WIRED Editor Amit Katwala has traveled far and wide for a hands-on look at the future of robotic artificial limbs, and the technological progress he witnessed is beyond impressive. But in truth, his quest to become Superhuman is still stuck in the prototype phase. I, on the other hand, have been galavanting around the English countryside wearing the Hypershell Pro X, the first readily available leg-boosting, mile-eating, powered exoskeleton.
As a broader product category, exoskeletons have the potential to enhance mobility for those with disabilities, helping them regain independence and improve their quality of life. They can also reduce physical strain in the workplace, minimizing the chances of injury and boosting productivity. But the likes of Hypershell produces nonmedical, wearable exoskeletons that promise muscle-boosting power for us average Joes.
The majority of these designs, however, seem to be permanently on preorder, or ambitiously chasing the big bucks on Kickstarter, so it’s refreshing to be able to test something that’s available on Amazon.
Last year I reviewed a prelaunch version of the similar DNSYS X1 (WIRED 5/10) and found it to be glitchy, heavy, and generally disappointing, but it did show promise. It remains stuck in preorder however, as does the much-publicized pair of $5,000 Arc’teryx MO/GO powered pants.
So can Hypershell do it better? There are currently three versions of the Hypershell exoskeleton: the basic 400-watt, $900 Hypershell Go X, the $1,199 Pro X which has a 800-watt output, 10.8-mile range, and enhanced capabilities for running and even cycling assistance. And then there’s the Hypershell Carbon X, which uses a titanium alloy instead of carbon fiber and costs $1,500.
The Go X offers 7.5 miles per hour maximum speed assistance while the Pro X’s 800-watt motor can help up to speeds of 12.4 miles per hour. Each model collapses down to 16.9 × 10.2 × 4.9 inches, and the Go and Pro X weigh 4.41 pounds, while the Carbon version is 7 ounces lighter.
My Hypershell Pro X sample has a 5000-mAh 72-Wh battery, with quoted assisted range of 10.8 miles (17.5 kilometers) and 10 modes, including up and down stairs, down and uphill, cycling, running, race walking, and regular walking. I’ve been wearing the exoskeleton for the past few months while testing various outdoor gear, including hiking boots and rain jackets, and within seconds of turning it on I knew it was significantly more useful than the DNSYS X1, giving my legs a nice power-up on trails. Did I feel like a fool wearing it in public? Absolutely. Did my wife ask me “Why are you walking like Woody from Toy Story?” Yes. But for many people in need, the benefit of the assistance should outweigh the mild embarrassment.
Fit and Features
Photograph: Chris Haslam
Strapping myself in for the first time, I’m impressed by the build quality, the ergonomic fit, and adjustability. The lower back and hip cushioning is particularly good. I’m 5′ 11′′ tall, and most adults—Hypershell estimates 80 percent—will have no fitting issues. The excellent app takes you through the whole process, with step-by-step video instructions on adjusting to fit, and then once you’re corseted in, it demos the various power modes and controls. When you first power on, the inert machine springs to life and tightens up, and once you’ve chosen a power mode, it instantly starts to work as you walk.
Closer Pets C200 2-Meal Automatic Pet Feeder for $50: This automatic feeder is super simple, which is both its weakness and its strength. It’s essentially two shallow plastic containers with stainless steel inserts (both dishwasher safe) and tamper-resistant lids that are locked and automatically open using an old-school egg-style timer that runs on a AA battery rather than electricity. Although the container has an ice pack to keep the wet food cool, after one night it lost virtually all of its coolness. There’s a lid-link clip attachment, a small piece of plastic that links the lids to ensure they will open at the same time, which is super helpful for owners of two cats like me. I wish the timer were electric so I could program it to the exact time I want it open, rather than guesstimating the timing on the little marks. However, this is a simple solution to help make sure both my cats are given wet food without me having to wake up at the crack of dawn.
Photograph: Molly Higgins
Oneisall Cordless WiFi Automatic Cat Feeder for $50: I had high hopes for this cordless feeder that boasts a rechargeable battery with a 100-day life and an integrated app, but it’s just too unreliable. Through the app, you can program up to 10 daily meals (in 1-12 portions each), monitor pets’ eating habits, and customize meal calls. Unlike other apps, you’re not able to choose portion size, but instead have to multiply the number of servings. The app gave me constant problems, and would often disconnect from the feeder and be unable to reconnect to WiFi. Luckily, I was able to program meals via the screen and buttons, but it would’ve been a whole lot nicer if the app had worked reliably.
Do Not Recommend
Courtesy of Amazon
Catit Pixi Smart 6-Meal Feeder for $117: Like others on this list, the Catit Pixi wet and dry feeder uses ice packs to keep wet food fresh and rotates the meals in six compartments on a set schedule. The schedule can be programmed via the app or changed on the body of the feeder. At this price point, the app shouldn’t be this limited and glitchy. The schedule is available in military time only, and the app is extremely limited—you can only set the meal schedule for the same day, and when I wanted to do only two to three meals a day spread over two days, I had to reschedule the meals for every new day. The feeder didn’t keep it cold enough to spread the meals out and the wet food was not at a safe eating temperature. At this price point, just get the Petlibro Polar wet feeder for a few bucks more.
Catit Pixi Smart Cat Feeder for $114: Kibble is stored in the body of this dry feeder, but it doesn’t have a window to visually check food levels. The calendar to plan meals shows only a week at a time, and although it should repeat daily based on the schedule, I found that some days there would be no schedule despite setting one up. The Pixi also doesn’t tell you how much food was dispensed; it just refers to it as a “portion”—I manually measured and found the portion was less than a tablespoon of kibble. After using it continuously for more than a month, I found it was extremely glitchy and almost never reliably stuck to the programmed schedule, sometimes skipping meals altogether. This feeder is potentially dangerous, and I’d caution pet parents against relying on it.
Closer Pets C500 for $75: This automatic wet and dry feeder can schedule up to four pre-portioned meals (and one meal given manually) that are opened on a timer system using three AA batteries (sold separately). The user presets the four times they want the bowls, which have ice packs underneath, to rotate. The bowls are quite deep and narrow and aren’t super easy for cats to reach, which could cause whisker fatigue. And although there are two relatively large ice packs, when I checked on the feeder after a night’s sleep, the packs weren’t very cold. This may be OK for kibble, but wet food was kept at unsafe temperatures, and my cats couldn’t reach all of the food.
Why Use an Automatic Feeder?
Automatic feeders are great for pet owners who want to help manage their pets’ weight and monitor eating patterns. Plus, they allow for a lot more control and precision for owners to learn exactly how much their cat is eating and when. Because cats are naturally more nocturnal, many have the annoying habit of waking you up in the early hours demanding food, and these allow you to set up a schedule that fits more to their schedule without inconveniencing yours.
Of course, it’s never recommended to leave pets alone for long periods, but these automatic feeders give more peace of mind and are a whole lot healthier for your pet than leaving a huge amount of food for free-feeding while you’re away for the night. Simply put, it’s an easier way to feed and monitor your cat’s health with less work for you, the human.
I have two rescue cats, ages 4 and 5, and they eat two wet-food meals a day and small amounts of dry kibble throughout the day. Vets (and TikTokkers) have successfully persuaded me to move toward a primarily wet-food diet, however, which has a higher water content. This provides more moisture in their diet, which helps with potentially life-threatening problems like UTIs, which are especially prevalent in male cats. I still like to give smaller dry-food meals throughout the day for them to satisfy their need for crunch.
For dry food, I use Hill’s Science Diet, and for wet food I use Friskies’ Shreds variety. (Yes, only Shreds. Fellow cat owners will understand.)
I set up the feeders, noting ease of set up, potential problems, and app navigation. I also tested various schedules and manual feedings through the app, noting any issues. I used each of the feeders for at least a week, if not more.
How Long Can I Leave My Cat Alone?
Although cats are generally thought of as less high-maintenance than dogs, it’s still not good to leave your cat for prolonged periods. Under dire circumstances, you can leave a cat alone for 24 to 48 hours with scheduled feedings and a clean water source, but it’s not ideal—especially for cats with health issues, kittens younger than a year, or very elderly cats. Although these feeders are automatic, and meals can be scheduled in advance and over multiple days, our pets still need their human pals around for enrichment, care, and well, love.
An insurrectionist robot unleashed by a mad inventor in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis. HAL 9000 sabotaging a manned mission to Jupiter in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Skynet, the self-aware global defense network that seeks to exterminate humanity throughout the Terminator franchise.
Hollywood has never wanted for audacious depictions of artificial intelligence or the ways in which it could alter the fate of our species. But the rapid integration of AI into the studio system and our now unavoidable interactions with it have severely compromised the genre, not to mention film as a medium.
On the one hand, it’s perfectly understandable that screenwriters and studios would return to the subject of AI in recent years, particularly since it provokes such fierce debate within the industry. (A major cause of the 2023 labor strikes was the threat that AI posed to creative jobs.) Still, the novelty faded fast.
Consider M3GAN, a campy horror flick about an artificially intelligent doll who starts killing people, released just a week after the debut of ChatGPT in 2022: It was a surprise box-office smash. Last year’s sequel? A critical and commercial flop. Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning (2023) introduced a rogue AI called The Entity as a final adversary for Ethan Hunt and crew. The resolution of its cliff-hanger ending and blockbuster finale for the spy saga, Mission: Impossible—The Final Reckoning (2025), underperformed its predecessor, and neither quite justified their expense.
The latest AI-themed bomb is Mercy, a crime thriller starring Chris Pratt as an LAPD detective strapped into a chair who has 90 minutes to pull enough evidence from security cameras and phone records to convince a stern judge bot (Rebecca Ferguson) that he didn’t kill his wife—or else face instant execution. Despite releasing in January, one reviewer has already declared it “the worst movie of 2026,” and judging by its mediocre ticket sales, many US moviegoers decided as much from the trailer alone. It’s almost as if nobody cared whether a fictional software program might be capable of sparing a life when real health insurance claims are being denied by algorithms already.
For those few who did see it, Mercy fell far short of its dystopian premise, failing to grapple with the ethics of such a surveillance state and its medieval-modern justice system in favor of cheap relativism. Spoiler: Pratt’s character and the AI ultimately team up to stop the real bad guys as the bot begins to show signs of unrobotic emotion and doubt, which manifest as glitches in the program. By the end, Pratt is delivering a true groaner of a we’re-not-so-different speech to the holographic Ferguson. “Human or AI, we all make mistakes,” he says. “And we learn.”
While the naive belief in AI’s progress toward enlightenment feels dated on arrival, you are also reminded of how prophetically cynical something like Paul Verhoeven’s RoboCop, now almost 40 years old, was in addressing a future of cybernetic fascism. Contrary to that kind of pitch-black, violent satire, the current trend seems to be propagandistic narratives about how AIs are scary at first but secretly good. (See also: Tron: Ares, Disney’s wildly misguided attempt to leverage an old IP for the era of large language models, another cinematic train wreck of 2025.)
In fact, the insistence on some inborn value or honor to artificial intelligence may be the driving force behind the new Time Studios web series On This Day…1776. Conceived as a blow-by-blow account of the year the American colonies declared independence from the British crown, it consists of short YouTube videos generated in part by Google DeepMind (though actual actors supply voiceovers). The project has drawn serious attention and scorn because acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky served as executive producer via his creative studio Primordial Soup, launched last year in a partnership with Google to explore the applications of AI in filmmaking. It probably doesn’t help that Aronofsky and company are valorizing the country’s founders in the same aesthetic that has defined the authoritarian meme culture of Donald Trump’s second term.
As much as half of all the code produced at Alphabet, the parent company of Google, is being generated by artificial intelligence (AI) coding agents.
The use of AI to drive operational efficiency and free up more money to invest in AI capacity was one of the points made by Anat Ashkenazi, senior vice-president and chief financial officer of Alphabet and Google, during the company’s latest quarterly earnings call.
For its fourth quarter of 2025, Alphabet reported revenue of $114bn, up 18% year over year. For the full year, it posted revenue of $403bn, a 15% increase from the previous year.
The company is seeing a huge increase in demand for Google Cloud and its AI-powered services. During its latest earnings call, in a response that suggests Alphabet does not need to expand its software developer workforce, Ashkenazi said: “We look at coding productivity. About 50% of our code is written by coding agents, which are then reviewed by our own engineers. This certainly helps our engineers do more and move faster with the current footprint.”
Ashkenazi said 60% of Alphabet’s 2025 capital expenditure (capex) was allocated to servers, with the remaining 40% directed towards datacentres and networking equipment. A similar amount looks set to be spent in 2026, with Alphabet predicting it will spend between $175bn and $185bn on servers, datacentres and networking equipment. Its latest quarterly earnings call suggests capex is primarily focused on AI infrastructure and technical innovation to meet growing demand.
While Google does not have the breadth of AWS services or the deep corporate foothold of Microsoft, its steady effort to win enterprise customers is now turbocharged by its AI-native cloud offerings Lee Sustar, Forrester
There is increasing concern in stock markets that the huge investments in AI infrastructure will not deliver a return on investment. In response to questions about AI capacity challenges and compute demand, Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet and Google, said: “We’ve been supply-constrained, even as we’ve been ramping up our capacity. Obviously, our capex spend this year is an eye towards the future, and you have to keep in mind, some of the time, horizons are increasing in the supply chain. So, we are constantly planning for the long-term and working towards that. And, obviously, how we close the gap this year is a function of what we have done in the prior years. And so there is that time delay to keep in mind.”
The investment in AI infrastructure is needed to support demand for Google Cloud and the AI services the company provides. The quarterly filing shows Google Cloud’s annual run rate is over $70bn.
Pichai said Google Cloud has sold more than eight million paid seats of Gemini Enterprise, its AI platform, to over 2,800 companies. He also stated that over 120,000 enterprises use Google’s Gemini AI models, including major companies such as Airbus, Honeywell, Salesforce and Shopify, with existing customers increasing their spending, outpacing their initial commitments by over 30%.
“Nearly 75% of Google Cloud customers have used our vertically optimised AI, from chips, to models, to AI platforms, and enterprise AI agents, which offer superior performance, quality, security and cost-efficiency. These AI customers use 1.8 times as many products as those who do not, enabling us to diversify our product portfolio, deepen customer relationships and accelerate revenue growth,” added Pichai.
Forrester’s principal analyst, Lee Sustar, said: “Google Cloud’s quarterly revenue jump of 48% over the same period a year earlier is decisive evidence that it is a full-blown enterprise challenger to AWS [Amazon Web Services] and Microsoft Azure. While Google does not have the breadth of AWS services or the deep corporate foothold of Microsoft, its steady effort to win enterprise customers is now turbocharged by its AI-native cloud offerings. But this comes at a hefty price for parent Alphabet, which saw capital expenditure for the fourth quarter effectively double the amount of a year earlier.”
Entertainment1 week ago
Sports1 week ago
Politics1 week ago
Sports1 week ago
Tech1 week ago
Entertainment1 week ago