Technology

This magazine plays Tetris — here’s how

Published

2 months ago

February 22, 2026

Tetris has been immortalized in a playable McDonald’s plastic chicken nugget, a playable fake 7-Eleven Slurpee cup, and a playable wristwatch. But the most intriguing way to play Tetris yet is encased in paper.

Last year the Tetris Company partnered with Red Bull for a gaming tournament that culminated in the 150-meter-tall Dubai Frame landmark being turned into the world’s largest playable Tetris installation using over 2,000 drones that functioned as pixels. Although the timing was a coincidence, Red Bull also published a 180-page gaming edition of its The Red Bulletin lifestyle magazine around the same time as the event, with a limited number of copies wrapped in a less grandiose, but no less technically impressive, version of Alexey Pajitnov’s iconic puzzle game.

To create a playable gaming magazine, Red Bull Media House (the company’s media wing) enlisted the help of Kevin Bates, who in 2014 wowed the internet by creating an ultra-thin Tetris-playing business card. In 2015, he launched the $39 Arduboy, a credit card-sized, open-source handheld that attracted a thriving community of developers. Over the course of a decade, Bates also created a pair of equally pocketable Tetris-playing handhelds that cost less than $30, and the shrunken-down USB-C Arduboy Mini.

The GamePop GP-1 Playable Magazine System (as it’s officially called) is the latest evolution of Bates’ mission to use existing, accessible, and affordable technologies to reimagine what a portable gaming device can be. It took “most of last year” to develop, Bates revealed during a call with The Verge. He wouldn’t divulge the exact details of how his collaboration with Red Bull came to be. But if you’re looking to make an officially licensed version of Tetris that’s thin enough to flex, Bates has the experience, and he shared with us some of the technical details that make this creation work.

The game’s screen is made up of 180 tiny RGB LEDs on a custom circuit board that can flex and bend.

While OLED display technology has given us tablet-sized devices that fold into smartphones, they’re still expensive and fragile. To make a display that can survive being embedded in a flexible magazine cover without reinforcement, Bates created a custom matrix of 180 2mm RGB LEDs mounted to a flexible circuit board just 0.1mm thick. While the display and coin-cell batteries make it thicker in a few places — nearly 5mm at its thickest point — you genuinely feel like you’re playing a handheld made of paper. The flexible circuits are bonded between two sheets of paper to create the sleeve that wraps around the book-sized magazine, and it feels satisfyingly thin and flexible.

Flexible circuits aren’t a new idea. They’ve been used in electronics for decades. You can find them in flip phones old enough they now feel like antiques, and nearly every laptop. They’re also frequently used to miniaturize devices that don’t fold or flex at all, connecting internal components where space is extremely limited. But it’s only in the past five or six years that the technology has become available to smaller makers, and Bates says he’s been “messing around with the flexible circuits for about as much time.” This collaboration was an opportunity to use what he’s learned to create a device that would live outside his workshop.

The GamePop GP-1’s display resolution pales in comparison to the OLED screens used in folding phones, but Bates’ creation is far more durable. The game has not only undergone the typical safety tests, but Bates even “hit it with a hammer a few times” to test its durability. His display survived, but don’t try that with a folding phone. They’re still far less durable.

The front cover of the Red Bull GamePop magazine.

To keep it as thin as possible, the Tetris game uses embedded touch sensors instead of physical buttons.

Instead of buttons, the game uses seven capacitive touch sensors that are directly “printed in the copper layer of the board,” Bates says. There’s no true mechanical feedback when pressed, but the paper’s flex helps them feel a bit like a button when you press down. Bates says the responsiveness of the sensors was specifically tuned to account for the thickness of the paper stock and the glues used in the final print run. You’re not going to be chasing Tetris world records on the cover of a magazine, but the controls are satisfyingly responsive and the game is surprisingly much easier to play than other Tetris devices I’ve tested.

The Red Bull magazine’s cover illuminated from behind revealing some of its internal components.

Most of the game is made using flexible electronics, but there is a thin rigid PCB housing its processor and rechargeable batteries.

How much does a flexible Tetris game cost to manufacture? Neither Bates nor Red Bull would divulge the total price tag for all the off-the-shelf and custom components you’ll find sandwiched inside the magazine’s cover. But to help keep costs down, not all components are flexible. Inside the edge of the cover, next to the magazine’s spine, you’ll find a long but thin rigid PCB where an ARM-based 32-bit microprocessor is located, along with four rechargeable LIR2016 3V coin cell batteries.

A close-up of a USB-C cable plugged into a charging port on the bottom of a magazine cover.

The magazine features a deconstructed USB-C charging port along the bottom edge of its cover.

Like most devices now, the game can be recharged using a USB-C cable, but it’s not immediately obvious where. Hidden along the bottom edge of the magazine’s cover is a deconstructed USB-C port. Instead of a metal ring, its socket is a small paper pocket containing a pin-covered head inside. It doesn’t feel quite as durable as the charging port on your phone, but it’s a welcome alternative to making the game disposable when the batteries die.

Bates did have to cut some corners. The GamePop GP-1 saves high scores, but modern Tetris gameplay features, like previews of upcoming pieces and being able to save tetrominoes for later, aren’t included. There’s sound effects, but when starting a game you only hear a small snippet of the iconic Tetris theme. The game’s piezo speaker “uses about as much energy as it does to run the rest of the system,” Bates says, so this helps prolong the life of the small rechargeable batteries. He tells us you can play for an hour or two that way, and the battery should last many months when not in use.

Red Bull made around 1,000 copies of the magazine. It’s only available online in Europe, but can also be found in some stores and newsstands, including Iconic Magazines in New York and Rare Mags outside Manchester in the UK. However, only 150 copies with the playable cover were produced, and none were made available to the public. They were distributed to Tetris competitors, those featured in the magazine, influencers, and select media.

The playable cover isn’t going to revolutionize the print industry, or pave the way for smartphones we can roll up and stick in our back pockets. The goal was to use existing tech in a way that gamers haven’t seen before.

Photography by Andrew Liszewski / The Verge

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Andrew Liszewski

Related Topics:gadgets gaming Hands-on Reviews Tech

Click to comment

Technology

The Netherlands is the first European country to approve Tesla’s supervised Full Self-Driving

Published

9 hours ago

April 11, 2026

Press Room

The Netherlands is the first European country to approve Tesla’s supervised Full Self-Driving

Dutch regulators, the RDW, announced that after over a year and a half of testing, it has officially approved Tesla’s Full-Self Driving (FSD) Supervised. This makes the Netherlands the first European country to authorize the use of FSD on its roads. This could open the door to wider adoption throughout the EU. Tesla’s European headquarters is located in Amsterdam, so it’s only fitting that the country is the first to embrace the company’s FSD.

In a statement announcing the approval, the RDW said that, “Using driver assistance systems correctly makes a positive contribution to road safety because the driver is supported in their driving tasks; it is a supplement to the driver. Through continuous strict monitoring of the driver in the vehicle, the system is safer than other driver assistance systems.”

The update implementing FSD Supervised (version 2026.3.6) has started rolling out to a limited number of users. Drivers will need to watch a tutorial and take a quiz before self-driving can be enabled, which reminds people that FSD Supervised “does not make your vehicle autonomous. Do not become complacent.”

Technology

Remove your personal info from the web; stop it from coming back

Published

9 hours ago

April 11, 2026

Press Room

Remove your personal info from the web; stop it from coming back

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The first time I tried to remove my personal information from people search sites, it was back online after a few weeks. If the same thing happened to you, you might have decided it’s just not worth the effort. This is likely by design.

Data brokers profit from your information, so they’re incentivized to make the process as difficult as possible. Sen. Maggie Hassan even called out a few data brokers recently for hiding their opt-out pages altogether. But you don’t have to let them keep your data, as long as you know what to do.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.

SPRING CLEAN YOUR DIGITAL FOOTPRINT: WHY RETIREES ARE SCAM TARGETS

A quick search of your name can reveal just how many sites are sharing your personal information without you realizing it. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

How to remove your personal info

The way I see it, there are two ways you can do this:

Manually removing your information
Using an automated data removal service

I recommend the second option. It saves a lot of time and does a more thorough job than most people will manage on their own. But if you still prefer to go about it yourself, I’ll share a step-by-step guide to help you do it as painlessly and thoroughly as possible.

Step 1: map your exposures

This step is important for when your information inevitably reappears after some time. Before you start removing anything, compile a list of places where your personal information appears or is likely to be held. Or you can compile the list yourself. The sites will likely include:

People search sites

These are the easiest to find because they’re designed to be public.

Search: “your full name” + city, “your phone number”, “your email”
Check beyond page 1, as many listings appear deeper in the results
Repeat searches with: Maiden names or name variations and old locations

Private data broker databases (harder to see, but widely used)

These don’t usually show up in search results because they sell data to businesses, not individuals. You can try to infer their presence based on how your data is used, but it’s no easy feat.

This is one of the reasons I recommend using a data removal service. They narrow down which brokers are most likely to have your information based on things like your location and other markers.

But if you want to try for yourself, look for signals like:

Getting calls or emails from companies you’ve never interacted with
Highly specific outreach (e.g., your job title, income range, or recent move)
Pre-filled forms with your personal details

Where your data likely came from:

Warranty registrations
Loyalty programs and retail purchases
Financial, insurance, or real estate inquiries
App usage and location data

If you’ve shared your data with a company, there’s a strong chance it’s been resold or shared with brokers behind the scenes.

Marketing and lead generation lists

These are often built for targeted advertising and outreach, and your data can circulate across many of them at once.

How to spot them:

Sudden spikes in spam after:

Signing up for a service

Entering a giveaway or quiz

Downloading a resource (e.g., ebook, discount code)

Signing up for a service
Entering a giveaway or quiz
Downloading a resource (e.g., ebook, discount code)
Emails that feel “personalized” but come from unfamiliar brands
Messages referencing a specific interest, purchase, or life event

Where to check:

Your email inbox (search for patterns in senders)
SMS history for unknown marketing messages
Unsubscribe pages (they often reveal the company or list owner)

Important: Unsubscribing usually stops messages. It doesn’t remove your data from the underlying list.

Public profile aggregators (not quite the same as people-search sites)

These sites compile information from across the web but aren’t always designed specifically for “people lookup.”

Examples include:

Old forum profiles or community pages
Professional directories and membership listings
Scraped social media profiles
Event attendee lists or speaker bios

How to find them:

Search your name in quotes + keywords like:

“profile”, “bio”, “member”, “directory”

“profile”, “bio”, “member”, “directory”
Search usernames you’ve used in the past
Use image search to find reused profile photos

These are often overlooked but can still expose valuable details like your location, employer, or social links.

5 MYTHS ABOUT IDENTITY THEFT THAT PUT YOUR DATA AT RISK

Data broker listings often include sensitive details like your address, phone number and relatives, making removal a critical first step. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

Step 2: Remove your data

Now that you’ve mapped where your data is exposed (or likely to be), it’s time to start removing it. Instead of jumping randomly between sites, work through your list in order of visibility and risk:

People search sites (highest visibility)
Public profile aggregators
Marketing and lead-gen lists
Private data brokers (least visible, but still important)

Remove your data from people-search sites

These should be your first priority because they make your personal information easy for anyone to find.

Typical process:

Find your listing using the link you saved earlier
Locate the “opt-out” or “remove my info” page (usually in the footer)
Submit your profile URL
Verify your request (via email or CAPTCHA)

What to expect:

Time per site: ~5-20 minutes
Removal timeframe: a few days to a couple of weeks

Tip: Save confirmation emails or screenshots. You may need them if your data reappears.

Remove your data from public profile aggregators

These can be less standardized, since they’re often scraped or republished pages.

Typical process:

Look for a “Contact,” “Support,” or “Privacy” page
Request removal directly (or delete your account, if possible)
If no response, identify the site owner via WHOIS or hosting info

Alternative option:

If the page won’t be removed, you can request de-indexing through Google, but this only hides it from search results, not the site itself

These take more effort, but they’re worth addressing because they often contain contextual details (job, interests, affiliations.)

Remove your data from marketing and lead-generation lists

This is less about a single listing and more about stopping ongoing data use.

Typical process:

Use the “unsubscribe” link in emails or reply STOP to SMS messages
Look for a “delete my data” or privacy request option
Submit a formal request if available (often under GDPR/CCPA rights)

Important:

Unsubscribing stops messages
It does not always delete your data

If the company has a privacy page, look specifically for:

“Right to deletion”
“Do not sell my information”

Remove your data from private data broker databases

These are the least visible and often the most frustrating to deal with manually.

Typical process:

Find the company’s privacy or legal page
Submit a data access or deletion request
Verify your identity (this may require ID documents)

What makes this harder:

You often don’t know which brokers have your data
Some require detailed verification
Responses can take weeks

This is where most people hit a wall and where ongoing monitoring or automation becomes useful.

Keep track as you go

As you work through your list, track:

Sites you’ve submitted requests to
Dates of submission
Confirmation emails or case IDs

This makes it much easier to:

Follow up if needed
Re-check later when your data reappears

1 BILLION IDENTITY RECORDS EXPOSED IN ID VERIFICATION DATA LEAK

Even after you remove your information, it can reappear, which is why ongoing monitoring or automated removal matters. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

The best way to deal with resurfacing data

My recommendation is to use a personal data removal service. These services handle the entire removal process for you, so there’s no need to search for your own data online or return to data broker sites to repeat opt-out requests. Everything is managed in the background.

They also tend to do a more thorough job than most people can manage on their own.

Many data removal services can request deletions from a wide range of websites, including some that are not easy to find on your own. They also scan for new exposures, alert you if your information shows up again and allow you to submit additional removal requests when needed. In some cases, these requests are handled by privacy specialists.

Most services also include a 30-day money-back guarantee, so you can try it risk-free and see how much of your information is exposed online.

YOU COULD BE SHARING YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER WHEN YOU DON’T NEED TO

Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com.

Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com.

Kurt’s key takeaways

Removing your personal information from the internet is not a one-and-done task. It takes persistence, a bit of strategy and the right tools. The frustrating part is that your data can come back even after you remove it, but that does not mean the effort is wasted. Every step you take reduces your exposure and makes it harder for your information to spread. If you want the most control, doing it manually gives you a clear view of where your data lives. However, if you want consistency without the ongoing time commitment, a data removal service can take that burden off your plate and keep working in the background. Either way, the key is to stay proactive. Your data has value, and once you start treating it that way, you will approach your privacy very differently.

Have you ever removed your personal info online only to see it show up again later, and what did you do next? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.

Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

Technology

Is the ‘Holy Grail of batteries’ finally ready to bless us with its presence?

Published

21 hours ago

April 11, 2026

Press Room

Is the ‘Holy Grail of batteries’ finally ready to bless us with its presence?

Earlier this year, a relatively unknown startup from Finland made a startling announcement: It had finally solved solid-state batteries.

Not only that, but Donut Lab, a spinoff of Verge Motorcycles, said that its solid-state battery — long considered the “Holy Grail of batteries” for their high-density, durable, fast-charging abilities — would go into production later this year.

Battery experts were understandably skeptical. After all, solid-state batteries are one of those technologies, along with artificial general intelligence and the hyperloop, that seem perpetually two years away. And while most legitimate efforts in this field — whether academic or commercial — have some level of published research or recognizable names attached, Donut Lab seemed to have emerged out of nowhere, with no known researchers or prior presence in the field. This lack of traceability immediately raised concerns about the startup’s credibility.

“I can’t say they didn’t do it,” said Eric Wachsman, the director of the Maryland Energy Innovation Institute and an expert on solid-state batteries and solid oxide fuel cells. “All I can say is they haven’t demonstrated that they have.”

The skepticism seems warranted, especially when you consider how many other people have been chasing the solid-state dream. Were we really to believe this obscure startup had beaten Toyota, Stellantis, and the entire nation of China to the punch? The odds were against it.

Donut Lab seemed to anticipate the doubt, launching a website last February called idonutbelieve.com that would serve as a platform to publish independent tests verifying that, in fact, its solid-state battery was real, and spectacular. Over the course of several weeks, the startup posted third-party results from state-owned VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland that it said proved its battery was what it said it was: a fast-charging, high-energy-density solid-state battery that wasn’t actually a supercapacitor in disguise.

“The resistance won’t disappear when we present the proof,” Donut Lab CEO and cofounder Marko Lehtimäki said in a video. “It will just intensify because this new technology is a threat to the established players in the industry.”

But Donut Lab is still hiding the ball on some key information. At CES in January, the startup said its solid-state battery has an energy density of 400Wh per kilogram—roughly twice that of typical lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries in production. Not only that, but it could charge to full in five minutes, had a practically unlimited lifespan of 100,000 charging cycles, was unaffected by heat and cold (negative 30 degrees Celsius and 100C), and contains no rare earth elements, precious metals, or flammable liquid electrolytes.

Much of that remains unsubstantiated. Even after posting five independent test reports from VTT, the startup has yet to demonstrate three of the most important metrics: chemistry, density, and cycle-life claims.

The stakes are incredibly high. Imagine an electric vehicle that can travel 700–800 miles on a single charge, and that wasn’t at risk of bursting into flames because the flammable electrolytes had been replaced with a solid material.

In lithium-ion batteries, the motion of the liquid electrolytes generates heat, and in certain situations, this can slip into a “thermal runaway” effect that results in a fire. By comparison, solid-state batteries would make it safer to quickly draw power from (or add it back to) the battery, meaning you could theoretically charge an EV faster. It also could mean, structurally, less room has to be devoted to temperature control, which could allow companies to squeeze more battery cells into the same size pack.

After reviewing the tests of the Donut battery, Wachsman said there are still significant concerns. During the extreme heat tests, for example, the pouch surrounding Donut’s battery lost its vacuum seal. Gas generation inside batteries — caused by processes like electrolyte decomposition or oxygen release — can lead to swelling and rupture of the battery pouch. But without knowing the exact chemistry of the cell, it’s difficult to say how significant it is that Donut’s battery had this failure.

Setting aside the Donut battery for a moment, solid-state batteries have struggled to graduate from the laboratory to the assembly line because of well-documented problems. These batteries are often plagued by the formation of metallic cracks called dendrites that cause them to short circuit. Think of them like cracks that form on a sidewalk when a tree root grows underneath.

Dendrites have been a thorn in the side of battery developers since the 1970s. One reason lithium-ion batteries have become ubiquitous while other approaches have stalled is that their commonly used graphite anodes are less susceptible to dendrite formation.

But new discoveries could help engineers finally overcome these hurdles. A research team from MIT recently published a study in Nature that found that chemical reactions caused by high electrical currents that weaken the electrolyte also make it more susceptible to dendrite growth. That’s why developing stronger electrolytes alone hasn’t solved the decades-old dendrite problem. And it could point to the importance of developing more chemically stable materials to finally fulfill the promise of solid-state batteries.

Progress is already being made — where else? — in China. Last month, CATL, which controls nearly 40 percent of the global battery market, filed a patent application for solid-state batteries with a reported 500Wh energy density. According to CarNewsChina, the battery maker has already been planning small-scale production in 2027. But automotive-grade cells won’t be ready likely until the end of the decade.

Other Chinese companies are rushing ahead. Automaker FAW said recently that its “liquid-solid-state” lithium-rich manganese cell with 500Wh/kg was ready for vehicle integration.

China is already laying the groundwork for mass production by the end of the decade, by which point it hopes the technology will be mature. And why wouldn’t it? This is a country that has taken EVs and battery development seriously for years, allowing it to corner the market on much of the world’s supply.

Different companies are taking different approaches. For example, Honda is committed to sulfur-based electrolytes despite emerging alternatives. Last October, Toyota announced “the world’s first practical use of all-solid-state batteries in BEVs” by 2027 or 2028. And Mercedes, using a prototype battery from startup Factorial, was able to get an electric EQS sedan a real-world range of 749 miles.

“The companies probably have a ways to go,” said Alevtina Smirnova, director of the NSF Industry-University Cooperative Research Center for Solid-State Electric Power Storage. “Because there is no comparison to what is happening now in China to what is happening here in the US.”

For its part, Donut Lab is unperturbed by the skepticism around its claims. On April 1st, Lehtimäki posted a new video addressing some of the controversy surrounding its solid-state batteries. He also revealed that Donut Lab had created a second, more production-ready version of its battery that would start shipping to customers later this year.

There was a crucial admission: The widely discussed “100,000 cycles” figure was a design target, he said, not an experimentally verified result. Actual testing has been conducted over shorter cycles, with projections extrapolated based on known variables such as charge rate, temperature, and usage conditions.

He then pivoted to a more near-term project: Donut Lab’s latest merch drop, including a “tin-foil”-covered bucket hat.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.