smartwatches that run its own Fitbit OS software. While I’ve always appreciated Fitbit’s wide selection of health features, detailed sleep tracking and long battery life, I’ve always felt its software could use some work. The experience doesn’t feel as polished as the software on watches from Apple and Samsung, and there aren’t as many apps. But that could all change with Wear OS.

Yet Fitbit might not be completely abandoning its Fitbit OS either. A next-generation version of the Fitbit Versa and Fitbit Sense watch may be in the works according to 9to5Google, which wouldn’t run on Wear OS.

Of course, only Apple, Samsung and Fitbit truly know what products are in their respective pipelines. But whatever their plans may be, health monitoring will likely continue to be a big focus for the smartwatch industry at large. Current smartwatches can already track an assortment of data points about our bodies, from how much time we spent asleep to our resting heart rate and blood oxygen saturation. Experts believe making better sense of such data is a big part of where wearable devices are going next.

The same quadcopters you can buy at Amazon are on the front lines of the battle for Ukraine.

Ukrainian nonprofit Come Back Alive has collected ammunition, rifle stands and radios to help the country’s soldiers fight Russia’s invasion. This week, it also delivered items more commonly used to pep up YouTube videos than fight a war: 24 DJI Mavic 3 drones.

“Our drones are our eyes,” said one Ukrainian military officer who’s worked with drones since 2015 and spoke on condition of anonymity for security reasons. The Ukrainian military has no official drone unit, the officer said, but soldiers and civilians use them to see what’s in the next village or along the next kilometer of road. “If Russian artillery is preparing to strike, we can shift civilians. … It’s a possibility to make a preventive strike and to save Ukrainian people.”

From commercial quadcopters to fixed-wing military models, drones have proved important to Ukraine, giving its outgunned defense better chances against the huge Russian military. Early in the war, a civilian drone team called Aerorozvidka worked with military units to help Ukraine stall a convoy of armored vehicles headed toward Kyiv, the country’s capital. During a nighttime ambush, the unmanned aircraft dropped small explosives on the lead vehicles, which along with mines caused a pileup. The team also helped Ukraine repel Russia’s initial attempt to seize the airport near Kyiv.

Unmanned aircraft have been used in warfare as far back as 1849. Japan sent balloon bombs over the Pacific Ocean to the US during World War II. The term “drone” became mainstream when General Atomics’ hulking MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper drones caught on in US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. By 2011, the US military had 11,000 of the big, expensive systems.

Rarely, however, have drones played the role they’re taking on in the asymmetric war between Ukraine’s low budget forces and Russia’s gargantuan military. Miniaturization has improved the cost, flight time and range of commercial drones, while Ukrainians have used military drones successfully against Russian armored vehicles that can cost millions of dollars. Drones are rewriting the rules of war.

“The tank was key at one point,” said John Parachini, a Rand Corp. military researcher. “Now drones may be the more decisive weapons system.”

Though commercial drones are useful mostly for reconnaissance, Ukraine’s fleet of military drones has proved important to delivering the actual attack. The large Turkish built Bayraktar TB2 has been used to destroy Russian resupply vehicles and surface-to-air missile launchers. One Ukrainian company, UA Dynamics, makes the low-profile surveillance drone called Punisher that can carry a 4-pound bomb. The US Defense Department is shipping more than 100 smaller military drones called Switchblades and Pumas from US manufacturer AeroVironment.

Ukrainians are using about 1,000 drones in the war effort, the military officer estimated. Many are mere “toys,” he said, “but we have what we have.”

Sales of military drones are expected to increase about 7% per year, to $18 billion, in 2026 from $13 billion in 2021, according to Business Research Company.

US drone makers get involved with Ukraine
Other US drone makers are delivering drones to Ukraine for humanitarian or noncombat uses:

Draganfly has sold 10 drones and donated three more for delivering blood, vaccines, antibiotics, insulin and other medical products that must be refrigerated. Partners for that work include Coldchain Delivery Systems and Revived Soldiers Ukraine. Some are being fitted with lidar and magnetometer sensors to detect landmines, too. It plans to send 200 drones by August, said CEO Cameron Chell.
Aquiline Drones has donated 40 of its $3,000 Spartacus Hurricane drones to Ukraine for inspections, search and rescue, and sending relief items like medication and water, said CEO Barry Alexander. With a boost from donations, it hopes to send 1,000 of the drones to Ukraine.
Skydio, whose drones dodge trees and houses using autonomous navigation, has donated dozens of drones, worth about $100,000 in total, to support humanitarian and relief efforts in Ukraine, said CEO Adam Bry. Though Skydio focuses on commercial uses, it also sells drones to the US Army for surveillance.
“If you’re taking fire, the first thing you do is take cover and understand where the fire is coming from,” said Chuck McGraw, who leads Skydio’s federal sales and deployed drones as a Navy SEAL in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world. “You can pop up a drone in 60 seconds or less and put eyes on the threat.”

The Russians have their own drones and air defense systems for counteracting Ukrainian drones. Ukrainian photos show Russians have the same DJI Mavic 3 drones that Ukraine is using. But when it comes to Russian military drones, careful accounting in the open source intelligence movement has shown significant losses, with 21 downed or captured Russian drones so far.

“The Russians are a little behind in this game, and the Ukrainians have proved extremely inventive,” RAND’s Parachini said.

The drone advantage in Ukraine isn’t permanent, as militaries add new abilities to destroy drones or jam the radio transmissions they rely on. And though Russian air defense systems apparently didn’t work as well as expected in Ukraine, militaries are investing in counter-drone technology, Parachini said.

Drones are dangerous to use in war, the Ukrainian officer added. Enemy forces can fire on operators when they see a drone take off and can use DJI’s AeroScope technology to locate drones. “In Ukrainian we have a joke: Every time we have a new mouse, someone will construct a new mouse catcher,” the officer said.

DJI didn’t respond to a request for comment but tweeted in response to Ukrainian criticism that military use of its drones is “inappropriate.”

AeroVironment military drones head to Ukraine
Drones can occupy a middle ground between human piloted aircraft and missiles. AeroVironment’s Switchblade 300 and 600 models are “loitering missiles” that unfold their wings like a pocket knife with a lot of blades and can stay airborne until a targeting system tells them where to go.

The 300 weighs 5.5 pounds, fits into a backpack and is launched from a compact tube. It can fly for 15 minutes – covering more than 6 miles – before colliding into its target. The 50-pound Switchblade 600 is designed for more serious targets like armored vehicles. It can fly up to 25 miles and loiter for 40 minutes.

AeroVironment also sells the Puma line of reconnaissance drones that can stay aloft for as long as six and a half hours. After being launched with a throw, catapult or truck, they can be used to spot targets and transfer coordinates wirelessly to Switchblades for an attack.

“A two-person team with a Switchblade drone can be miles away and take out a $50 million piece of equipment with five people in it,” said Michael Robbins, head of government affairs for a US industry group, the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International.

The US military began sending 100 Switchblades to Ukraine in late March as part of an $800 million military aid package, then announced a further $300 million package on April 1 that includes both Pumas and Switchblades. The Pentagon declined to comment on which models, but the latter package includes Switchblade 600s, according to Bloomberg. AeroVironment declined to comment for this story.

The Turkish Bayraktar TB2, with a 40-foot wingspan, can navigate without GPS and carry laser-guided munitions. They cost about $1 million each, Robbins said.

“The Bayraktar TB2 has been used to fairly devastating effect against ground forces,” Robbins said. “It’s become a rallying cry in Ukraine.”

The huge drone has become so successful in frustrating the Russians that it’s inspired a music video to sing its praises.

“Russian bandits are made into ghosts by Bayraktar,” says a translation of the lyrics.

As the cost of living rises it is “vital” that broadband firms do more to promote discounted broadband for low-income households, the government says.

In a letter to broadband suppliers, Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries noted only 1-2% of Universal Credit claimants take up social tariffs.

Ofcom has previously said that 84% of benefit recipients were unaware of social tariff packages.

It said it had seen “limited evidence” of those tariffs being promoted.

The Good Things Foundation, which campaigns on behalf of the digitally excluded, described data poverty as an issue that has “grown significantly over the past two years during the pandemic”.

It warned increases to the cost of living “will only put further pressure on those on the lowest incomes, who are already having to make stark choices between having the internet connection they need and heating their house or feeding their family”.

In her letter to broadband firms, Nadine Dorries highlighted the increasing prevalence of “a more digital society” and said it was “vital” to raise awareness of discount broadband offers “for low-income households”.

Of the five million households eligible for cheaper broadband, only around 55,000 households are currently taking advantage of the offers available, the culture secretary noted, in her letter.

Ms Dorries invited the telecoms companies to respond “on how we go further”.

line
‘Tougher and tougher’
Mike – who asked the BBC not to use his last name – has been off work due to medical issues and claims Universal Credit.

Speaking on the phone to the BBC, he says he’s on the sofa wrapped in a duvet as he can’t afford to turn the heating on.

“It’s getting tougher and tougher. Obviously, with the electric going up, food prices going up – I’m starting to struggle.”

He doesn’t have a TV, and uses foodbanks; a local charity provides food vouchers and a hot meal – and recently it has given him a tablet so he can access the internet.

The internet is an essential – Mike uses it to communicate with the job centre, among many other things.

At present, he’s using the limited data that comes with his phone and the tablet – paying for broadband isn’t a possibility: “Taking extra bills on at the moment, is not something I’d want to do,” he tells the BBC.

He says he has heard a little about social tariffs, but only through the grapevine: “It’s not really put out there for you to find it easy, you’ve got to go and try and find that information”.

line
Many of those struggling to pay their bills turn to Citizen’s Advice for help.

Matthew Upton, the charity’s director of policy, told the BBC: “We’re hearing shocking stories of people on the lowest incomes struggling to get by and yet they’re missing out on affordable broadband deals.

“It’s good to see the government applying more pressure on firms to do more to help people move onto social tariffs, but if it still doesn’t work they must consider other options.”

Other organisations welcome efforts to raise awareness of social tariffs, but say it won’t fix the underlying problem of rising costs and insufficient income.

Previously Ofcom found that, even on a social tariff, broadband takes up nearly 5% of the disposable income of an unemployed person claiming Universal Credit.

Rebecca McDonald, Senior Economist at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, told the BBC promoting social tariffs “is no substitute for meaningful action to protect peoples’ incomes, as we face the biggest squeeze on living standards in generations”.

“At a bare minimum, the government must increase benefits in line with inflation as soon as possible, to protect those most at risk of hardship.”

Companies urge further support
Some of the biggest telecoms companies have also called on the government to do more.

A spokesperson for Virgin Media O2 said it was speaking to the government about “ways to make sign-up easier and quicker”.

The firm said it hoped to move from a manual to an automated process to help identify individuals or families receiving Universal Credit.

BT told the BBC it offered an “at-cost” social tariff and, as living costs rise, it was “now urgent that the rest of the industry plays their part to introduce this sort of social tariff, and that government looks at what more they can do to offer further support for those who continue to struggle”.

“If the industry does not play their part, government should empower Ofcom to require this.”

line
How can I get a social tariff?
Different deals are available from different broadband providers.

They are usually available to customers who receive certain government benefits – such as universal credit, pension credit, income support, jobseekers’ allowance or employment and support allowance.

Regulator Ofcom has a list of providers, how much their tariffs cost, their broadband speeds and who is eligible – you can have a look here.

Ofcom also says that as well as these tariffs, other support might be available to customers who might not be able to get online because they struggle to afford internet services.

It says if you’re struggling to pay your mobile phone or broadband bill, you should speak to your provider as soon as possible to see how they can help.

Allegations of Chinese cyber activity as the recent conflict broke out in Ukraine have been emerging.

The details appear unusually murky but one Western intelligence official believes the aim was espionage – and the cyber-attack may have been broader than previously reported.

The Times first reported that hackers, alleged to be based in China, began targeting Ukrainian websites on 23 February, the day before the invasion.

That led to questions as to whether they had advance notice of Moscow’s plans and if their intention was somehow to support Russia.

A broad set of Ukrainian government and commercial organisations were said to have been targeted by hackers, including organisations linked to nuclear power.

It is unclear how far this activity was scanning for vulnerabilities online and how many websites were actually compromised.

But the aim looks to have been espionage – stealing secrets – rather than the kind of sabotage operations which Russia was accused of carrying out just before the invasion, and when it started.

The Times cited intelligence documents – but the Ukrainian security service denied they had handed anything over and seemed to downplay the revelations, adding to confusion.

Some analysts wondered if they were worried about antagonising Beijing.

On Monday, the Chinese embassy in the UK rejected the claim and described the Times report as “sheer irresponsible talk and not credible at all”.

Russia targeted
But some Western officials believe the story is even more complex. They claim the Chinese actors went on to target systems in Russia and Belarus, as well as Poland:

“Since late February, Chinese cyber-actors have been launching cyber-attacks against government and military networks in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus,” claims one western intelligence official.

“Russia was observed to be a significant target of the recent Chinese cyber activity,” they added.

The claim cannot be independently verified, although a number of researchers and cyber-security companies say they have seen some Chinese activity and are investigating.

There are other bizarre aspects: the attacks were more amateurish and ‘noisy’ than normal, it is claimed, almost as if the hackers were less concerned about being discovered.

And the alleged Chinese hackers, in a shift from normal behaviour, are said to have launched their campaign from Western infrastructure.

Normally, they would approach their target using servers and systems around the world. but in this case it was only from Western systems.

“The scale, timing and targets of the operation indicate a significant departure,” the Western intelligence official said.

False flag
China has always dismissed accusations that it is involved in cyber-espionage and has recently been pointing the finger at Western governments, and particularly the US, over hacking into its networks.

“The targeting of both the Ukrainian and Russian targets was conducted in a non-covert way. One possible reason for this would be to try and ‘false flag’ the activity,” the intelligence official explained.

So it is possible China was taking advantage of the conflict in order to spy, not just on Ukraine but also Russia, Belarus and other countries – but perhaps trying to do so using a ‘false flag’ – so that it could try to pin any blame on Western governments.

That is one possibility, but one which Beijing is likely to deny. Trying to understand what was really happening in this case may not be easy.

Over the next five years, three new heavy-lift rockets will put thousands of satellites into low earth orbit as part of Amazon’s Project Kuiper.

The project aims to provide broadband connections using a constellation of 3,236 satellites.

Rival Starlink is said to have more than 2,300 satellites in orbit already.

The rockets will be made by Arianespace, Blue Origin – which was founded by Amazon owner Jeff Bezos – and United Launch Alliance.

Amazon says Project Kuiper aims to provide high-speed, low-latency broadband to customers including households, businesses, government agencies, disaster relief operations, mobile operators, and other organisations “working in places without reliable internet connectivity”.

Like Elon Musk’s Starlink, users will connect to the internet via a terminal that communicates with the satellites. Amazon says its experience in shipping and making products like Echo and Kindle will be useful in producing and distributing these.

“Project Kuiper will provide fast, affordable broadband to tens of millions of customers in unserved and underserved communities around the world,” said Dave Limp, senior vice-president for Amazon Devices & Services, in a statement announcing the deal.

New rockets
Amazon plans 83 launches over the next five years, saying it constitutes “the largest commercial procurement of launch vehicles in history”.

The firm plans two “prototype” missions later this year – but using a rocket made by ABL Space Systems, and not the three that will launch the bulk of the satellites.

Unlike Elon Musk’s Falcon 9 rockets, the three new rockets used for Project Kuiper’s launches are still in development.

Another satellite internet firm OneWeb, which is part-owned by the British government, recently decided to use SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets after losing access to the Russian-built Soyuz rockets it had been using, following the invasion of Ukraine.

In total Mr Musk hopes to launch as many as 30,000 Starlink satellites into space.

The value of this type of low-earth orbit satellite internet has already been demonstrated in Ukraine, where the United States Agency for International Development said, in conjunction with SpaceX, it had helped ship a total of 5,000 Starlink terminals to the country’s government.

But, as low-earth orbit becomes increasingly congested, astronomers have complained that the light reflected from these satellites as they pass overhead increasingly disrupts the view of the night’s sky.

Astro-photographer Mary McIntyre, said on Twitter: “The satellites are literally destroying our beautiful night sky.”

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
View original tweet on Twitter
There are also concerns that so many satellites in orbit exacerbates the risk of collision and the problem of space junk.

Twitter has limited content from more than 300 official Russian government accounts, including that of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The accounts will no longer be recommended in timelines, notifications or elsewhere on the site, Twitter said.

The company said it would take action against any country which “restricts access to the open internet while they’re engaged in armed conflict”.

The platform has been severely limited in Russia since war began in Ukraine .

Currently Putin has two official accounts on the social media site: one in Russian and one in English. They have 3.6 million and 1.7 million followers respectively.

Twitter said allowing Russian government officials to post freely on the social media site, whilst simultaneously limiting the platform in Russia “creates a harmful information imbalance”.

As part of Tuesday’s action, content on more than 300 official government accounts will no longer be “recommended or amplified”. This means Twitter’s powerful algorithm will not promote these accounts.

The targeted Russian government accounts include official ministry and embassy profiles, as well as the accounts of high-ranking Russian officials.

The accounts have previously been criticised for spreading misinformation during the Ukraine war, but unlike tweets from Russian state-affiliated media outlets, they have not previously been subject to specific moderation by Twitter.

How Kremlin accounts manipulate Twitter
Twitter confirms it is being restricted in Russia
Ukraine invasion: How the war is being waged online
On 10 March the Russian Embassy in the UK’s official account claimed the bombing of a maternity hospital in the Ukrainian city of Mariupol had been faked.

The claim was false. Twitter later removed tweets making the “FAKE” claim.

Last month, a BBC investigation found further misinformation spread by official Russian government accounts, as well as evidence of coordinated activity – using multiple government accounts to drive a particular narrative – which is against Twitter’s rules.

Recent posts claiming civilian killings in the town of Bucha had been staged have also been debunked.

However, Twitter says that it is Russia’s actions in Ukraine, combined with the country’s decision to block and limit social media platforms domestically, that has led to their action.

“When a government that’s engaged in armed conflict is blocking or limiting access to online services within their country, while they themselves continue to use those same services to advance their positions and viewpoints – that creates a harmful information imbalance”, says Yoel Roth, Head of Site Integrity at Twitter.

Twitter says it is applying the rules to any country that limits access to online services while engaging in interstate warfare. But the new rules, which came into force on Tuesday, initially only affect Russian government accounts.

Not ‘tit-for-tat’
Although Twitter is not banned in Russia, the site has been severely slowed down, to the point of inoperability.

However, Twitter says its action was not retaliatory.

“To be clear, this isn’t a ‘tit-for-tat’ policy, where if you block Twitter then you get de-amplified by Twitter – this enforcement will occur whether Twitter is blocked or not,” said Mr Roth.

He added that Twitter will take action on media depicting prisoners of war which have been posted by government or state-affiliated media accounts.

“If we see media that’s published by government or state media accounts that feature prisoners of war, or if the prisoner of war is being subjected to ill treatment, things like violence, humiliation or mockery, we will require the removal of those tweets” he said.

Twitter “de-amplified” Russian state media on the platform – such as Russia Today and Sputnik – on 28 February, four days after the invasion of Ukraine began. The company previously told the BBC the action had led to a “30 percent reduction of the reach of this content”.

However the action was not enforced on official Russian government accounts.

Speaking last month, Tim Graham, a social media analyst at QUT Digital Media Research Centre in Australia, described it as a “loophole” in Twitter’s moderation policies.

“It’s certainly a blind spot in Twitter’s defences against disinformation,” he said.

Facebook users around the world have been waking up to find themselves locked out of their accounts for no apparent reason.

The message many received reads: “Your Facebook account was disabled because it did not follow our Community Standards. This decision can’t be reversed.”

One user told the BBC there was no warning or explanation given.

Parent firm Meta said it was investigating.

In a tweet, Meta’s Andy Stone said: “We’re aware that some users are experiencing issues accessing their Facebook accounts and we are working to resolve them as quickly as possible.”

He did not say how many were affected, or what the issue was.

PR consultant Jen Roberts was one of those to find herself locked out of her account. She told the BBC: “I haven’t posted anything or commented for quite some time, so it’s extremely unlikely that I’ve done anything that could be construed as offensive.”

But, despite not being an avid user, finding her account locked was still upsetting: “All of the images from my university years and family occasions are on Facebook

“I will no longer have access to 15-plus years of content, which is genuinely sad.

“It is also quite stressful not knowing what the issue is, and having no recourse to resolve it. To be given no warning and then no way to access our own data is mindboggling.”

The chief executive of a political consulting firm has responded to a report alleging Meta paid his company to “undermine” TikTok.

Internal emails, apparently seen by the Washington Post, allegedly suggested Targeted Victory’s campaign aimed to show TikTok “as a danger to American children”.

Zac Moffatt tweeted that the Post’s report mischaracterised their work and “key points are simply false”.

The BBC approached Meta for comment.

A spokesperson said: “We believe all platforms, including TikTok, should face a level of scrutiny consistent with their growing success.”

Paper push
The “bare-knuckle” campaign allegedly included placing opinion pieces and letters to the editor in US regional news outlets “promoting dubious stories about alleged TikTok trends that actually originated on Facebook”, the Post journalists wrote.

None of the opinion pieces or letters to the editor revealed that a Meta-funded group had been pushing them, the paper added.

In response to the article, Mr Moffat tweeted that: “The story infers that the words of the letters to the editor were not the authors’ own, nor did they know of Meta’s involvement. That is false. They will confirm that.”

In internal emails, the paper claimed, Targeted Victory urged its partners to get stories into local media that linked TikTok to dangerous trends.

“Dream would be to get stories with headlines like ‘From dances to danger: how TikTok has become the most harmful social media space for kids’,” one Targeted Victory staff member allegedly wrote in an email apparently seen by the Post.

Challenges
The paper alleged that Targeted Victory encouraged operatives to amplify reports of dangerous trends linked to TikTok.

This included a purported Devious Licks challenge, which encouraged damage to school property, and reports of a rumoured Slap a Teacher challenge, which an investigation by news site Insider suggested did not in fact exist.

But journalistic investigations, the Post said, suggested that stories about both challenges began to spread on Facebook.

Following publication, Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers – a large US teaching union – accused Facebook of fanning the flames of Devious Licks and terrifying “teachers, students and parents across America as a result”.

Those fears were echoed by TikTok itself. In response to the article, the company told the BBC: “We are deeply concerned that the stoking of local media reports on alleged trends that have not been found on the platform could cause real world harm.”

Responding to the article, technology journalist Casey Newton wrote on his newsletter Platformer that the effect went beyond inconvenience, but it risked inspiring people to carry out the purported challenges.

“Even the fact that Meta might have helped to inspire such copycats ought to have been enough to kill this project when it was still being white-boarded,” he wrote.

Mr Moffatt tweeted that The Post itself had reported on the purported TikTok challenges.

Media strategies
Targeted Victory describes itself as “right-of-centre”, but Mr Moffatt said it managed “bipartisan teams”.

In 2016, Mr Moffatt met with Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg as part of a group of high-profile conservative figures following allegations – which the firm denied – that it tampered with its Trending Topics feature, to promote “progressive” views.

Now it is Mr Moffatt’s work with Meta that is attracting scrutiny. However, this latest incident is not the first time the strategies of firms hired by the social media giant have been criticised.

In 2018, the New York Times exposed tactics used by a public relations company, Definers, hired by Facebook.

The paper said the firm circulated a document falsely claiming anti-Facebook campaign group Freedom From Facebook was backed by the financier George Soros.

Mr Zuckerberg said he had not been aware of the Definers actions and said the company would no longer work with the firm.

Dyson has taken its first step into wearable technology, with an eye-catching pair of over-ear headphones that come with an air-purifying mouth visor.

Best known for vacuum cleaners, Dyson has diversified in recent years with products such as fans and a hairdryer.

The headphones – dubbed Dyson Zone – are designed to tackle the growing issue of air pollution.

One reviewer said they would definitely “turn heads in the street”.

Britta O’Boyle, deputy editor at gadget publication Pocket-lint, wrote: “Their design is certainly eye catching.”

The sound quality was “excellent”, she told the BBC News, and the headphones had a “lovely construction”.

But as she had been unable to test the product outdoors, she could not say how effectively it would purify air or “how silly you feel wearing it”.

The headphones go on sale in the autumn.

“We don’t expect them to be cheap,” O’Boyle added.

Global problem
The noise-cancelling headphones come with a motor, fan and air filters in each ear cup.

Air is sucked through the filters, capturing allergens and pollutants such as nitrogen and sulphur dioxide and brake dust.

And this purified air is then channelled to the nose and mouth via the visor, which is magnetically attached to the bottom of the headphones.

It is 97% effective at getting clean air to the lungs, the company says.

Track breathing
There are four purification modes, depending on whether the wearer is walking down a street or sitting down.

The headphones use sensors to track breathing and exertion and then toggle between modes.

They also come with:

an app that lets users specify their location and determines when the filter needs replacing
a face covering comes that slots into the visor
The product has four hours’ battery life in low-filtration mode, according to Pocket-lint, or 1.5 hours in high filtration.

‘Fresh air’
Chief engineer Jake Dyson said: “Air pollution is a global problem – it affects us everywhere we go.”

“The Dyson Zone purifies the air your breathe on the move.

“And unlike face masks, it delivers a plume of fresh air without touching your face, using high-performance filters and two miniaturised air pumps.”

The non-contact aspect was a “must” for the designers, to avoid discomfort and irritation.

It was also a first foray into audio for Dyson engineers.

The Dyson Zone has been six years – and 500 prototypes – in the making

Originally, a snorkel-like mouthpiece was paired with a backpack holding the motor and inner workings.

The Verge called the finished product “bizarre”, stressing it was not an early April Fool’s joke.

“While mask wearing has been normalised considerably over the past two years, we’ll have to see whether customers will be willing to embrace this extremely odd-looking product,” it wrote.

Gadget publication Stuff.tv called it “the wildest gadget we’ve ever tried”.

And tech website Cnet said it looked “like something you’d see in a dystopian sci-fi movie”.

The National Cyber Security Centre has said more organisations should reconsider the risk of using Russian technology, including anti-virus software.

But in a blog post published today, it said that for most individual users it is safe to use Kaspersky’s software.

Germany recently suggested replacing Kaspersky anti-virus.

The Russia-headquartered firm said the German warnings were “made on political grounds”.

Critical Infrastructure.
In 2017, The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) announced it would write to all government departments, warning against using Kaspersky products for systems related to national security.

But in today’s blog post, the NCSC’s Ian Levy wrote: “We have no evidence that the Russian state intends to suborn Russian commercial products and services to cause damage to UK interests, but the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

The centre is now urging more groups to reconsider their use of Russian controlled technology including:

wider public sector organisations that weren’t covered by its 2017 guidance
organisations providing services to Ukraine
organisations that if compromised could represent a PR ‘win’ for Russia
organisations providing services related to critical infrastructure

“We’ve not seen – and don’t expect to see – the massive, global cyber-attacks that some had predicted,” the NCSC’s Ian Levy says in his blog.

But the Ukraine conflict has changed the balance of risks.

The UK already had advice from a few years back regarding use of products like Kaspersky anti-virus but this was confined to those involved in national security.

German authorities issued a new tougher warning calling for Kaspersky products to be removed after the Ukraine conflict began, raising questions about whether the UK would follow.

And the NCSC started to get phone calls from members of the public worried about turning their laptops on because they ran Kaspersky.

That has now led to a broader warning that a wider range of institutions – like those in critical infrastructure or who might be the targets of Russian retaliation – should think carefully about using any Russian products.

But this new advice still does not apply to the general public – who are not thought to be at direct risk.

2px presentational grey line
German warnings
Earlier in March, Germany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) said that against the backdrop of the invasion of Ukraine and threats against Nato and the EU, Russian IT manufacturers could be forced against their will “to attack target systems, or be spied on as a victim of a cyber-operation without its knowledge or as a tool for attacks against its own customers,”

The BSI found no evidence of current problems with Kaspersky products but recommended its anti-virus products were replaced with alternatives – but carefully, to avoid weakening defences.

In response, the firm said the BSI decision was “not based on a technical assessment of Kaspersky products”, and as a private global cyber-security company it “does not have any ties to the Russian or any other government”.

It added: “The security and integrity of our data services and engineering practices have been confirmed by independent third-party assessments.”

But the German warning raised the level of public concern, which the NCSC has sought to address.

“It almost certainly remains the case that nearly all individuals in the UK (and many enterprises) are not going to be targeted by Russian cyber-attack, regardless of whether they use Russian products and services” Mr Levy wrote.

“If your personal laptop uses Kaspersky AV (or other products) it’s highly unlikely to be directly targeted…it’s safe to turn on and use at the moment.”