Kalakshar US

There’s a long list of reasons US stability is now teetering between “Fyre Festival” and “Charlie Sheen’s ‘Tiger Blood’ era.” Now you can add cybersecurity to the tally. A crucial cyber defense law, the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA 2015), has lapsed. With the government out of commission, the nation’s computer networks are more exposed for… who knows how long. Welcome to 2025, baby.

CISA 2015 promotes the sharing of cyber threat information between the private and public sectors. It includes legal protections for companies that might otherwise hesitate to share that data. The law promotes “cyber threat information sharing with industry and government partners within a secure policy and legal framework,” a coalition of industry groups wrote in a letter to Congress last week.

As Cybersecurity Dive explains, CISA 2015 shields companies from antitrust liability, regulatory enforcement, private lawsuits and FOIA disclosures. Without it, sharing gets more complicated. “There will just be many more lawyers involved, and it will all go slower, particularly new sharing agreements,” Ari Schwartz, cybersecurity director at the law firm Venable, told the publication. That could make it easier for adversaries like Russia and China to conduct cyberattacks.

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

Before the shutdown, there was support for renewal from the private sector, the Trump administration and bipartisan members of Congress. One of the biggest roadblocks was Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. He objected to reauthorizing the law without changes to some of his pet issues. Notably, he wanted to add language that would neuter the ability to combat misinformation and disinformation. He canceled his planned revision of the bill after a backlash from his peers. The committee then failed to approve any version before the expiration date.

Meanwhile, House Republicans included a short-term CISA 2015 renewal in its government funding bill. But Democrats, whose support the GOP needs, wouldn’t support the Continuing Resolution for other reasons. They want Affordable Care Act premium tax credits extended beyond their scheduled expiration at the end of the year. Without an extension, Americans’ already spiking health insurance premiums will continue to skyrocket.

In its letter to Congress last week, the industry coalition warned that the expiration of CISA 2015 would lead to “a more complex and dangerous” security landscape. “Sharing information about cyber threats and incidents makes it harder for attackers because defenders learn what to watch for and prioritize,” the group wrote. “As a result, attackers must invest more in new tools or target different victims.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/congress-let-a-key-cybersecurity-law-expire-this-week-leaving-us-networks-more-vulnerable-174529522.html?src=rss 

With the AI boom, construction of new data centers has skyrocketed, and not without consequence — some communities that count these facilities as neighbors are now facing water shortages and strained power supplies. While tech’s data center footprint has been growing for decades, generative AI has seemingly shifted the impacts of these operations toward the catastrophic. What exactly makes these new data centers such a burden on the environment and existing infrastructure, and is there anything we can do to fix it? 

Chips

The industry believes AI will work its way into every corner of our lives, and so needs to build sufficient capacity to address that anticipated demand. But the hardware used to make AI work is so much more resource-intensive than standard cloud computing facilities that it requires a dramatic shift in how data centers are engineered. 

Typically the most important part of a computer is its “brain,” the Central Processing Unit (CPU). It’s designed to compute a wide variety of tasks, tackling them one at a time. Imagine a CPU as a one-lane motorway in which every vehicle, no matter the size, can get from A to B at extraordinary speed. What AI relies on instead are Graphics Processing Units (GPU), which are clusters of smaller, more specialized processors all running in parallel. In the example, a GPU is a thousand-lane motorway with a speed limit of just 30 mph. Both try to get a huge number of figurative vehicles to their destination in a short amount of time, but they take diametrically opposite approaches to solving that problem. 

Phil Burr is Head of Product at Lumai, a British company looking to replace traditional GPUs with optical processors. “In AI, you repeatedly perform similar operations,” he explained, “and you can do that in parallel across the data set.” This gives GPUs an advantage over CPUs in large but fundamentally repetitive tasks, like graphics, executing AI models and crypto mining. “You can process a large amount of data very quickly, but it’s doing the same amount of processing each time,” he said.

In the same way that thousand-lane highway would be pretty wasteful, the more powerful GPUs get, the more energy hungry they become. “In the past, as [CPUs evolved] you could get a lot more transistors on a device, but the overall power [consumption] remained about the same,” Burr said. They’re also equipped with “specialized units that do [specific] work faster so the chip can return to idle sooner.” By comparison, “every iteration of a GPU has more and more transistors, but the power jumps up every time because getting gains from those processes is hard.” Not only are they physically larger — which results in higher power demands — but they “generally activate all of the processing units at once,” Burr said. 

In 2024, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory published a congressionally mandated report into the energy consumption of data centers. The report identified a sharp increase in the amount of electricity data centers consumed as GPUs became more prevalent. Power use from 2014 to 2016 was stable at around 60 TWh, but started climbing in 2018, to 76 TWh, and leaping to 176 TWh by 2023. In just five years, data center energy use more than doubled from 1.9 percent of the US’ total, to nearly 4.4 percent — with that figure projected to reach up to 12 percent by the start of the 2030s.

Heat

Like a lightbulb filament, as electricity moves through the silicon of computer chips, it encounters resistance, generating heat. Extending that power efficiency metaphor from earlier, CPUs are closer to modern LEDs here, while GPUs, like old incandescent bulbs, lose a huge amount of their power to resistance. The newest generation of AI data centers are filled with rack after rack of them, depending on the owner’s needs and budget, each one kicking out what Burr described as “a massive amount of heat.” 

Heat isn’t just an unwelcome byproduct: if chips aren’t kept cool, they’ll experience performance and longevity issues. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) publishes guidelines for data center operators. It advocates server rooms should be kept between 18 to 27 degrees celsius (64.4 to 80.6 degrees Fahrenheit). Given the sheer volume of heat GPUs kick out, maintaining that temperature requires some intensive engineering, and a lot of energy.

The majority of data centers use a handful of methods to keep their hardware within the optimal temperature. One of the oldest ways to maximize the efficiency of air conditioning is a technique of hot and cold aisle containment. Essentially, cold air is pushed through the server racks to keep them cool, while the hot air those servers expel is drawn out to be cooled and recirculated. 

Many data centers, especially in the US, rely on the cooling effect that occurs as water changes from a liquid to a gas. This is done by drawing hot air through a wet medium to facilitate evaporation and blowing the resulting cooled air into the server room, in a method known as direct evaporative cooling. There’s also indirect evaporative cooling, which works similarly but adds a heat exchanger — a device that’s used to transfer heat between different mediums. In this type of setup, the heat from the warm air is transferred and cooled separately from the server room to avoid raising the humidity levels indoors. 

Due in part to their cooling needs, data centers have a tremendous water footprint. The Lawrence Berkeley report found that, in 2014, US-based data centers consumed 21.2 billion liters of water. By 2018, however, that figure had leapt to 66 billion liters, much of which was attributed to what it collectively terms “hyperscale” facilities, which include AI-focused operations. In 2023, traditional US data centers reportedly consumed 10.56 billion liters of water while AI facilities used around 55.4 billion liters. The report’s projections believe that by 2028, AI data centers will likely consume as much as 124 billion liters of water. 

“Collectively, data centers are among the top-ten water consuming industrial or commercial industries in the US,” according to a 2021 study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. About one-fifth of these data centers use water from stressed watersheds, i.e. areas where the demand for water may be greater than the natural supply. 

Most of the water consumed by data centers evaporates and won’t be immediately replenished, while the rest goes to wastewater treatment plants. As a trio of academics explained in an op-ed for The Dallas Morning News, data centers are “effectively removing [drinking water] from the local water cycle.” Water used in the cooling process is typically treated with chemicals such as corrosion inhibitors and biocides, which prevent bacterial growth. The resulting wastewater often contains pollutants, so it can’t be recycled for human consumption or agriculture. 

And data centers’ water use goes well beyond cooling. A much bigger portion of their water footprint can be attributed to indirect uses, mainly through electricity generated by power plants but also through wastewater utilities. These account for about three-fourths of a data center’s water footprint, the study notes. Power plants use water in a number of ways, primarily for cooling and to produce the steam needed to spin their electricity-generating turbines. According to the authors, 1 megawatt-hour of energy consumed by data centers in the US on average requires 7.1 cubic meters of water. 

“Data centers are indirectly dependent on water from every state in the contiguous US, much of which is sourced from power plants drawing water from subbasins in the eastern and western coastal states,” the authors explain. To adequately address the water issue, energy consumption must be reigned in too. 

Exploring the alternatives

One major approach to reduce the massive water footprint of these systems is to use closed-loop liquid cooling. This is already ubiquitous on a smaller scale in high-end PCs, where heat-generating components, such as the CPU and GPU, have large heat exchangers that a liquid is pumped through. The liquid draws away the heat, and then has to be cooled down via another heat exchanger, or a refrigeration unit, before being recirculated.

Liquid cooling is becoming more and more common, especially in AI data centers, given the heat that GPUs generate. With the exception of mechanical issues, like leaking, and the water needed to operate the facility more generally, closed-loop systems do not experience water loss and so make more reasonable demands on local water resources. Direct-to-chip liquid cooling drastically cuts a data center’s potential water use, and more efficiently removes heat than traditional air-cooling systems. In recent years, companies including Google, NVIDIA and Microsoft have been championing liquid cooling systems as a more sustainable way forward. And researchers are looking into ways to employ this approach on an even more granular level to tackle the heat right at the source. 

Whereas cold plates (metal slabs with tubing or internal channels for coolant to flow through) are commonly used in liquid cooling systems to transfer heat away from the electronics, Microsoft has been testing a microfluidics-based cooling system in which liquid coolant travels through tiny channels on the back of the chip itself. In the lab, this system performed “up to three times better than cold plates at removing heat,” and the company said it “can effectively cool a server running core services for a simulated Teams meeting.” A blog post about the findings noted, “microfluidics also reduced the maximum temperature rise of the silicon inside a GPU by 65 percent, though this will vary by the type of chip.”

Another option is “free” cooling, or making use of the natural environmental conditions at the data center site to cool the operation. Air-based free cooling utilizes the outdoor air in cold locales, while water-based free cooling relies on cold water sources such as seawater. Some facilities couple this with rainwater harvesting for their other water needs, like humidification.

A map of Start Campus

Start Campus, a data center project in Portugal, is located on the site of an old coal-fired power station and will use much of its old infrastructure. Rather than simply employ a closed-loop, the high temperatures will require the closed-loop system to interact with an open loop. When the campus is fully operational, its heat will be passed onto around 1.4 million cubic tons of seawater per day. Omer Wilson, CMO at Start Campus, said that by the time the water has returned to its source, its temperature will be the same as the surrounding sea. Start Campus has also pledged that there will be no meaningful water loss from this process.

There is another novel cooling method, immersion, in which computing equipment is — you guessed it — immersed in a non-conductive liquid suitable to draw heat. Wilson described it as a relatively niche approach, used in some crypto mining applications, but not used by industrial-scale facilities. 

To keep with both energy and cooling needs, some researchers say the industry must look to renewable resources. “Directly connecting data center facilities to wind and solar energy sources ensures that water and carbon footprints are minimized,” wrote the authors of the aforementioned Environmental Research study. Even purchasing renewable energy certificates — which each represent one megawatt-hour of electricity generated from a renewable source and delivered to the grid — could help shift the grid toward these sources over time, they added. “Data center workloads can be migrated between data centers to align with the portion of the grid where renewable electricity supplies exceed instantaneous demand.”

Geothermal resources have begun to look especially promising. According to a recent report by the Rhodium Group, geothermal energy could meet up to 64 percent of data center’s projected power demand growth in the US “by the early 2030s.” In the Western US, geothermal could meet 100 percent of demand growth in areas such as Phoenix, Dallas-Fort Worth and Las Vegas.

For cooling, geothermal heat pumps can be used to “leverage the consistently cool temperatures” found hundreds of feet beneath the surface. Or, in locations where there are shallow aquifers present, data centers can make use of geothermal absorption chillers. These rely on the low-grade heat at shallower depths “to drive a chemical reaction that produces water vapor,” the report explains. “This water vapor cools as it is run through a condenser and cools the IT components of a data center using evaporation.” 

Iron Mountain Data Centers operates a geothermally cooled data center in Boyers, Pennsylvania at the site of an old limestone mine. A 35-acre underground reservoir provides a year-round supply of cool water. Geothermal may not be a widespread solution just yet, but it’s catching on. In 2024, Meta announced a partnership with Sage Geosystems to supply its data centers with up to 150 megawatts (MW) of geothermal power starting in 2027. 

Beyond the hardware

While novel cooling methods will undoubtedly help curb some of the AI data centers’ excessive resource demands, the first step to meaningful change is transparency, according to Vijay Gadepally, a senior scientist at MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory Supercomputing Center. AI companies need to be upfront about the emissions and resource use associated with their operations to give people a clear view of their footprints. 

Then there is the hardware to consider. Incorporating more intelligent chip design — i.e. processors with better performance characteristics — could go a long way toward making data centers more sustainable. “That’s a huge area of innovation right now,” Gadepally said. And large data centers are often “running underutilized,” with a lot of power that isn’t being allocated efficiently. Rather than leaning into the push to build more such facilities, the industry should first make better use of existing data centers’ capacities. 

Similarly, many of today’s AI models are vastly overpowered for the tasks they’re being given. The current approach is “like cutting a hamburger with a chainsaw,” Gadepally said. “Does it work? Sure… but it definitely is overkill.” This doesn’t need to be the case. “We have found in many instances that you can use a smaller but tuned model, to achieve similar performance to a much larger model,” Gadepally said, noting that this is especially true for new “agentic” systems. “You’re often trying thousands of different parameters, or different combinations of things to discover which is the best one, and by being a little bit more intelligent, we could dismiss or essentially terminate a lot of the workloads or a lot of those combinations that weren’t getting you towards the right answer.” 

Each of those unnecessary parameters isn’t just a computational dead end, it’s another nudge towards rolling blackouts, less potable water and rising utility costs to surrounding communities. As Gadepally said, “We’re just building bigger and bigger without thinking about, ‘Do we actually need it?'” 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/why-do-ai-data-centers-use-so-many-resources-171500010.html?src=rss 

“Ohhh, this is niiice.” 

I kept repeating that to myself when I first saw the 2026 Nissan Leaf in person, like the oft-memed Tiffany Haddish clip. I quickly learned it’s hard not to love this third iteration of the Leaf. Its seats feel wonderfully comfortable, its infotainment screens are wide and immersive and its electromagnetic sunroof seemed like something meant for a far more premium car. I tested the highest-end Leaf, which retails for $38,990, but it still offers plenty of value at that price. And it makes me think the entry-level $30,000 model — which has smaller screens, cheaper seats and no sunroof — would be similarly great. Once again, the Nissan Leaf holds the crown as the ideal cheap EV.

It’s easy to forget what a revolutionary vehicle Nissan’s original Leaf was. Released in 2010 for under $33,000, it was the first truly affordable EV on the market. Sure it was small and didn’t go very far, but Nissan eventually fixed those issues with the second-gen model (which I ended up buying earlier this year). But that came at a time when the world was more hyped to see Tesla enter the fray with cheaper cars like the Model 3 and Model Y, and the Leaf was once again overshadowed when other automakers joined the EV arena. 

Now the Leaf is back and better than ever. Its compact SUV styling makes it look more futuristic than the basic hatchback design of the previous model, it can get up to 300 miles of range (up from a maximum of 212 miles with the earlier Leaf SV Plus) and it offers more cargo space with the rear seats down (55.5 cubic feet compared to 30 cubic feet). And with the Leaf’s new turquoise color option, it truly stands out on the road. While it didn’t turn as many heads during my testing as the VW id.Buzz, several neighbors commented that it simply looks cool. 

On a fundamental level, the 2026 Nissan Leaf shouts “hot new EV” in ways the old one simply didn’t. Its sloped roofline and unique side profile makes it simultaneously seem like a sporty coupe and a tiny SUV. Its front and rear LED lights give off sci-fi vibes. Those same neighbors who were intrigued by this Leaf didn’t even realize I had a 2018 model parked right beside it. They just thought that was a boring old hatchback. Since its inception, the Nissan Leaf’s design has gone from a quirky curiosity to a car that was desperately aiming for the mainstream. This time around, Nissan’s design choices feel supremely confident.

Stepping into the Leaf makes that all the more clear: I loved its soft synthetic leather seats, which perfectly supported my aching back once I tweaked the lumbar support settings. Its enormous dual 14.3-inch infotainment screens also make a striking impression. The first screen, situated behind the steering wheel, makes it easy to see your current speed, charge level and additional driving information. But it’s the center screen that takes the cake — it’s gloriously colorful and bright enough to be visible in harsh sunlight. It’s perfect for the Leaf’s built-in Google Maps navigation, but it’s even better when using wireless CarPlay, since every app fills the entire screen. (And thankfully, wireless CarPlay and Android Auto support are available on every Leaf trim.)

The base 2026 Leaf has cloth seats and two 12.3-inch screens, but from photos I’ve seen they still look like a step up from most infotainment setups. My review model also had a 10 speaker “Bose Personal Plus” audio system, which includes small speakers inside the headrests of the driver and passenger seats. That makes music sound a bit more immersive, but more importantly, it also serves as a covert way to deliver navigation instructions to the driver without distracting everyone else in the car. During my testing, I found that the Bose system felt rich and detailed for most music (it has a small subwoofer, so anything bass-heavy sounded muddled), and I genuinely appreciated having directions whispered into my ears.

Here the sunroof is partially shaded.

The Leaf’s panoramic sunroof, which is only available on the high-end Platinum+ FWD trim, also makes a striking impression. It lets in tons of light while blocking the heat of the sun, and it can also become opaque at the touch of a button with so-called Polymer Dispersed Crystal Display technology. You can also have it shade only part of the car, which is helpful when I’d like some light, but my kids in the back seat don’t. The shaded mode still lets in diffuse light, but it’s not powerful enough to cast shadows (it acts almost like a total solar filter, allowing you to see the sun safely). It doesn’t darken the Leaf much, though, so you might need an additional shade for napping babies.

According to Christian Spencer, a Nissan senior manager and engineer, the company found that the sunroof’s shading technology also allowed for more headroom. Adding a traditional retracting shade would have shaved off a few much-needed inches. As it stands, the Leaf’s wide and round roof should easily fit very tall drivers and passengers. In a conversation with Engadget, Spencer noted that Nissan also brought over some design elements from existing vehicles, like the Z sports car, Rogue SUV and Ariya EV. In particular, the new Leaf’s sturdy 4-link suspension comes directly from the Ariya, and it helps to make the car feel much more stable over bumps and at high speeds.

This is one of two charging ports on the 2026 Leaf.

That’s something I definitely noticed during a recent 100-mile round trip. The Leaf is zippy to get to highway speed thanks to its 214-horsepower electric motor (up from 147hp on the previous gen, but matching the same performance of the previous higher-end SV Plus models). The revamped Leaf also feels very solid while cruising alongside much larger cars and in chaotic winds, whereas the previous model always felt a bit unstable at high speeds. The overall rigidity leads to slightly mushy steering on the 2026 Leaf, but I still found it more comfortable to drive than Kia’s similarly-sized EV6. My wife and kids, who care less about driving dynamics, noted that it just felt very smooth to ride in.

My 100-mile trip brought the leaf down to 60 percent from a full charge, which is in line with the 259 miles of range available on my Platinum+ review model. (Curiously, you lose range as you step up the Leaf’s specs. I’m sure the large 19-inch tires didn’t help with efficiency — the cheaper models have 18-inch tires.) I was able to charge the Leaf from 65 percent to 100 percent overnight with a standard Level 1 charger. In addition to the standard J1772 port for Level 1 and 2 charging at home, the Leaf also includes a Tesla-style (NACS, above) port for high-speed refills at Tesla Superchargers. That makes the 2026 Leaf far more suitable for road trips than the older model, which was stuck with an archaic CHAdeMO port for fast charging.

The nissan Leaf 2018 (left) next to the 2026 model (right).

A major difference I noticed from my 2018 Leaf is that the new model actually feels like a true electric car internally, rather than being built out of a frame that was originally designed for a gas-powered vehicle. The annoying center console from the second-gen Leaf — which was made out of cheap plastic, and led to so much knee banging I had to install a cushion — is completely gone, replaced with room for a small backpack or purse by your right foot. The new Leaf’s floor also sits very low, which gives second-row passengers a ton of leg room.

Not every change is a true step forward, though. While the 2026 Leaf offers more overall cargo space than the previous version, it loses 3.6 cubic feet of storage when the rear seats are up. And if you’ve got kids in car seats, those rear chairs will always be up. I was able to fit in a small tricycle, two scooters, protective gear and a small cooler during a recent trip, but it was definitely a tight squeeze. On a brighter note, I was at least able to fit in a large combination car seat and smaller booster chair without issue. I also really appreciated Nissan’s easily accessible LATCH connections, which are brightly colored and easily visible. You don’t have to go fishing around for them under cushions like on other cars.

Here you can see a Doona tricycle, two scooters and a cooler.

There’s also bad news for fans of one pedal driving: Nissan has dumped its original “E-pedal” feature for “E-step,” which can dramatically slow the Leaf with regenerative braking, but won’t fully stop the car. According to Spencer, that’s partially due to Japanese regulators, who prefer having the brake be the only way to fully stop a car. But it’s a bummer if you’ve gotten used to the convenience of one-pedal driving and never touching the brakes, a feature that Nissan helped to pioneer with the second-gen Leaf. Spencer says the company has heard plenty of feedback about the loss of true one pedal driving though, so it could be a feature Nissan implements again down the line.

I’d consider those complaints minor quibbles, though. The 2026 Leaf is more attractive and feature-rich than the $34,000 Hyundai Kona EV or Chevy Equinox, and it also has the backing of a company with far more experience in the EV arena. While I’d still recommend looking at used EV options — I’ve seen great cars like the Hyundai Ioniq 5 dip to $25,000 or less — the 2026 Leaf is simply hard to beat.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/evs/nissan-leaf-2026-review-still-the-budget-ev-to-beat-173000858.html?src=rss 

It’s getting increasingly difficult to say smart rings are just a niche inside the broader world of wearable technology. The raft of celebrities who are seen wearing them, the NBA’s use of Oura rings as an early warning system against COVID-19 and, last year, Samsung’s entry into the market has made them far more prominent in the minds of mainstream consumers. We’ve tested plenty of smart rings, and are likely to test plenty more as the years roll on. To help you better understand the category, we’ve built this guide that explains what they do, what they’re for and which ones are worth your time and money right now.

Best smart rings for 2025

What is a smart ring?

Smart rings offer an alternative to smartwatches and fitness trackers to keep an eye on your health and daily activity. They can track your movements, heart rate, temperature and monitor how well you’ve been sleeping. Essentially, they take much of the same hardware you’d find in a smartwatch or tracker and shrink it down into a much smaller package. 

The trade-offs are, as such, obvious: Rings are smaller and can’t track anywhere near as many things as a wrist-worn device can. You’ll also miss out on any of the added features that are found on those bigger pieces of gear, like a screen on which to see your notifications or real-time readings of your steps count. But they may be more accurate for your heart rate and temperature, and are significantly more discreet.

That discretion is important if you want to keep an eye on your health without looking like you care. Sure, they’re still gadgets, so they’re still noticeably bigger than traditional pieces of jewelry — but not by much. Plus, it’s an alternative for people who don’t like watches, with one statistic saying 68 percent of Americans don’t wear them.

What can smart rings track?

Much like smartwatches and fitness trackers, smart rings are equipped with accelerometers and gyroscopes that can track your movement. That lets them interpret how much you’re moving and, based on whether you toss and turn in the night, how well you’re sleeping. 

Many rings have PPG (photoplethysmography) sensors to monitor your heart rate and blood oxygenation, either continuously or at intervals. Plus, they often come with temperature sensors that can be used to track signs of infection, and the data they gather on body heat can be used to predict the wearer’s menstrual cycle. 

It’s possible to use this information to draw broader conclusions about how you’re doing more generally. You can get metrics for your stress, resilience and recovery rates, and you’ll even get data on how calm you are during meditation sessions. 

I’ve personally been able to look back at stressful days and then compare my vital signs to the baseline. This can be useful to monitor how well, or badly, you’re dealing with stress at any given time and chart progress made. 

But not all smart rings are alike. Circular’s Ring 2 is one of a handful to offer its own one-line ECG (electrocardiogram). This, like many fitness watches that now offer the same, will look at your heart’s electrical activity to look for irregularities, such as atrial fibrillation. Evie, meanwhile, markets itself as a smart ring “designed for women” with a focus on reproductive cycle tracking.  

Smart rings vs. smartwatches

At the risk of winning this year’s “Yeah, obviously” award, smart rings are not a replacement for smartwatches. Rings do not have built-in displays or vibration motors, so the only way to interact with them is via their companion apps on your phone. 

There’s no way for you to get any idea of how you’re doing at any given time unless you’re able to look at your primary device. Even activity alerts — pop-ups telling you to move if you’ve been still for too long — can only be pushed to your phone. 

You won’t get any of the added-value stuff you get with most wrist-worn devices either, and not just the ability to tell the time. That means no calls, apps, message responses, GPS, fall detection or mobile payments via NFC. There are a few exceptions: Samsung’s Galaxy Ring can detect pinch gestures to activate the camera trigger or turn off alarms with a compatible phone. 

It’s probably worth noting that while no consumer wearable will be as accurate or reliable as a clinical diagnostic tool, the smaller hardware may mean a compromise in accuracy. Rings might also get in the way of certain types of activity, like pull-ups, barbell deadlifts or any other movement that involves gripping onto a handle that might push the accessory into your finger and cause discomfort.

Who should use a smart ring?

Given the broader features available in even the most basic fitness tracker, it’s hard to say smart rings are a “better” choice. A $300 ring will do a lot less than a $50 tracker, and if you’re led by your wallet, a ring will always work out to be the luxury option. What they offer, however, is a far more elegant aesthetic, especially if you’re not likely to wear a tracker, smartwatch or fitness watch. And that’s before we get to people with skin sensitivities or other reasons for preferring a smaller, more unobtrusive tracker. 

What to consider before buying a smart ring

What do you want to get out of it?

Are you hoping a smart ring will encourage you to get out and exercise more? Help you keep an eye on your physical health? Manage your mental health? It’s good to go in with a clear picture of what you want because you may find the limited applications frustrating. 

Will it fit your finger?

Most reputable smart rings will, during the ordering process, send you a sizing kit so you can find the most comfortable model. You’re asked to find a size that sits snugly on your index finger ensuring the sensors make good contact with your skin.

The companies often suggest you wear this plastic dummy on your hand for a few days before placing your order. After all, our hands can swell and shrink during the day and depending on the ambient temperature. 

Normal rings can be sized up or down a bit (by a competent jeweler) if your body shape shifts over time. You can’t do that with most smart rings, so if you do change sizes drastically, you’ll have to go through the process from the start and pay full price again.

There are exceptions to this: If you pay for a coverage plan with Ultrahuman, for example, you’ll get one free ring replacement if you lose weight. Anecdotally, some makers will offer ad-hoc discounts if you speak to them but that’s obviously at the discretion of the name in question. 

One thing to bear in mind is wearing your ring while working out, which might be an issue as pointed out earlier. Depending on your activity, you might find a ring uncomfortable compared to a watch. If gripping onto a dumbbell or handlebars is something you do frequently, it might be better to use a smartwatch or wristworn device. But for runners, swimmers or other folks who don’t need to grab onto much while they work out, a ring should be just fine.

What’s the battery life like?

Bigger rings will have bigger batteries, so it’s a lot harder to give a clean figure as to how long each ring will last on a charge. Thankfully most rings sip, rather than slurp, at their batteries and so most of them last at least five days or so on a charge. That’s one big plus over some smartwatches given they often will only last a day or so before needing more power.

What can you do if you lose your smart ring?

Several companies include Find My Ring features in their apps to identify the last location that your ring was connected to your phone. However, if you’re not a fan of minimalism and your home is full, it might be harder to find them. After all, the rings don’t have vibration motors or speakers to offer an audible chirp as and when you’re looking for them. 

I once lost an Oura Ring 3 for two days before downloading a third-party app that could locate it within a few feet. Turns out, when I’d made my kids’ bed, the ring had fallen into my daughter’s duvet cover, which I found only once I’d turned the room upside down twice. 

Samsung, meanwhile, offers location-tracking in its app and can give you a rough idea of your ring’s last location. You can also, if you’re hunting for it in dark environments, set its lights to blink, which is something its rivals do not offer.

Are there long-term costs?

The nature of the technology world, especially in 2025, is that a lot of hardware companies can’t survive selling users one device every three or four years. So, to supplement that income and to offer users a better value proposition, companies offer additional features at an extra cost. 

That can come in the form of a premium subscription to unlock additional features and insights about your body. There are also one-off purchases to unlock specific features that you may want to focus on, as well as extended warranties or insurances. 

I’d wager most people plan on wearing a smart ring for several years before opting to upgrade, and so it’s important to keep an eye on the total cost of ownership. If your budget will only stretch to the initial payment and no further, keep in mind what features you’ll be missing out on.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/wearables/best-smart-ring-140000425.html?src=rss