In 2025, quitting social media felt easier than ever

For a tech writer, being very offline is sort of like being a marathon coach who doesn’t run. So in 2025, I tried to reverse years of studied avoidance towards the most ubiquitous technological phenomenon on earth — I got back on social media. The change was short-lived. 

My first exodus from the feeds took some work — disabling notifications, removing apps from my homescreen and then deleting accounts entirely. This time, the phone put itself down. The whole thing has simply lost its luster.

I started with Instagram. Every experience went like this: I’d see a single post from one of the rare family members or IRL friends who are active on the platform. Next, I was fed a sponsored post, followed by suggestions to follow randos. After that, a series of influencer videos that, admittedly, appeal to my taste (funny/absurdist women and dissertations on urban planning). That was followed up with more sponsored posts, mostly from brands I’d looked up for work. Then it’d circle back to the influencers. My eyes glazed over and I tossed the phone aside.  

Years back, the platform gave off a jolt of quasi-social connection that I’d spend hours sucking up. I fed on pointless thoughts from an ex-coworker, vacation reels from a college roommate, a half-baked loaf of bread that an old friend dropped on the floor but took a picture of anyway. Now it’s a bare sliver of that stuff, shoehorned between towers of sponsored content and posts from people who make or promote their living on Instagram. The real people have left. The connection is gone. The FOMO is no more.   

I experienced some variation of the same disappointment on every platform I rejoined. When I got back on TikTok a few months after the ban, it felt like a frenzied shopping mall. Every video seems to be about four seconds long and most are promotional and/or shoppable. YouTube Shorts is drowning in AI-generated videos, and I don’t hit up social media to watch fake footage of desperate wild animal babies clambering onto the boats of helpful humans. My life has no need for simulated toddlers admonishing their pets. Occasionally, I’d hit on something compelling: a clip from late night TV, a stupidly decadent dessert recipe, people from other countries explaining cultural subtleties. 

But for me, these social media platforms are no longer velcro for the eyes. I remember losing focus, spending long hours on YouTube Shorts and IG. I’d look up bleary-eyed and shame-faced after hours scrolling TikTok’s For You Page. Now, after a few minutes, a bored ickiness sets in. I feel like I’m trapped in a carnival of bots hawking shampoo at me and I just want to go home. 

It’s not a mystery how or why things feel different; The answer is always money. These billion- and trillion-dollar companies have shareholders who prize year-over-year performance over anything else. So we get more sponsored posts on Instagram. TikTok purposefully, enthusiastically overloads itself with shoppable content (which isn’t going to change no matter who owns it). YouTube is obsessed with engagement so it ends up rewarding people who flood the platform with AI slop. These platforms aren’t about human connections and the spread of creativity — the stuff that used to draw me in — they’re thinly varnished ecommerce sites sprinkled with brute-forced AI oddities.   

I’d be sadder about the whole thing if I thought it could be any different. These companies are among the most valuable in the world. The fact that I can’t connect with my fellow common people using their services is not surprising. The change isn’t even driving everyone away. Instagram reported more users than ever this year, to the tune of 35 percent of the planet. Billions of users still scroll TikTok and watch YouTube Shorts. So maybe it’s just a me thing.  

And I have options. Over-monetization may have made me not want to engage with a few social media behemoths, but things aren’t so dire everywhere. Bluesky reminds me of Twitter before X. I take comfort in seeing posts that prove most people are as dismayed as I am over a government and wider economic system that are nakedly uninterested in serving the public. The hot takes aren’t quite as funny as they were on Twitter years back — maybe it’s just all been said before or perhaps things have gotten too dire for levity. I still don’t end up spending a lot of time on the platform, however. It’s not as weird as it was before the defection and I get tired of the stream of news headlines contextualized with tut-tutting and handwringing — I’m perfectly capable of doing that myself.  

It’d be easy to say that social media just isn’t my thing, but that’s not true because I can’t quit Reddit — the shining exception to my social media ennui. It feels filled with actual people. Ads exist, but in a subdued, manageable way. And every contributor, commenter and moderator I’ve come across on the app is militantly vigilant against the onslaught of artificially generated content. I also like the organizational structure. I know my Home tab will only expose me to my chosen subs and I derive great joy from happy cows, greeble-chasing cats, enigmatic night feelings and freaky abandoned spaces. I use my local subreddit r/Albuquerque daily to answer questions and keep tabs on the world (directly) around me. 

Sadly, Reddit is an outlier, a misfit exception to the rule, and now that it’s gone public, it may follow a similar monetization push. Bluesky is tiny, new and not yet profitable, so who knows where its financial journey will lead it (though the “world without Caesars” shirt gives us some hope). 

There’s something lamentable about the loss of the connections we gleaned from platforms that were once compelling, engrossing and rife with the creativity of our fellow humans. Ultimately, any public-facing company that prioritizes profits over everything else has no incentive to look out for its users. So I don’t expect any of the larger social platforms to pull back on their monetization marches. For now, I’ve decided I’m comfortable with my admittedly narrow interaction with the world of social media. As a Gen-Xer, online-first wasn’t how my relationship to the world started out. And I’m pretty confident I know enough about other tech-related stuff to be useful to my editors and readers without a black belt in social. (Ed. note: She is.) Besides, Karissa’s got us covered. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/in-2025-quitting-social-media-felt-easier-than-ever-140000374.html?src=rss

The best winter tech for 2026 to help get you through the coldest months

The festive lights, time off and cute scarfs can only conceal the truth for so long: Winter can be pretty bleak. I don't mean to be a downer, but it's cold all of the time, dark most of the time and this lasts far beyond the most wonderful time of the year. Here at Engadget, we've tried so many tools and products to make winter more bearable from therapy lamps to heaters. We've invested in tea sets, wrapped ourselves in heated blankets and learned to grow herbs indoors — really, anything that will make these three-plus months more bearable, we've tried.

Here, you'll find some of the best winter tech getting us at Engadget through the coldest months, plus a number of recommendations from our other gift guides that will get anyone through the winter warm, comfortable and content.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/home/smart-home/the-best-winter-tech-for-2026-to-help-get-you-through-the-coldest-months-130009890.html?src=rss

Instacart is ending its controversial price tests

Instacart has announced it will be ending price testing on its platform. This comes after a study published earlier this month revealed pricing experiments that led to some customers seeing higher prices than others and the FTC saying last week it would be investigating the grocery delivery app.

"Effective immediately, Instacart is ending all item price tests on our platform. Retailers will no longer be able to use Eversight technology to run item price tests on Instacart," an Instacart spokesperson shared with Engadget. The blog post called out "misconceptions and misinformation," maintaining that these price experiments were never the result of dynamic pricing and were never based on any personal or behavioral information about shoppers.

In an earlier blog post responding to the study's allegations, Instacart said pricing changes were a "form of short-term, randomized A/B testing." The post referred to this process as "common in the grocery industry" and continued to paint the practice as a way to "invest in lower prices." It also highlighted that Instacart does not set the prices on its platform, which are set by retailers listed on the app.

The company made clear that its retail partners will continue to set their own prices on the platform, which may vary by location just as they do in brick-and-mortar stores, but that Instacart will no longer support any item price testing services.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/instacart-is-ending-its-controversial-price-tests-134552152.html?src=rss

Alexa+ can now answer your Ring doorbell and talk to people

Amazon just introduced a new feature for Alexa+ called Greetings. This lets Alexa+ answer the doorbell and converse with visitors, which certainly sounds futuristic in a "gated community as dystopia" kind of way.

There are several caveats here. First of all, it only works with certain newer Ring video doorbell models. Customers also have to pony up for a Ring Premium Plan and have access to the Alexa+ early access build. It's available in the US and Canada and only in English.

If you meet those criteria, this could be a fairly useful little feature. Amazon says it "transforms your Ring doorbell into an intelligent assistant capable of determining who's at your door, understanding what they need and responding conversationally." The company promises that the tool operates whether people or home or out doing errands.

How does this work? It's an AI algorithm that "determines who's there based on what they're wearing, holding or their actions." It will use "visual context, any information the visitor shares and the instructions it's been given to help manage interactions on your behalf."

Amazon says that it can, for instance, distinguish if a person is wearing a delivery uniform and tell them to leave the package at the back door. Most of my delivery drivers don't come to the door in full uniforms because it's winter and that would be ridiculous. I don't even expect that during the summer. In other words, this is modern AI and mistakes will happen.

The company gives other examples of how this could be used, like gathering messages from friends who stop by and telling door-to-door salespeople to (politely) bug off. Amazon also says Alexa+ will be able to direct visitors to water and snacks that have previously been laid out. Finally, there's a way to avoid those pesky cute kids on Halloween while still providing them with treats.

Everything can be reviewed later on via the Ring app, which should provide context as to who has been hanging around the porch. Alexa+ Greetings are rolling out today.

For the uninitiated, Alexa+ is Amazon's updated chatbot. It's more conversational than the old Alexa, which could be useful or annoying depending on what you use it for. I use Alexa primarily as an alarm, so I don't necessarily want a gabfest.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/alexa-can-now-answer-your-ring-doorbell-and-talk-to-people-162712774.html?src=rss

A Facebook test makes link-sharing a paid feature for creators

Creators and publishers have long worried about Meta's ability to throttle links to outside content. Now, the company is testing out a new scheme that effectively puts link-sharing behind a paywall for creators on Facebook.

Under the test, a Meta Verified subscription will determine how many links a creator can share another profile per month. According to a screenshot shared by social meda consultant Matt Navarra, creators in the test recently received a notification from Meta informing them that "certain Facebook profiles without Meta Verified, including yours, will be limited to sharing links in 2 organic posts per month."  

Meta is making link sharing pay to play with a new test.
Meta is making link sharing pay to play with a new test.

A spokesperson for Meta confirmed the test to Engadget. The test is currently affecting an unspecified number of creators and pages using "professional mode" on Facebook. Publishers aren't affected for now. "This is a limited test to understand whether the ability to publish an increased volume of posts with links adds additional value for Meta Verified subscribers," the spokesperson said.

While Meta seems to be trying to downplay the significance of the test, it's a notable shift for the company. Many creators and businesses rely on Facebook and reducing their ability to send traffic to outside websites could be a significant hit. Many creators are already frustrated that the company puts its better customer service features behind the Meta Verified subscription, which starts at $14.99/month. Making link-sharing a premium feature as well would be even more unpopular.

Have a tip for Karissa? You can reach her by email, on X, Bluesky, Threads, or send a message to @karissabe.51 to chat confidentially on Signal.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/a-facebook-test-makes-link-sharing-a-paid-feature-for-creators-224632957.html?src=rss

X was spooked enough by new Twitter to change its terms of service

Despite changing its name and using decidedly bird-free branding, X is trying to hold on to its original Twitter trademarks, TechCrunch reports. The xAI-owned social media platform has updated its terms of service to include references to Twitter after previously only mentioning X, and seemingly attempted to counter a startup's petition to cancel the company's Twitter trademarks with a petition of its own.

The startup X appears to be responding to is Operation Bluebird, a company cofounded by former Twitter general counsel Stephen Coates that went public last week with plans to capture what remains of Twitter for its own use. The first step in that process was filing a petition with the US Patents and Trademark Office to cancel X's control of Twitter’s trademarks.

"The TWITTER and TWEET brands have been eradicated from X Corp.’s products, services and marketing, effectively abandoning the storied brand, with no intention to resume use of the mark," Operation Bluebird explained in the petition. “Petitioner seeks to use and register the TWITTER and TWEET brands for new products and services, including a social media platform that will be located at the website twitter.new."

In fairness to Operation Bluebird, Elon Musk was very open about his plan to abandon the Twitter name and bird logo after he acquired the company in 2022. "And soon we shall bid adieu to the twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds," Musk posted in July 2022, not long before Twitter was rebranded to X. Even after the platform rebranded, though, at least one remnant of the original Twitter brand has stuck around: Twitter.com still redirects to X.com.

The updated terms of service TechCrunch spotted now say that as of January 16, 2025, "nothing in the Terms gives you a right to use the X name or Twitter name or any of the X or Twitter trademarks, logos, domain names, other distinctive brand features, and other proprietary rights, and you may not do so without our express written consent." The company's counterpetition also reiterates that the Twitter trademarks are X's "exclusive property."

In a statement to Engadget, Coates said that Operation Bluebird’s cancellation petition was “based on well-established trademark law” and that he believes the upstart will prevail. “X legally abandoned the TWITTER mark, publicly declared the Twitter brand ‘dead,’ and spent substantial resources establishing a new brand identity. Our cancellation petition is based on well-established trademark law and we believe we will be successful. They said goodbye. We say hello.”

At the time of writing, Operation Bluebird has convinced over 145,200 people to claim a handle on the company's new social platform. Maybe X sees that early interest as a threat, but it's just as possible Operation Bluebird's public comments were enough to tip the company off so it could try to hold on to trademarks it clearly believes still hold some value.

Update, December 16, 2025, 4:13PM PT: This story was updated to add a statement from Stephen Coates.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-was-spooked-enough-by-new-twitter-to-change-its-terms-of-service-231138305.html?src=rss

YouTube is letting creators make playable games with a Gemini 3 tool

Google's at it again, once more insisting that AI is something people need or want more of in their lives. The latest move comes from YouTube Gaming, which announced an open beta for a project called Playables Builder. This allows select YouTube Creators to use a "prototype web app built using Gemini 3" to make bite-sized games, no coding required. 

YouTube was testing the addition of small-scale games to its desktop and mobile platforms back in 2023, then added multiplayer capability to Playables last year. Since AI is appearing all over Google-owned services, today's news probably shouldn't be a surprise.   

The premise sounds similar to the Disco and GenTabs projects that Google Labs recently announced. They offer an AI layer to web browsing: provide a natural language input, get an interactive widget that does what you asked for. Despite my skeptical attitude toward AI, I can see those tools having some practical applications for search, where the goal is to aggregate whatever data you're looking for into a manageable, easy-to-read interface. 

But a game is not simple. A good game takes what might be a simple idea and, with finesse and iteration and skill, transforms it into a genuinely fun experience. It's a cute parlor trick that AI assistants can help people to make stuff without technical knowledge, but there's a reason professional game devs work hard to amass all their know-how. Playables Builder is a peak example of misunderstanding what artificial intelligence is best at. Just because a chatbot can make a game doesn't mean anyone will enjoy playing it.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/youtube-is-letting-creators-make-playable-games-with-a-gemini-3-tool-195500318.html?src=rss

Google is retiring its free dark web monitoring tool next year

Google will stop sending out dark web reports starting early next year, as it shuts down the free tool that can tell you if your personal information has appeared on the seedy underbelly of the internet. The tool used to be exclusively available to Google One subscribers until the company opened it up to everyone in mid-2024. If you switch it on, you’ll receive a notification whenever your name, email address and phone number leak on the internet, typically due to data breaches.

In Google’s email announcement, however, it said it was discontinuing dark web reports because “feedback showed that it did not provide helpful next steps.” A report just lets you know that your information has appeared on the dark web. You can also see a list of all the hits you get on your Google account, along with what data breach leaked that particular detail. However, it doesn’t give you guidance on what to do afterwards.

The company explained that it will focus on tools that can give you clear, actionable step to take instead. Google will stop monitoring for new dark web results on January 15, 2026 and will remove access to the report from your account on February 16. You can also remove your monitoring profile right now by going to the “results with your info” section on the tool’s official page.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/google-is-retiring-its-free-dark-web-monitoring-tool-next-year-023103252.html?src=rss

Judge blocks Louisiana’s social media age verification law

A Louisiana law that would have required social media platforms to verify the ages of their users has been blocked by a judge. The law, known as the Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation, was passed in 2023 and required Meta, Reddit, Snap, YouTube Discord and others to implement age verification and parental control features.

The ruling came just days before the law, which technically took effect over the summer, would have started to be enforced. In his ruling, Judge John W. deGravelles wrote that the law's "age-verification and parental-consent requirements are both over- and under-inclusive," and that its definition of "social media platform" was "nebulous."

The ruling was a victory for NetChoice, a lobbying group that represents the tech industry and has challenged the growing number of age verification laws around the world. The group had argued that the law was unconstitutional and posed a safety and security risk.

In a statement following the ruling, the group pointed to the "massive privacy risk" posed by the Louisiana law and others like it. "Louisiana’s law would have done more than chill speech," Paul Taske, the co-director of NetChoice’s Litigation Center said. "It would have created a massive privacy risk for Louisianans like those playing out in real time in countries without a First Amendment, like the UK."

In a statement, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said she would appeal the ruling. “The assault on children by online predators is an all-hands-on-deck problem,” Murrill said. “It’s unfortunate that the court chose to protect huge corporations that facilitate child exploitation over the legislative policy to require simple age verification mechanisms.”

Update, December 16, 11:50AM PT: This story has been updated to add a statement from the Louisiana Attorney General’s office.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/judge-blocks-louisianas-social-media-age-verification-law-001212758.html?src=rss

Reddit is starting to verify public figures

Like it or not, the checkmark has become an almost universal symbol on most social platforms, even though its exact meaning can vary significantly between services. Now, Reddit, which historically hasn't cared that much about its users' identity, is joining the club and starting to test verification for public figures on its platform.

The company is beginning "a limited alpha test" of the feature with a small "curated" group of accounts that includes journalists from major media outlets like NBC News and the Boston Globe. Businesses that are already using an "official" badge, which Reddit started testing in 2023, will also now have a grey "verified" checkmark instead of the "official" label. 

Verification has long been a thorny issue for many platforms. For users, it's at times been a source of confusion, especially on sites where verified badges only require a paid subscription. Reddit's approach, at least for now, is closer to how Twitter handled verification prior to Elon Musk's takeover of the company.

The company has handpicked the initial group who will get checkmarks indicating they have verified their identity and seems to be geared around high-visibility accounts. "This feature is designed to help redditors understand who they're engaging with in moments when verification matters, whether it’s an expert or celebrity hosting an AMA, a journalist reporting news, or a brand sharing information," Reddit explains in a blog post. "Our approach to verification is voluntary, opt-in, and explicitly not about status. It’s designed to add clarity for redditors and ease the burden on moderators who often verify users manually." 

For now, Reddit users — even notable ones — won't be able to apply for verification. But the company notes that its intention isn't to limit checkmarks to famous people only. A Reddit spokesperson tells Engadget that "our goal is that anyone who wishes to self-identify will be able to do so in the future." 

The company also notes that verification doesn't come with any exclusive perks, like increased visibility or immunity from the rules of individual subreddits. Reddit requires accounts to be in good standing and already active on the platform in order to be eligible for verification. Accounts that are marked NSFW or that "primarily engage in NSFW-tagged communities" won't be eligible. 


This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/reddit-is-starting-to-verify-public-figures-170000833.html?src=rss