Tech
Keep Tabs on Your Pets and Kids With the Best Indoor Security Cameras
Compare Indoor Cameras
Best MicroSD Cards
Photograph: Amazon
Many security cameras support local storage, enabling you to record videos on the camera or a linked hub. A few hubs have built-in storage, and some provide slots for hard drives, but most rely on microSD cards. Here are some details on what to look for (and a few recommendations).
The microSD card you choose should have fast read and write speeds so that you can record high-quality video and play it back without delay. We recommend going for Class 10 microSD cards rated as U1 or U3. You can dive deeper into what that means in our SD card explainer. Before buying, check the card type, format, and maximum supported card size for your security camera. Consider how many hours of video each card capacity can store. For example, you might get a couple of days of HD video on a 32-GB card. If you want to record continuously, you likely want a higher-capacity card.
I recommend formatting the card as soon as you insert it into the camera. You will usually be prompted to do this, but if not, there is generally an option in the settings. Just remember, formatting will wipe anything on the microSD card, so back up the contents first.
Some security camera manufacturers offer their own branded microSD cards. They work just fine in my experience, but for maximum reliability, here are my favorites. Always remember to check the specs. Even different sizes of cards in the same range often have different capabilities.
Other Indoor Cameras to Consider
There are a lot of security cameras out there. Here are others I tried that didn’t earn a top spot.
Photograph: Simon Hill
Wyze Cam Pan V4 for $60: The V3 was our pick for the best panning camera, and the V4 offers several improvements, including an upgrade to 4K footage and a built-in spotlight. The smart design allows it to spin 360 degrees and tilt 180 degrees to take in a whole room. I like the option to set waypoints in the app to have it cycle through, the privacy mode, the automatic motion tracking, and the ability to record locally on a microSD card (up to 512 GB). On the downside, you must subscribe for features like AI detection and rich notifications, starting from $3 a month ($20 a year) for a single camera, though that only gets you 14 days of video storage. The frame rate also drops to 15 (from 20) at night, and I found moving subjects, combined with the camera panning, resulted in blurry footage. While we are testing Wyze cameras again after the firm beefed up its security policies, the past security breaches may still give you pause if you’re considering its cameras for inside your home.
Aqara Camera G100 for $35: This affordable camera comes from Aqara’s rapidly expanding stable of smart home gadgetry, and offers an impressive set of specs for the money (2K video, 140-degree field of view, AI detection, IP65 rating, spotlight for color night vision, two-way audio, and microSD card slot for local storage). On paper, it’s very similar to our top pick, but I found connectivity a little flaky (it needs a strong Wi-Fi signal) and the AI detection frequently identified my cat as a person. It’s still a bit of a bargain and makes sense for folks who have already invested in Aqara gear. It also boasts wide smart home compatibility, including Apple HomeKit, which is a real rarity at this price.
TP-Link Tapo HybridCam 360 C216 for $30: With a cute design that can sit on a table or shelf or be mounted the other way up, this camera has an IP65 rating, so it can also work outdoors, though it needs to be plugged in via the 6.6-foot USB-C cable. The video is sharp at up to 2K and 30 fps, and the C216 allows 360-degree pan and 152-degree tilt. It can track subjects and patrol the room, and there’s local video storage via microSD card. People detection is good, and it can recognize a baby crying (my cat can also trigger this). An excellent pan/tilt camera at a very competitive price, the only thing keeping this from a recommendation above is TP-Link’s slightly superior C225, but if your budget is limited and the C225 isn’t on sale, this is a great second choice.
Lorex 2K Dual-Lens Indoor Pan-Tilt Camera for $80: There’s a lot to like about this dual-lens camera, with one fixed-view camera and a pan-and-tilt lens on top to track subjects and cover a 360-degree area. It offers crisp 2K video with HDR, smart motion detection for people and pets, and local storage on a microSD card up to 256 GB (32 GB included). There’s also two-way audio with a call button on the camera, capable of calling the app on your phone. The tracking was sometimes a bit unreliable, and tapping on notifications did not always load the clip, but it mostly worked well. Lorex was owned by Dahua (banned by the US government) until a Taiwanese firm, Skywatch, reportedly bought it in 2023.
Eufy Indoor Cam E220 for $32: This is a solid alternative to TP-Link’s Tapo Pan Camera above. Eufy’s E220 also offers up to 2K footage with a 125-degree field of view, but pans to cover 360 degrees horizontally and tilts through 95 degrees vertically. It has person and pet detection, can automatically track movement, offers local or cloud storage, and supports Google Home and Amazon Alexa. The weakness is the limited frame rate (15 fps), which can result in choppy footage.
Ezviz C6 for $100: A cute design, crisp and clear video, and onboard AI and storage make this a compelling prospect. I like that the 2FA allows fingerprint unlock, it has a privacy mode, and it gives you the option to have gestures trigger a call. But the C6 struggled in mixed lighting, repeatedly identified my cat as a human intruder, and needs to be positioned low for the best view. I also tested the Ezviz C6N ($30), which had problems with subjects appearing blurry, and the Ezviz CP1 Pro (£20) and Ezviz SD7 (£130), which seem to be available only in the UK. The SD7 is a 7-inch portable screen with a battery inside that offers a dedicated view of your Ezviz cameras (up to 30), allowing you to play back video and control them where applicable, but that’s all it does, so I am slightly puzzled about why you would buy it over a smart display that can also do other stuff.
Photograph: Simon Hill
Psync Camera Genie S for $28: Easily the most interesting security camera I have tested, the unusual Psync Camera Genie S has a funky, blocky design that folds open to reveal a 2K camera and four LED lights. It records in a vertical format like TikTok, can pan 350 degrees and tilt 135 degrees, and has smart motion tracking. It supports two-way audio and has 32 or 64 GB of storage inside. In keeping with the AI trend, it is GPT-enabled, so if you spring for a ViewSay subscription ($1/month during Beta, then $7/month), it uploads frames of each video to a secure server and uses a visual language model to describe them for your notifications. This can have unintentionally hilarious results. Instead of getting a generic alert, it might say, “A man is opening a door, and a cat is behind him,” or, “A person is standing in a dark room, holding a baby, and looking at the camera.” Those are both real notifications I got, though the latter was actually my daughter holding a cat toy. ViewSay can also label objects in the room, but for most folks, it seems like a pointless gimmick, and it definitely needs to work on the accuracy to make it useful. The feed is quick to load, but I found the footage a bit blurry in low light (the maximum frame rate is 20), and the vertical orientation limits your field of view.
Wiz Indoor Security Camera for $17: As a 1080p camera with a relatively narrow 120-degree field of view, the debut Wiz security camera is a hard sell. Parent company Signify owns Philips Hue, but Wiz is cheaper, and if you own any of its smart lights, you can use the camera to trigger them. It also works with the company’s SpaceSense technology to use Wi-Fi and your Wiz lights to detect motion. It supports two-way audio, sound detection, and night vision. You can insert a microSD card for local recording, but you need a subscription ($4/month) for activity zones, cloud storage, and manual recording. There is a privacy mode, but it lacks a shutter. It’s a reliable camera, but only worth considering for folks with Wiz lights. It comes with a USB cable, but no power adapter.
TP-Link Tapo C210 for $20: If you want the ability to pan around the room, TP-Link’s Tapo C210 is another affordable indoor security camera with versatility. Like its sibling, our budget pick above, this camera supports up to 2K video, two-way audio, and local recordings via microSD cards up to 256 GB. But it has the same disappointing frame rate (15 frames per second), which can result in jerky video clips—more of a problem with a panning camera. There’s also some lag on the two-way audio, and the camera does not return to its starting position after tracking a subject, which can leave it facing the wrong way.
Eve Cam for $165: This is a solid HomeKit security camera for Apple households. The video quality is reasonably good, the night vision works well, motion alerts are reliable, and it can generally distinguish pets from people. The magnetic base is quite handy, and it is easy to automate this camera through Apple’s Home app so that it turns on when you leave the house or triggers lights when it senses motion. But it is relatively expensive, and it only works with Apple devices. An iCloud storage plan (starting from $1 per month for one camera) and a HomePod or Apple TV to act as a HomeKit hub are essential.
Panasonic Home Hawk Window for $120: This camera sticks to the inside of a window, so you can keep an eye on the outside of your house without mounting anything—a huge plus if you’re renting. The image quality is surprisingly clear, it has a decent 150-degree wide-angle view, and you can set it to just detect people to avoid notifications for every car that drives past or bird that pops up. But it’s pricey, there’s no 2FA, and there’s no cloud storage, so you’ll need a microSD card to view anything outside of a livestream.
Blink Mini for $30: Compact, versatile, and cheap, the Blink Mini offers good-quality video, two-way audio, accurate motion detection, activity zones, and integration with Alexa. The 1080p footage is clear, even in low light, but bright areas can appear blown out. There is two-way audio, but it often lags and distorts. If you don’t want a subscription (from $3 per month), you can add a Sync Module 2 ($50) and record to a USB flash drive (sold separately). It worked reliably in my testing, but it detects any motion (it can’t distinguish between pets and people). You can also get the Blink Mini Pan-Tilt Camera for $40, which is a regular Blink Mini camera with a pan-and-tilt mount, so you can pan through 360 degrees and tilt through 135 degrees.
Ezviz C1C for $20 and C6CN for $60: Ezviz’s cameras are as affordable as Wyze’s. The app has a really nice grid view, so you can easily watch a live feed of all your cameras, but there’s a small delay when detecting motion—I set up the C6CN panning camera in my living room, and it didn’t start recording until I made it from the door to the other side of the room. It always detected motion accurately, but the delay might be an issue if you’re dealing with an intruder.
TP-Link Kasa Spot for $20: I tried the Spot and the Spot Pan Tilt ($22), and both are impressive and inexpensive offerings from TP-Link. They have a wide field of view and decent motion detection that alerts you instantly. These cameras lacked two-factor authentication when I tested them, but the company has since added the feature to the Kasa app.
Don’t Buy These
Photograph: Simon Hill
I didn’t like every camera I tested. These are the ones to avoid.
Ring Indoor Cam: Ring is reintroducing a policy to enable local law enforcement to request footage directly from Ring users, making its camera tough to recommend. We stopped recommending Ring a few years ago due to this policy (among other reasons), but began testing and recommending Ring hardware after it changed its tune. If you’re already in the ecosystem, you may still fancy the Ring Indoor Cam (2nd Gen). It records crisp 1080p footage at 24 frames per second, has optional color night vision, and has a privacy shutter you can swivel around. You get motion alerts, pre-roll captures a few seconds before each event, two-way audio is decent, and the Ring Indoor Cam has a built-in siren. But the feature-packed app can be slow to load the live feed, and the best features, like person alerts and rich notifications, require a Ring Protect Plan ($5 per month for one camera or $10 per month for all your cameras and doorbells). Ring recently introduced a new version of this camera that ups the resolution to 2K and brings a few other improvements, but we haven’t tested it yet.
Chamberlain myQ Smart Indoor Security Camera: While we love the MyQ Garage Opener, the firm’s foray into security cameras was not as successful. We had issues getting the camera up and running, the MyQ app was slow and buggy, and a subscription starting from $8 per month is required if you want to record video (there’s no local option). The 1080p resolution is OK, but the night vision is weak, and there are several better options above.
Nooie 360 Cam 2: We liked the original Nooie 360 Cam. This version sports a similar design, allowing for almost 360-degree rotation and 94-degree tilt, and bumps the video resolution up to 2K. It takes microSD cards (up to 128 GB), and cloud plans start from $3 per month for 14-day event recording. Unfortunately, alerts are not reliable (sometimes they didn’t come through to my phone). The Nooie app is buggy, and it often takes a frustratingly long time to load the video feed. Any motion triggers a recording (there’s no person or pet detection), and you can set the camera to track a subject or pan and tilt manually, but annoyingly, it doesn’t return to a default position. There is 2FA, but it’s optional.
SwitchBot Indoor Camera and Pan/Tilt Cam: These cameras are affordable and offer clear video, but both struggled with exposure in mixed lighting. The app is a little flaky and crashed on me when I tried to play back video from an inserted microSD card, and there’s no 2FA. If you enable motion tracking, the pan cam also has the unfortunate habit of staying in the last position it tracked movement.
Wyze Cam V3: The V3 has been discontinued, but you can still find it on Amazon. While it offers good-quality video and works well on the whole, the free service makes this far less of a bargain than it used to be. It does boast local or cloud recordings, 2FA, and a choice of smart-home integrations. But this is one of the cameras that had a major security flaw that Wyze failed to fix for several years.
Tech
‘I Actually Thought He Was Going to Hit Me,’ OpenAI’s Greg Brockman Says of Elon Musk
In August 2017, Greg Brockman and Ilya Sutskever gathered at Elon Musk’s self-described “haunted mansion,” a 47-acre, $23 million estate in Hillsborough, south of San Francisco, to discuss the future of OpenAI. Actor Amber Heard, Musk’s then-girlfriend, had served the group whiskey and then dashed off with a friend, Brockman, OpenAI’s cofounder and president, testified in federal court during the trial for Musk v. Altman on Tuesday.
Ahead of the meeting, Musk gifted Brockman and Sutskever, OpenAI’s cofounder and former chief scientist, new Tesla Model 3 cars. “It felt like he was buttering us up,” Brockman said on the stand. “He wanted us to feel indebted to him in some way.” Sutskever tried to reciprocate for the occasion. The amateur artist presented Musk with a painting of a Tesla. Musk and the other cofounders wanted to establish a for-profit arm to entice investors to give them billions of dollars to pay for compute. But Musk also wanted control of the company, and Sutskever and Brockman objected to granting the Tesla CEO what they believed would be a “dictatorship” over the future of AI development. They proposed having shared control.
After several minutes of deliberation, Musk rejected their offer. “He stood up and stormed around the table,” Brockman recalled. “I actually thought he was going to hit me, physically attack me.” Musk grabbed the painting, said he would cut off his funding of the nonprofit until Brockman and Sutskever quit, and left the room, according to Brockman’s testimony. But that night, Musk’s so-called chief of staff Shivon Zilis called Brockman and Sutskever “to say it’s not over,” Brockman testified. “There were discussions of futures that included us.”
The story of the heated negotiations emerged as Brockman wrapped up his testimony on Tuesday. To OpenAI, the events at the mansion are representative of repeated instances of erratic behavior by Musk that they believe undermine his arguments about the company. Musk contends his roughly $38 million in donations to OpenAI were abused by Brockman and others on the path to creating the $852 billion for-profit venture now known for services such as ChatGPT and Codex. Brockman, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and OpenAI deny any wrongdoing, and the jury in Musk v. Altman could begin deliberating on an advisory ruling as soon as next week.
After Tuesday’s testimony, William Savitt, an attorney for OpenAI, told reporters that what Brockman had learned in 2017 was how tough it can be to meet one’s heroes. Brockman admired and respected Musk’s business acumen, but his desire for control was absolute and concerning, Savitt said. Marc Toberoff, an attorney for Musk, told reporters that the true concern was Brockman’s motivations for sharing control, with his desire for wealth having faced scrutiny in court a day earlier.
For his part, Brockman offered another story on Tuesday to underscore why he thought Musk was not up to the task of controlling an AI company. Brockman recalled then-OpenAI researcher Alec Radford showing Musk an early version of an AI chatbot that didn’t generate responses that he liked. Musk “kept saying this system is so stupid, that a kid on the internet could do better,” Brockman said. Radford “was absolutely crushed” and “demoralized” to the point that he almost quit the AI research field altogether, Brockman said. Brockman and Sutskever “spent a lot of time” rebuilding his confidence. Musk’s inability to see the potential in the early technology—which eventually became the basis for ChatGPT—made him unfit to control OpenAI, in Brockman’s view. “You needed to dream a little bit,” Brockman said. And Musk hadn’t shown that he could.
Boardroom Fights
Brockman said Tuesday that he, Sutskever, and Altman considered voting Musk off the OpenAI nonprofit board as negotiations with him about a for-profit sibling company dragged on for months. They would meet again over whiskey at Musk’s mansion to discuss alternative funding options. There was agreement over what not to do, but little on what to do instead. But Brockman and Sutskever decided removing Musk felt “wrong,” Brockman testified. Eventually, Musk left on his own after deeming OpenAI was on a path of “certain failure,” according to an email he wrote in early 2018.
Zilis, then an adviser to both OpenAI and Musk, kept him informed about developments at the AI venture in the years to come. “She was proxy Elon in some ways,” Brockman said, referring to her as “a friend” who he had first met in 2012 or 2013.
Tech
Telehealth Abortion Is Still Possible Without Mifepristone
Abortion provider Carafem’s phones were ringing nonstop over the weekend after a US federal appeals court reinstated a nationwide requirement that the drug mifepristone, one of two pills used for a medication abortion, must be obtained in person. The decision, handed down on Friday, left patients unsure if they could gain access to their treatment through telehealth. “People are afraid, and they’re angry,” says Carafem’s chief operations officer, Melissa Grant. “I had people contact us saying, This can’t be true. Do you still have the medication available? Can’t you just give it to me? They were bargaining.”
With the restriction in place, Carafem quickly pivoted to a backup approach. Instead of prescribing the two-drug protocol typical for a medication abortion—mifepristone, which blocks progesterone and prevents the pregnancy from progressing, and then misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract—the organization began prescribing misoprostol on its own. While slightly less effective than the dual-pill option, it’s been widely used in the past. “We feel comfortable prescribing it,” says Grant.
Some Planned Parenthood clinics also pivoted to the misoprostol-only regimen this weekend. “Planned Parenthood providers are doing everything they can to make sure patients know that medication abortion is still safe, legal, and available,” says Danika Severino, vice president of care and access at Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
On Monday, the Supreme Court offered a temporary reprieve, pausing the appeals court ruling for a week. The measure allows patients to once again get mifepristone through virtual clinics at least until May 11, when SCOTUS will take another look at the case. Carafem and Planned Parenthood say they are prepared to shift back to misoprostol-only if necessary. Other providers, including the digital abortion clinic HeyJane, have confirmed that they will also take that approach if necessary.
Mifepristone was developed in the 1980s in France and has been extensively studied for safety and efficacy. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2000. Under President Joseph Biden, the FDA first allowed the drug to be obtained by mail instead of in person in April 2021, during the Covid-19 pandemic. The agency permanently lifted the in-person dispensing requirement in 2023.
After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending the constitutional right to an abortion, medication abortion via telehealth became a more sought-after option, especially for patients in states that adopted abortion restrictions. Approximately one in three abortions that took place in the first half of 2025 used abortion pills obtained through telehealth, according to public health nonprofit Plan C.
Access to mifepristone has become the next major battleground in reproductive health, with anti-abortion politicians and lobbyists seeking to reinstate in-person dispensing requirements on the drug and, by doing so, make medication abortion harder to obtain.
After conflicting legal rulings in 2023 sparked confusion over whether mifepristone would be available from virtual clinics, some of them planned to temporarily shift to offering misoprostol-only medication abortions. Some virtual clinics have offered single-pill options even before that. Carafem offered misoprostol-only medication abortions beginning in 2020, in an effort to provide patients with options for virtual care during the early days of Covid.
Originally developed to treat gastric ulcers, misoprostol has been used for medication abortion since the late 1980s. It remains the primary method of medication abortion in many parts of the world where access to mifepristone is limited.
“Mifepristone and misoprostol are both very safe medications, and in general, having mifepristone increases the efficacy and decreases complication rates of medication abortion,” says Rachel Jensen, a fellow with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which endorses the misoprostol-only protocol when mifepristone isn’t available. The single-drug regimen is also endorsed by the World Health Organization, the Society of Family Planning, and the National Abortion Federation.
Tech
The Italian Dubbing of ‘The Devil Wears Prada 2’ Has Stirred Up a Surprising Controversy
One thing is certain about The Devil Wears Prada 2: The ambitious undertaking of making a sequel of a cult status film after 20 years has succeeded, at least as far as box office figures are concerned. The numbers speak for themselves, with $77 million generated in US theaters and another $157 million in the rest of the world since its April 29 release.
In the face of such a box office smash, this installment has inspired heated debates for days about its quality and comparisons to the original. In Italy, those arguments even extend to the dubbing of the film.
The controversy stems from the choice of voice actors in the Italian version of The Devil Wears Prada 2, who are themselves a nod to continuity; it’s the same cast as the original. Connie Bismuto is back to voice Anne Hathaway as Andy, Francesca Manicone dubs Emily Blunt as Emily, Gabriele Lavia is once again Stanley Tucci’s Nigel, and above all, Maria Pia Di Meo, the actress who has been the familiar and expressive voice of Meryl Streep in practically all the Italian adaptations of recent years—including the fearsome Miranda Priestly—returned for the sequel.
While many fans were happy to revisit these familiar voices, other viewers noticed some idiosyncrasies, largely due to the advanced age of the voice actors themselves, especially Di Meo and Lavia.
Di Meo, born in 1939, is undoubtedly a master of Italian dubbing, and her performances, linked to such great Hollywood actresses as Jane Fonda, Julie Andrews, Mia Farrow, Barbra Streisand, and Streep, have made her one of the most recognizable and expressive voices of cinema in that country’s theaters.
Yet some say her performance now reveals too much of the passage of time and that there’s a disconnect between her 87-year-old voice and that of a character as energetic and sharp as Miranda (played, in the original, by a 76-year-old Streep). Could this nine-year gap be too great to bridge? The same has been said of Lavia, who dubs Stanley Tucci with a result that often sounds a bit forced.
But more than a question of age, perhaps there’s a broader discussion to be had about dubbing in general and its effectiveness in an era in which downloads first and then streaming platforms have accustomed us to seeing more and more content in the original language.
Even just listening to the trailers released online for The Devil Wears Prada 2, a native Italian speaker will notice not only that the voices that have aged into varying degrees of mismatch but also that the speed of the lines makes them hard to follow. And what about the adaptation of the dialog? “I’m a features editor at Runway,” Anne Hathaway’s Andy says proudly, but how many of those who live outside newsrooms know what a features editor is? And again, when Miranda’s second assistant says, “I have to pee, I drank a venti,” how many people outside of the US understand on the fly that she’s referring to a Starbucks drink?
Perhaps, then, what hasn’t aged so well is not so much the voices of individual dubbers but a dubbing system that no longer keeps pace—in most cases—with the speed and specificity with which the content itself is produced. In the face of this consideration, however, one cannot ignore that, at least in a market like Italy, especially at the cinema, people overwhelmingly go to see dubbed versions of movies.
So these same online debates perhaps serve to keep attention focused on how many countries outside of the US experience these films. And one that deserves not only greater respect but also a quality that isn’t fully guaranteed with today’s frenetic pace.
This story originally appeared on WIRED Italia and has been translated from Italian.
-
Tech1 week agoA Brain Implant for Depression Is About to Be Tested in Humans
-
Sports1 week agoPro wrestling star Steph De Lander reveals how colleague’s advice helped lead her to title triumph at ACW
-
Business1 week ago‘I had £20,000 stolen and had to fight a 13-month fraud reporting rule to get it back’
-
Entertainment1 week agoNorway joins Type 26 Frigate Programme to boost NATO naval power
-
Entertainment1 week agoMelania Trump says ABC should ‘take a stand’ on late-night host Kimmel
-
Tech1 week agoAre tech leaders risking a cyber resourcing crisis? | Computer Weekly
-
Business6 days agoPSX plunges over 4,800 points | The Express Tribune
-
Business1 week agoStarmer says ‘tide could be turning’ on shoplifting epidemic





