Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 Leaks: Thinner Design & Bigger Displays
Samsung has officially confirmed its next Galaxy Unpacked event, scheduled for July 9, 2025, in Brooklyn, New York. This highly anticipated event will unveil the latest advancements in Samsung's flagship lineup, including the Galaxy Z Fold 7, Galaxy Flip 7, Galaxy Watch 8 series, and new Galaxy earbuds. With a focus on innovation, seamless ecosystem integration, and user-centric design, Samsung aims to solidify its leadership in mobile and wearable technology.
Watch this video on YouTube. Galaxy Z Fold 7: Slimmer, Smarter, and More Versatile
The Galaxy Z Fold 7 is expected to be the centerpiece of the event, showcasing Samsung's continued dominance in foldable smartphone technology. Rumors suggest a thinner and more portable design, making it easier to carry without compromising durability. Enhanced camera systems are anticipated, offering improved image quality for both casual users and photography enthusiasts. Additionally, larger internal and external displays are expected to enhance multitasking, gaming, and media consumption, catering to users who demand versatility in their devices. These upgrades reflect Samsung's ongoing commitment to refining foldable display technology, a market segment where it remains a leader. Galaxy Flip 7: A Fresh Take on Compact Design
The Galaxy Flip 7 is set to redefine compact smartphones with a redesigned cover screen that addresses user demand for greater functionality. This updated cover screen is expected to provide quick access to notifications, widgets, and essential apps, making the device more practical for everyday use. The Flip 7's compact design, combined with its enhanced usability, positions it as a stylish yet functional option for users who prioritize portability without sacrificing performance. Samsung's focus on balancing form and function ensures the Flip 7 will appeal to a wide range of users. Galaxy Watch 8 Series: Smarter Wearables for Everyday Life
The Galaxy Watch 8 series, including the highly anticipated Galaxy Watch Ultra 2025, is expected to bring significant advancements to Samsung's wearable lineup. These smartwatches are rumored to feature advanced health monitoring tools, such as improved heart rate tracking, sleep analysis, and stress management features. A longer battery life and a sleeker, more ergonomic design are also anticipated, making sure comfort and convenience for daily wear. Whether you're tracking fitness goals, monitoring your health, or staying connected on the go, the Galaxy Watch 8 series aims to deliver both functionality and style. Samsung's emphasis on wearable technology underscores its strategy to create a cohesive ecosystem where devices work seamlessly together. Next-Generation Galaxy Earbuds: Enhanced Audio Experience
Samsung's new Galaxy earbuds are expected to elevate its wireless audio offerings with several key improvements. These earbuds are rumored to include enhanced sound quality, advanced noise cancellation, and extended battery life. Designed to integrate effortlessly with other Galaxy devices, they promise a superior audio experience for music, calls, and virtual meetings. With these upgrades, Samsung continues to strengthen its ecosystem, making sure a unified user experience across its product lineup. Unified Galaxy Ecosystem: Seamless Connectivity
Samsung's commitment to ecosystem integration remains a cornerstone of its product strategy. The Galaxy Z Fold 7, Flip 7, Watch 8 series, and Galaxy earbuds are designed to work together seamlessly, creating a unified experience for users. For example, you can switch effortlessly between your smartphone and smartwatch or enjoy uninterrupted audio transitions between your earbuds and other Galaxy devices. This interconnected approach enhances convenience, productivity, and user satisfaction, making it easier to stay connected across all aspects of your digital life. Exclusive Offers: Reservations and Trade-In Programs
Samsung is offering exclusive perks for early adopters through its free reservation program, available until July 8, 2025. By reserving a device, you can receive $50 in Samsung credit, bonus rewards points, and entry into a $5,000 prize draw. Additionally, Samsung's trade-in programs allow users to upgrade to the latest Galaxy devices at a reduced cost, making innovative technology more accessible. These incentives reflect Samsung's commitment to delivering value to its customers while encouraging adoption of its latest innovations. What to Expect on July 9
The July 9 Galaxy Unpacked event promises to be a showcase of Samsung's latest innovations in smartphones, wearables, and audio devices. With the Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Flip 7 leading the lineup, alongside the Galaxy Watch 8 series and new earbuds, Samsung is poised to redefine the mobile and wearable technology landscape. By emphasizing ecosystem integration, advanced features, and customer-focused incentives, the company continues to set the standard for innovation in the tech industry. This event will undoubtedly highlight Samsung's vision for the future of connected devices, offering users a glimpse into the next generation of technology.
Uncover more insights about the Galaxy Z Fold 7 in the previous articles we have written.
Source & Image Credit: Demon's Tech Filed Under: Android News, Mobile Phone News, Top News
Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals
Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Geeky Gadgets
11 minutes ago
- Geeky Gadgets
How to Use Google VEO 3 For Beginners in 2025
Have you ever imagined creating stunning, professional-grade videos without needing a full production team or years of editing experience? With the rise of AI-powered tools, this is no longer a distant dream. Enter Google VEO 3, a innovative video creation platform that's redefining how we approach content production. Whether you're a social media enthusiast, a budding filmmaker, or a marketing professional, this tool promises to simplify the process while delivering breathtaking results. But here's the catch: with so many features and options, knowing where to start can feel overwhelming. That's where this beginner-friendly tutorial comes in, offering you a clear path to mastering Google VEO 3 from day one. In this instructional feature, crafted by Manizha & Ryan, you'll uncover everything you need to know to get started with Google VEO 3. From exploring its intuitive Flow environment for quick projects to unlocking the advanced customization power of Gemini, this guide will help you harness the platform's potential. You'll learn how to create videos using text prompts, animate static images, and even fine-tune cinematic styles to suit your creative vision. Along the way, we'll share tips on managing credits and choosing the right subscription plan, so you can create high-quality content without breaking the bank. By the end, you'll not only understand how to use Google VEO 3 but also feel inspired to push the boundaries of what's possible in video storytelling. Overview of Google VEO 3 Getting Started with Google VEO 3 To begin using Google VEO 3, all you need is a Google account. The platform operates through two distinct cloud-based environments: Flow and Gemini. Here's how to get started: Free Trial: New users can explore the platform with a free trial in Flow, offering an opportunity to test its capabilities before committing to a subscription. New users can explore the platform with a free trial in Flow, offering an opportunity to test its capabilities before committing to a subscription. Subscription Plans: After the trial, select from two subscription tiers based on your needs: AI Pro: Priced at $20/month, this plan includes 1,000 credits, ideal for casual users. AI Ultra: Priced at $250/month, this plan provides 12,500 credits, catering to professional creators. After the trial, select from two subscription tiers based on your needs: Credits serve as the platform's currency for generating videos. Higher-quality videos consume more credits, and running out of credits imposes usage restrictions. For instance, without credits, Gemini limits you to three videos per day, while Flow remains accessible for basic projects. Creating Videos with Flow Flow is designed for simplicity and speed, making it the perfect starting point for beginners. Follow these steps to create your first video: Access Flow: Visit and select 'Try in Flow.' Visit and select 'Try in Flow.' Select a Mode: Choose between: Text-to-Video: Convert written prompts into video content effortlessly. Frames-to-Video: Animate static images or frames into dynamic videos. Choose between: Customize Your Video: Define key elements such as the subject, environment, interactions, camera angles, and cinematic style to align with your creative vision. Flow also includes intuitive tools for extending scenes and adding intricate details, allowing you to maintain creative control while keeping the process straightforward. How to Use Google VEO 3 For Beginners Watch this video on YouTube. Below are more guides on Google VEO 3 from our extensive range of articles. Advanced Customization with Gemini For projects requiring greater precision and complexity, Gemini offers advanced customization options. While it processes videos more slowly than Flow, it is ideal for intricate projects. Here's how to use Gemini effectively: Access Gemini: Navigate to and select 'Try in Gemini.' Navigate to and select 'Try in Gemini.' Ideal Use Cases: Gemini is perfect for projects that demand detailed cinematic styles, interactive environments, or high levels of customization. Although more resource-intensive, Gemini enables creators to push the boundaries of video production, offering unparalleled flexibility and control. Key Features for Enhanced Video Customization Google VEO 3 provides a comprehensive suite of tools to help you tailor your videos to your specific needs. These features include: Cinematic Styles: Select from a variety of visual styles, including editorial, cartoon, and realistic options, to match your creative goals. Select from a variety of visual styles, including editorial, cartoon, and realistic options, to match your creative goals. Audio Customization: Add background music or sound effects to enhance the emotional impact of your videos. Add background music or sound effects to enhance the emotional impact of your videos. Color Schemes: Adjust tones and aesthetics to align with your desired theme or branding. Adjust tones and aesthetics to align with your desired theme or branding. Scene Extension: Expand scenes to include additional details, interactions, or dynamic elements. The platform's credit system ensures flexibility in video quality. For example, high-quality videos require 100 credits, while lower-quality outputs consume fewer credits, allowing you to manage resources effectively. Subscription Plans and Credit Management Google VEO 3 offers two subscription plans tailored to different levels of usage: AI Pro: Designed for casual users, this plan provides 1,000 credits per month for $20, making it suitable for smaller projects. Designed for casual users, this plan provides 1,000 credits per month for $20, making it suitable for smaller projects. AI Ultra: Geared toward professionals, this plan offers 12,500 credits per month for $250, accommodating larger-scale or more frequent video production needs. Credits are deducted based on the complexity and quality of the video. If you exhaust your credits, Gemini restricts you to three videos per day, while Flow remains available for basic video creation. Practical Applications of Google VEO 3 The versatility of Google VEO 3 makes it an invaluable tool for a wide range of creative and professional applications. These include: Social Media Content: Create engaging videos tailored for platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, helping you capture audience attention effectively. Create engaging videos tailored for platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, helping you capture audience attention effectively. Advertisements: Develop professional-grade ad campaigns with cinematic appeal to elevate your brand's visibility. Develop professional-grade ad campaigns with cinematic appeal to elevate your brand's visibility. Creative Storytelling: Experiment with editorial, cartoon, or realistic styles to bring unique narratives to life. With its intuitive interface and powerful features, Google VEO 3 enables users of all experience levels to transform their creative visions into reality. Media Credit: Tutorials by Manizha & Ryan Filed Under: AI, Guides Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Inside Musk Town: What is it really like to work for the world's most controversial tech billionaire?
This week, Tesla investor and social media influencer Sawyer Merritt posted a 30-second video clip on X (formerly Twitter) of himself hailing one of the first 'robotaxis', a small fleet of driverless Teslas that Elon Musk has deployed to the baking tarmac of Austin, the Texas capital, in a bid to revolutionise transport and rescue his company's struggling stock value. In a sycophantic follow-up post, after apparently taking 20 robotaxi rides, Merritt wrote: 'No interventions, no critical safety issues. All my rides were smooth and comfortable. Thank you, Tesla, for letting me be a part of this experience ... This is the start of a new era.' But videos also began circulating online that showed the robotaxis veering into oncoming lanes, slamming on their brakes in the middle of traffic, and, in one alarming test performed by safety advocates, failing to stop for a school bus and hitting a child-sized mannequin. Federal regulators are now pressing Tesla for answers. Musk, meanwhile, said the launch was the 'culmination of a decade of hard work'. His robotaxis have become the latest flashpoint in Austin's uneasy relationship with Big Tech: a city once proud of its countercultural roots is now grappling with what happens when tech empires set the pace for growth, policy, and even public safety. I recently wrote a book about how the tech boom has reshaped the city, driving up house prices, displacing communities, and threatening the very individuality that once defined it. Musk isn't just a part of this story: he's become its most audacious character. His rapid expansion across Texas – from the sprawling Gigafactory just outside Austin, and his fledgling 'company town' in Bastrop, 30 minutes from the capital, to his private Starbase city on the Gulf coast – is transforming the state's physical, economic, and political landscape. According to a report in The Dallas Morning News last year, Musk's companies drive approximately $11.1bn (£8.1bn) per year in statewide economic activity. He's now the largest private employer in Austin. His vision may be bold, but as Musk's influence grows, so too do the questions about regulation, environmental impact, and who gets to define a place. 'Keep America Great Without the Crazy' Morris and Evelyn Tanner, both 80 years old, had never been to a protest before. But then Donald Trump got the keys to the White House, and Elon Musk took over the small town of Bastrop, where they live. The Tanners had lived in Duncanville, just outside Dallas, for a quarter of a century, but retired a few years ago to this sleepy town, half an hour's drive east of Austin, to be near their daughter Ellen, an artist and environmentalist. Evelyn, a retired youth minister, had always voted Democrat; Morris, a retired US Air Force colonel, considered himself an independent. When they first relocated, Morris didn't think too much about Musk's move to Texas. 'My take was that electric cars were a good thing,' he says. 'But I thought the reason he came to Texas was to avoid the environmental and labour regulations that existed in California.' Fast-forward to 2025, and after Trump gave Musk carte blanche to wield his proverbial chainsaw within the federal government, firing or laying off thousands, both Morris and Evelyn decided they had seen enough. Morris feels that America has taken a significant step away from democracy. Since then, the couple have joined protests in the town every Thursday. One such demonstration last month saw 170 people show up to stand on the Chestnut Street bridge over the Colorado River. 'Keep America Great Without the Crazy', read one sign; 'No Kings', read another. Ellen Tanner, who was there with her parents, says while there were no counterprotesters on the bridge itself, people 'cruised past multiple times expressing their displeasure, giving us the middle finger or thumbs down'. But she says she was also surprised, particularly in this rural part of Texas, that half the reactions from passers-by were positive. Divide and conquer It's fair to say Musk has divided the town, with environmentalists and Democrats on one side, and Trump voters, Musk supporters, and possibly those benefiting financially from the boom on the other. 'So many people here work for Tesla or SpaceX. These are people whose livelihood depends on him,' Ellen says. And some of them, perhaps, feel stuck in the middle. Bastrop lies just 30 miles east of Musk's 10 million sq ft Tesla 'Gigafactory', a grey concrete and glass monstrosity set just off the same stretch of Highway 71. Just before you reach the town, if you take a left off the main road and head towards the river, you'll find more vast warehouses: one contains Musk's Boring Company, which bores huge tunnels to facilitate underground city transit systems; another houses a division of SpaceX that is making components for Starlink satellites; a third is set to be the headquarters of X, the social media company once known as Twitter, which Musk bought in the autumn of 2022 for $44bn and subsequently renamed. Further south, in Boca Chica, a peninsula tucked into the southeastern tip of Texas where the Rio Grande River empties into the Gulf of Mexico, Musk has established Starbase, the headquarters of SpaceX, which includes offices, a planned 1 million sq ft factory, a shopping centre and restaurants, not to mention a launchpad for the rockets. In early May, residents there (mostly SpaceX employees) voted to incorporate Starbase as an official Texas city. Musk is not alone in his move to Texas from California: many have been attracted by the fact that the state has no income tax. Tesla's Texas factory could produce three times as many vehicles as the one on the west coast, Musk said, and it would employ up to 20,000 people. In a barbed swipe at Gavin Newsom, California's governor, he described him as the 'U-Haul salesman of the year', joking that everyone was packing up and leaving and would therefore be in need of the removal truck rental company. The rise of the company town – or a hostile takeover? Musk is also, apparently, bringing back the 'company town' – a quirk of the industrial age, when mining companies and manufacturing businesses built settlements to house (and control) their workforce. Although 'Snailbrook' currently comprises little more than a general store and a scattering of mobile homes behind the Boring Company warehouse in Bastrop, it could be the beginning of a purpose-built community with housing for more than 100 workers. At Bastrop, like Starbase, the plan is for Musk employees to live fully on site: they will work there, play there, and raise their families there. But as Musk seemingly lurches further to the right, is he sowing division that could permanently tear these communities apart? Skip Connett likens Musk's move to Bastrop to a 'hostile takeover'. Together with his wife, Erin Flynn, Connett runs an organic farm with locations in Austin and Bastrop. The couple used to joke about the 'California muskrat tunnelling towards us and that nothing could stop it'. Today, says Connett, it's not so funny. 'It used to be quiet, and pretty easy to think about driving down a country road here. But today the roads have become so treacherous, with all the gravel trucks and the number of cars that have just probably doubled in the last two or three years on roads that were never [designed for them]. So the infrastructure is trying to play catch-up,' he says. 'Our lives and our livelihood are impacted every day ... and we feel that the whole community has been taken over.' Connett says that when he and Flynn bought their farm in Bastrop, land was affordable. 'Now it's changed in a matter of just three years. It was planned for recreation and agritourism. Now it's just an industrial site. I think it was hyper-growth, hyper-development, in a way that is so unnatural, particularly to a rural community.' Flynn says that before Musk's arrival, there was a mixture of people living in Bastrop – 'everyone from University of Texas graduates who were doing creative things and couldn't afford to live in Austin – musicians, artists – and also families that have lived there for generations. Musk did say that he was going to invest in more parks and quality of life, but right now what we're experiencing is just trucks, and crowds, and a lot of building and noise.' To Connett's knowledge, Musk has only appeared publicly in Bastrop once – after the completion of two tunnels under the road that separated The Boring Company and SpaceX. 'When his boring machine finally emerged from under the road and popped back up where the SpaceX building is, he came with two of his kids. They laid out the red carpet and he recorded a little video that he posted on Twitter. 'Oh, wow, a foam party,' he said. They use this foam to keep the boring machine smooth and running, and yet we still don't know exactly how toxic it is. For him, it's a funny joke. And for us, we were thinking, 'You're tunnelling under our roads into our aquifer.'' The Tanners' daughter Ellen works as an artist in Bastrop, and lives in a pretty 1940s home near the centre of town. Back in the spring of 2023, she attended a meeting held by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) after The Boring Company made a request to dump 140,000 gallons of treated wastewater per day into the Lower Colorado River. Since it began construction, Boring has been issued with a number of environmental violation notices. The week I meet with Ellen, an administrative court hearing is taking place in Austin, looking into a permit application from a separate wastewater facility near SpaceX that wants to increase the amount of treated effluent poured into the river from its current limit of 50,000 gallons per day to 510,000 gallons. Ellen says that when Musk began building in Bastrop, she was curious; she understood that Texas always marched to the beat of economic growth with very little concern for the environment, but Musk owned an electric car company, and because of that she wasn't overly concerned. 'When we first moved here, it was farms and fields and pastures. Now there are a lot of housing developments going up, and just driving along Route 969 you can see all the development and the gravel mines. I'd boat in the river today, but I don't think I'd do a ton of swimming.' Steve Box, a local environmentalist, says the stretch of the Lower Colorado River that runs past SpaceX and Boring can't handle more wastewater without further damaging what he believes is its declining health. Box argues that the TCEQ has failed to monitor the river adequately, even as development along its banks has surged (in a statement, the TCEQ said it had a long history of monitoring water quality and had met all federal requirements for monitoring). Box tells me that earlier this year, his group, Environmental Stewardship, secured a significant victory, successfully pressuring The Boring Company and SpaceX to connect to Bastrop's new wastewater facility instead of dumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of treated sewage into the river each day. Judah Ross isn't exactly a Musk loyalist, but he's not a critic either. He seems to understand the position of both camps, bridging the divide between sceptics and supporters. Ross has lived in Bastrop with his young family since 2021. He sells property there through his Bastrop Real Estate Group, and offers to drive me around the town, pointing out the old and new. Main Street, at least, doesn't seem like it's changed that much since I was last here in 2019 – there's a cupcake shop, an Episcopal church, a store selling beads and crafts, and a bank, established in 1889, that's still in operation – but Ross tells me that today those storefronts change hands for somewhere between $750,000 and $1m. He has several friends who work for Musk's companies, and says they are all happy with their jobs. 'It's really strict, the hours can be really long, you'll be called in on weekends, but they don't want people that are there just to collect a paycheck... You really have to have bought into the hype. I find, pretty consistently, they're very much Elon fans, and I find they generally align with him philosophically.' Before we part company, Ross shows me some drone footage he shot of Snailbrook. A metal sign welcomes residents; there's a gym, 16 mobile homes, pickleball courts, and a swimming pool, but not much else at the moment. In an article published in 2023 about Musk's intention to build a 'utopia' along the Lower Colorado River, The Wall Street Journal reported that plans showed the site would eventually have 110 homes and a school. Musk tweeted that the WSJ article about Snailbrook was false, without elaborating. Ross says that while Bastrop still felt like a small town, rising property taxes are a concern, and he's seen house prices double in the time he's been there. There are two types of people in Bastrop, he says: 'those wanting growth, and those who are anti-growth'. One place where former Musk employees seemingly let rip is on Reddit threads devoted to subjects such as 'what it's like working for Tesla right now'. One person who claimed to work in the company's energy division wrote: 'The sentiment [has] always been that we hate Elon but we believed in the mission (accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy). So a lot of us kinda put our heads down...' But, they added, after waves of layoffs, 'there's been a change in vibes within the company'. Another wrote that leaving Tesla was the 'best decision I could have made for my mental sanity'. 'Elon is temporary, the planet is forever' wrote another. One former Boring Company engineer, who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity, tells me he eventually left because of the 'impossible schedules [imposed] on the engineers'. 'We were working 12, 14-hour days, and if you couldn't do that, then you'd get fired. They had a policy of unlimited personal time off; that as long as it didn't impact your job, you could take all the time you wanted. And of course, nobody could ever take time off, because their job would always be impacted if they didn't work the next day. So it was just not a fun culture to be around.' He tells me he saw Musk one time while he was working for the company in Bastrop. 'He came out to visit the facility, and the word was 'Don't look him directly in the eyes. If he comes up to talk to you and asks what you can do better, you should have an answer ready.' He was surrounded by bodyguards, and it was like the King had come. Everybody was parting ways for him. It was pretty funny.' The former employee says Musk's businesses have affected Bastrop in profound ways. 'They've built so many houses and apartment buildings to accommodate all the people there, and the roads haven't kept up. The traffic has just gotten horrible,' he says. Several emails sent to Musk's companies asking for interviews and comment went unanswered. The local NPR (National Public Radio) affiliate in Austin, which covers Bastrop, recently aired a story on how Tesla owners felt about their vehicles since Musk had joined the Trump administration. For years, it said, Musk had appeared politically neutral, and owning a Tesla had been a 'badge of honour for climate-conscious consumers, many of them liberals'. Now Tesla owners found themselves 'being plagued by social pressure, random targeting, and – sometimes – deeply personal ethical battles over keeping their cars'. As 'Tesla Takedown' protests spread across the US, one Tesla owner in Dallas filed a lawsuit seeking $1m in damages after his Model X was reportedly vandalised. The claim included compensation for vehicle repairs, financial loss, and emotional distress, according to CBS News. Austin isn't just the home of Tesla headquarters. According to journalist Dan Solomon, writing in Texas Monthly, the city has historically been the largest consumer market in Texas by a wide margin. 'If Austin consumers reject Tesla, the company won't make up those lost sales in rural Texas,' wrote Solomon. Not every longstanding resident is anti-Musk. Ken Kesselus is a former mayor of Bastrop, and says that 'the speed and the dynamic of the transition lately is extraordinary'. He claims that the influx of new people to Bastrop, attracted by jobs at SpaceX and Boring, 'has improved the quality of the people we have in city and county government, people that volunteer for our various social service organisations'. He believes that they bring 'a perspective that the old timers probably never would have thought about. So I think we've been really enriched by that.' While it's likely that Bastrop will never be as large as its big city neighbour, Austin, just 30 miles away, does represent one possible model for what the future might hold, particularly in the way that it's been transformed by the tech boom. The New York Times called its real estate market a 'madhouse', where everyday people were forced to think like speculators. It is the only fast-growing US city in which the Black population is shrinking. It's no wonder, then, that longtime Bastrop residents are looking west along Highway 71 and wondering if something similar will one day happen to them. Change is coming. Fast. The picture 350 miles south of Bastrop is not too dissimilar. SpaceX began construction on its Boca Chica facility in 2014, and the first test flight from the site took place five years later. Since then, it's evolved into Starbase, SpaceX's hub for rocket ship development and testing – and a mini town, where the site's workers live. I visited Boca Chica some years back, and drove the empty road from Brownsville – the last major city before the border between the US and Mexico ends in the Gulf – to Boca Chica Beach. The landscape felt desolate: just stretches of loamy fields and the occasional Border Patrol checkpoint, where agents stopped to check vehicles heading west. The road ended at the ocean, where a few fishermen cast their lines, hoping to hook a blacktip shark. In the distance, beyond the dunes, you could see the towering mesh of steel belonging to SpaceX's launch facility. Last summer, a Texas environmental inspector found that SpaceX had illegally discharged industrial wastewater four times into the Gulf of Mexico – the most recent of a spate of citations for violating regulations. A year before, its first test of its Starship rocket destroyed the launchpad, propelling concrete debris into an endangered species habitat nearby and sparking a 3.5 acre fire in Boca Chica state park. Environmental groups have sued SpaceX and the Federal Aviation Administration for approving the launches. Meanwhile, SpaceX aims to ramp up its rocket launches to 25 times a year. Activists, fearing ecological damage and restricted beach access, want to see a full environmental review. On 6 March this year, another rocket exploded after launch, with debris raining down over parts of Florida and the Caribbean. It's here that Musk's plans for a company town are even further advanced than in Bastrop. In 2021, Musk announced on Twitter that he was 'creating the city of Starbase, Texas' in Boca Chica, an unincorporated community. Shortly afterwards, SpaceX began buying up existing homes in the area and turning them into employee housing. Brand new Airstream RVs arrived. Reports said locals were concerned that the development would come at a huge cost to the local environment. In February, Cameron County, where Boca Chica is located, approved a measure for a vote that – three months later – confirmed Starbase as its newest city. The majority of signatures on the petition belonged to SpaceX employees. It noted that the company owns almost all the homes and land in the proposed area, with only a few exceptions. It also said that the new town's sole candidate for mayor was SpaceX security manager Gunnar Milburn. American company towns founded at the beginning of the 20th century – places like Hershey, Pennsylvania, home of the chocolate factory, or Pullman, Illinois, built for employees of George Pullman's railroad car company – were, according to Hardy Green, who wrote a book on the subject, built by wealthy industrialists who envisaged utopian settlements for their employees. But, Green has said, history shows that often the relationship between employer and employees was contentious, particularly when workers unionised and went on strike. It's too early to say whether a similar reckoning awaits Musk in places like Bastrop and Starbase, but the outlines of a familiar dynamic are emerging: tightly run operations, long hours, and employees expected to buy into the company's ideology. History suggests that harmonious conditions in company towns rarely last for ever. Back in Bastrop, at the museum and visitor centre, assistant Rachel Hatch tells me that Bastrop is named after Dutch businessman and settler Philip Hendrik Nering Bogel, who went by the name Baron de Bastrop. Bastrop claimed he had left the Netherlands in the late 1700s because he was fleeing the French invasion, although legend has it that he was actually avoiding prosecution for embezzlement. Bastrop was a savvy entrepreneur, but he was also shady and a scammer, Hatch tells me. 'People like to compare Elon Musk to Baron de Bastrop, but it's kind of unfair.' She doesn't elaborate on which of these men it is unfair to.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Inside a plan to use AI to amplify doubts about the dangers of pollutants
An industry-backed researcher who has forged a career sowing doubt about the dangers of pollutants is attempting to use artificial intelligence (AI) to amplify his perspective. Louis Anthony 'Tony' Cox Jr, a Denver-based risk analyst and former Trump adviser who once reportedly claimed there is no proof that cleaning air saves lives, is developing an AI application to scan academic research for what he sees as the false conflation of correlation with causation. Cox has described the project as an attempt to weed 'propaganda' out of epidemiological research and perform 'critical thinking at scale' in emails to industry researchers, which were obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests by the Energy and Policy Institute, a non-profit advocacy group, and exclusively reviewed by the Guardian. He has long leveled accusations of flimsiness at research linking exposure to chemical compounds with health dangers, including on behalf of polluting interests such as cigarette manufacturer Philip Morris USA and the American Petroleum Institute – a fossil fuel lobbying group he has even allowed to 'copy edit' his findings. (Cox says the edit 'amounted to suggesting a small change' and noted that he has also obtained public research funding.) Both the tobacco and oil industries have a history of weaponizing scientific uncertainty, experts say, with some arguing that similar tactics drive the Trump administration's current deregulatory efforts. The president's May 'gold standard' science order, for instance, empowered his appointees to 'correct scientific information' and 'discipline' those who breach the administration's views, prompting outrage from some scientists. Cox has obtained funding to develop the new AI reviewer from the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the nation's largest chemical industry advocacy group, which counts oil and chemical giants such as Exxon and DuPont as members. Experts say the ACC's sponsorship raises questions about whom the project will benefit. Asked about these concerns, Kelly Montes de Oca, spokesperson for the ACC, said: 'This research has the potential to support scientific understanding and analysis of chemical exposure and human health, enhance transparency and reproducibility, advance the safety of chemical products and processes, and inform science-based global regulatory approaches.' Cox said in an email to the Guardian that his assistant 'is specifically designed to be helpful to those who wish to understand the objective implications of data without any distortions from the kinds of well-known human heuristics and biases that make objective analysis difficult for humans'. 'My work aims to help anyone interested in using sound technical methods to pursue scientific truth,' he added. The questions sent to him by the Guardian contained 'many fundamental inaccuracies', he said. Cox said the tool is currently being tested on submissions to academic journals – including Risk Analysis, which he edits – to evaluate research submissions before they are submitted to the peer review process. Asked for a response to concerns about the project's funding, Cox said that he has publicly acknowledged the ACC's support in all relevant publications and said the tool 'has no axe to grind and no positions to push'. But the ACC is not a neutral force, said Chris Frey, the associate dean for research and infrastructure at the North Carolina State University's College of Engineering who chaired the Environmental Protection Agency's clean air scientific advisory committee from 2012 to 2015. 'They lack impartiality in that they want to minimize regulatory burden on their members,' said Frey. In mid-February of 2023, Cox struck up a conversation with the AI assistant ChatGPT. He later sent the chat to his University of Colorado email address, which is subject to public record request laws. After asking the chatbot to write a sonnet about Abraham Lincoln, he turned the conversation to a more serious topic: the tiny toxic particles known as PM2.5, also known as fine particulate matter. Scientists have long found links between PM2.5 exposure and a wide variety of health concerns, from asthma and lung disease to heart attacks. But for years, Cox has raised uncertainty about those connections, publishing work 're-assessing' the mortality risks associated with exposure to the pollutant in animal agriculture and challenging the link between PM2.5 from gas stoves and childhood asthma. On that February day, Cox asked ChatGPT a simple question: 'Does PM2.5 cause lung cancer?' The bot responded by noting the 'strong scientific evidence' demonstrating the link. A seemingly dissatisfied Cox went on to ask if it is 'known with certainty that PM2.5 causes lung cancer', calling on ChatGPT to identify potential confounding factors in the research on the air pollutant. He took brief tangents to pose riddles to the bot and to request additional sonnets – including one about PM2.5 itself, yielding the line 'no nose can catch you, for you are so fine'. Eventually, Cox asked ChatGPT whether the association between PM2.5 and lung cancer can be explained by a 'combination of residual confounding, measurement errors, and modeling biases'. The bot maintained that 'the observed association is likely to be real and not fully explained by these factors'. From a conversation Cox had with ChatGPT in February 2023 Write a sonnet about PM2.5 and lung cancer Oh, deadly PM2.5 in the air, So small and yet so full of poison's might, A silent killer that we cannot bear, You infiltrate our lungs both day and night At the time of the conversation, Cox had already been interested for years in making 'smarter and more trustworthy AI', he told the Guardian. He had published a paper on the topic in 2021, and the following year – months before ChatGPT's release – had begun developing his own AI tool. The ACC had partly funded that work, he said. Cox also had a meeting with the Long-Range Research Initiative, a lobbying group focused on 'innovations in chemical safety science' which includes Exxon, just hours before he had the February 2023 ChatGPT conversation, the emails show. In an email seeking funding to develop an AI tool, Cox seemingly referenced that 'long experimental chat'. Among the recipients were George Maldonado, the editor of the academic journal Global Epidemiology, and ACC toxicologist Rick Becker. Cox wrote in the email that his questions eventually led ChatGPT to 'concede that we don't actually know that PM2.5 at current ambient levels causes lung cancer in humans – but it was a struggle to get there!' The chatbot 'does an excellent job of reflecting the 'party line' that is most prevalent on the web, fallacies and all', Cox continued in the email. But new AI software could be used to do ''critical thinking at scale' (if I may be grandiose!)', he said. The following day, Cox emailed a larger group of researchers, including Becker and two ExxonMobil scientists. ChatGPT, he wrote, 'seems to me to display a very strong starting bias that can eventually be overcome by sufficiently patient questioning'. That bias involved conflating 'evidence of association with evidence of causation', he said. From an email Cox sent to industry researchers in February 2023 We can help bend applications of this technology toward scaled-up critical thinking instead of scaled-up groupthink and propaganda 'I am hoping to build a critical mass of interest and get some funding in this area so that we can help bend applications of this technology toward scaled-up critical thinking instead of scaled-up groupthink and propaganda,' he added. Cox's past work may shed light on the 'groupthink and propaganda' that his work questions. In one 2023 study he co-authored, he found that exposure to the 'forever chemical' known as PFOA can occur in safe doses. The research was conducted with the organization Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment, headed by the contentious toxicologist Michael Dourson, who has also received funding from chemical makers. Another study the same year, which Cox co-authored with a Chevron toxicologist, said molybdenum – a petrochemical present in lubricants Chevron produces – was 'not a risk factor for changes in serum testosterone'. And in a third 2023 study, Cox said his research found no link between childhood asthma and gas stove exposure. At a 2018 conference, Cox also claimed there is no proven connection between air pollution and respiratory problems or heart attacks, while he said in a 2012 paper – funded in part by tobacco company Philip Morris USA – that he found smoking half a pack of cigarettes daily did 'not appear to be associated' with increased risk of coronary heart disease. In an email to the Guardian, Cox said the methods he applies are 'drawn from the scientific mainstream – not from ideology or partisanship'. 'Some critics have mischaracterized my work as an attempt to delay regulation or promote industry interests. That is not true,' he said. 'I do not advocate for or against any policy outcome. I advocate for grounding decisions in empirically supported causal understanding.' Cox served as an adviser to policymakers in his role on an EPA advisory committee. He has also argued against the proposed tightening of a regulation at an Occupational Safety and Health Administration hearing, in his capacity as an ACC consultant. Adam Finkel, a risk analyst and environmental health sciences professor at the University of Michigan, said though he believes Cox to be in some ways a 'genius' and skilled risk analyst, he also seems to be 'deceiving himself and everyone else' about the impacts of bias on his research. 'How you interpret any information is by imposing your preferences,' said Finkel, who is also a former director of health standards programs at the US Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 'There is no possible way to get around imposing some set of preferences.' Some degree of uncertainty is inherent to scientific analysis. But when assessing whether or not there is a causal effect between exposure to something potentially harmful, Finkel said, Cox looks for 'perfect certainty', which 'can lead to years and decades of doing nothing and harming people while you wait for the certainty to come'. While Finkel has 'fundamental belief that our system is under-protective' when it comes to public health, Cox seems to believe the opposite. Asked for comment, Cox said: 'I have never advocated that we should not act until we have certainty. Rather, I have advocated choosing to act on the best available information.' He said his work has acknowledged causal relationships between smoking and lung cancer, asbestos exposure and mesothelioma, and, in 2011, crystalline silica exposure and lung disease. But at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration hearing at which he spoke in 2014, Cox asserted on behalf of the ACC that the federal government had not demonstrated a link between certain levels of silica exposure and lung disease. 'He'll accept that at very high doses, this stuff is bad for you,' said Finkel. Policy is meant to ensure that level of exposure doesn't occur, he added. Maldonado, editor of Global Epidemiology, responded positively to Cox's AI assistant proposal, the emails from 2023 show. Within weeks, his journal published another one of Cox's conversations with ChatGPT in his journal. 'The purpose of this comment is to provide an example of a Socratic dialogue with ChatGPT about the causal interpretation of an important epidemiological association between exposure to fine particulate matter air pollution (PM2.5) and mortality risk,' says the paper, which states that it was partly funded by the ACC and counted climate denier Steve Milloy as one of its reviewers. When the bot said 'it is well-established that exposure to ambient levels of PM2.5 does increase mortality risk', Cox accused it of confusing evidence of association with evidence of causation. Eventually, ChatGPT said: 'It is not known with certainty that current ambient levels of PM2.5 increase mortality risk.' But the distinction between correlation and causation is 'epidemiology 101', said Gretchen Goldman, president of the scientific advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, who co-authored a 2019 paper critiquing Cox. 'From day one of a study, researchers consider, analyze and guard against possible confounding factors,' said Goldman. 'This uncertainty is always present, but that of course doesn't mean the research is wrong.' Demonstrating clear causal links between pollutants and health impacts can be complicated, especially because unlike in testing pharmaceuticals, it can be difficult and unethical to establish control groups for comparison. 'If you're looking at the effects on an actual population that's been exposed in real life to pollutants, you can't do those controlled types of studies,' said Frey of North Carolina State University's College of Engineering. 'That leads to thinking about ways to make inferences from real world data that might, for example, mimic a random, controlled trial.' But though demonstrating true causality can be complex, Cox has long overstated scientific uncertainty while downplaying evidence, said Frey. 'Science denialism often sounds convincing because it contains some truthiness to it or elements of truth or elements of valid points, but it's often based on either overemphasis or omission and doesn't portray a full picture,' he said. As chair of EPA's clean air scientific advisory committee during Trump's first presidential term, for instance, Cox proposed eliminating all research from the agency's consideration that did not demonstrate 'manipulative causation', wherein intervention on one variable would change the probability of an outcome. 'I see it as being about using widely accepted, non-controversial principles of causal analysis and inference,' Cox said of his push for this change. But in effect, the alteration would have dramatically and unnecessarily 'winnowed down' the body of evidence to which the EPA could have referred and removed research from consideration which 'in fact robustly' demonstrates that certain compounds cause harm, Frey said. 'That effort and his work generally have not been viewed as compelling by the mainstream scientific community,' he added. Industry interests have promoted uncertainty to defend their business models, Frey said. The oil sector, for instance, had strong evidence that fossil fuels warmed the planet as early as the 1950s yet publicly called the link 'weak' or even 'non-existent' for decades. Cigarette manufacturers also long promoted the idea that the connection between cigarettes and health harms was tenuous, with one tobacco executive even saying in 1969 that 'doubt is our product'. 'It's a well-worn tactic,' said Frey. Cox kept corresponding with industry scientists about his new tool, all the while holding similar conversations with ChatGPT about causation in research. In May 2023, for instance, Cox posed questions about the causal claims in a recent landmark study linking gas stove exposure to childhood asthma, the emails show. Later that month, Cox sent a slideshow to the ACC's Becker and several other industry-related scientists. His reviewer, it showed, had identified issues with the recent gas stoves study, and another major assessment which linked PM2.5 exposure to cardiovascular issues. This tool could 'benefit authors, reviewers, reporters, media (if we make the summary reports good enough), and decision-makers and policymakers trying to evaluate studies and decide how trustworthy their methods and conclusions are', Cox said. In a proposal sent days later, he added that it is 'probably good enough to be commercially useful'. In July 2023, Cox presented his new tool to members of the Long-Range Research Initiative – which also funded his earlier work – including to representatives from Exxon. Ahead of the meeting, Cox sent the group a conversation he had with the reviewer, which used a 2020 paper demonstrating a causal link between PM2.5 and mortality as an example of the kind of conflation his tool could spot. Maldonado, the editor of Global Epidemiology, offered to give the tool a 'friendly trial' at his journal. From an email Cox sent to the American Chemistry Council's Becker in July 2023 Such automated critical reasoning can help to thoroughly review, and potentially to improve, the scientific claims and scientific integrity of causal reasoning and presentation of evidence underlying many regulatory risk assessments After the meeting, Cox sent a two-part project proposal to the ACC. 'Such automated critical reasoning can help to thoroughly review, and potentially to improve, the scientific claims and scientific integrity of causal reasoning and presentation of evidence underlying many regulatory risk assessments,' Cox said. For part one, an academic paper on the project which would be published in Maldonado's Global Epidemiology, he asked for $75,000. For part two, a pilot testing the reviewer on submissions to the same journal, he asked for $80,000. In his response to questions from the Guardian, Cox confirmed the ACC's funding but not a dollar amount. Cox published the 'phase 1' paper about his new AI reviewer in the journal Global Epidemiology in June 2024. He also appears to have secured $40,000 for Global Epidemiology to participate in the second phase, but the partnership 'did not come to fruition' because too few authors were willing to participate, Cox told the Guardian. Maldonado did not respond to a request for comment. By April 2024, Cox told the ACC's Becker in an email that his reviewer tool was 'ready for a demo', claiming its reviews are 'already better than many human reviews, although not as on-point and insightful as the best human reviews'. But in an email last May to toxicologist Ted Simon, Cox said 'the real goal' of the tool was to enable it to do literature reviews, examining wide swaths of published information in a particular subject area. That month, ExxonMobil scientist Hua Qian ran a test of the tool. Now, Cox told the Guardian, the tool was being tested by researchers submitting work to the journal he edits, Risk Analysis, and other academic journals, including Decision Analysis. About 400 people have tested the tool so far. Itai Vardi, a manager at the Energy and Policy Institute, who shared the trove of emails with the Guardian, said the project could have disastrous consequences for academia, particularly epidemiology. 'AI language models are not programmed, but built and trained,' he said, 'and when in the hands and funding of this industry, can be dangerous as they will further erode public trust and understanding of this crucial science.' Asked about critics' concerns about the ACC's funding for the project, Cox said: 'People who are concerned about the use of sound science in areas where politics has dominated might understandably be concerned about the use of such tools.' But people should 'favor the development' of the AI tool if they want to 'apply sound science to improve our understanding of the world and how to act more effectively', he said. 'The fact that the ACC … are starting to step up to the challenge of designing AI to increase the objectivity, transparency, and trustworthiness of scientific research seems to me to be a great public benefit,' he said. But the ACC 'cannot be trusted as a source of 'objectivity, transparency, and trustworthiness of scientific research',' said Frey, when that research is 'aimed at understanding the human health harms caused by chemicals manufactured by their members'. And for him, Cox's use of the term 'sound science' also prompted concern. ''Sound science' is a term popularized by the tobacco industry as part of a campaign to create burdens of proof far beyond those required for policy decisions,' Frey said. Indeed, in the 1990s, Philip Morris USA – for whom Cox has done research – ran a 10-year 'sound science' public relations campaign to sow doubt about the harm cigarettes cause. In an email to the Guardian, Cox noted that 'reputable scientists' use the term to refer to reliable, verifiable research that follows accepted scientific methods. He dismissed the idea that causation can be difficult to prove in epidemiology. 'My response to people who are concerned that we should treat evidence of repeated associations as if it were evidence of interventional causality is that this outdated style of thinking is tremendously harmful and counterproductive in designing effective measures to successfully protect human health and safety,' he said. Asked for examples of harmful policies created by overreliance on association, Cox named several scientific studies, including a 1996 experiment which was stopped because interventions that were expected to slash participants' chances of getting lung cancer 'based on repeatedly observed associations' actually increased that risk. He did not name any policies. Other experts note that regulations and policies are not meant to require proof of causality – the Clean Air Act, for instance, says standards 'allowing an adequate margin of safety … are requisite to protect the public health'. Cox, however, has critiqued proposals to strengthen controls on pollution on the grounds of imperfectly demonstrated causality. It is the sort of logic that Cox's new AI tool could automate, which could benefit corporate interests, said Vardi of the Energy and Policy Institute. The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know. If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods. Secure Messaging in the Guardian app The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said. If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select 'Secure Messaging'. SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post See our guide at for alternative methods and the pros and cons of each. 'Instead of having scientists-for-hire do that denial work, which advances their economic interests, the industry is funding efforts to outsource it to a machine in order to give it an image of unbiased neutrality,' Vardi said. Cox, for his part, said: 'A scientist-for-hire could use such an AI system to check whether the conclusions affirmed or denied in a scientific paper follow from the data and analyses presented, but my AI systems don't concern themselves with affirming or denying any specific positions or conclusions. That is left for people to do.' Though Cox claims his AI tool is neutral, Finkel said his early ChatGPT conversations shed light on its potential dangers. 'He was torturing the machine only along one set of preferences, which is: 'Can I force you to admit that we are being too protective?'' Finkel said. 'That's not science.' Cox said his conversations with ChatGPT aimed to uncover hidden uncertainties. But a different chatbot could be trained to identify instances in which government is 'under-regulating', Finkel said. On an academic level, Cox's interest in certainty might seem reasonable, but in the real world, it is dangerous to apply his standard of causality, said Finkel. 'For almost anything that we now know is harmful, there was a period in time when we didn't know that,' he said. If Cox's standards are taken seriously, he added, we could see 'generations, decades of misery while we wait for him to be satisfied'. This article was amended on 27 June 2025. An earlier version referred to the tobacco company 'Philip Morris'; it was has been clarified that this is a reference to Philip Morris USA, rather than Philip Morris International; the latter became a separate company in 2008.
