Blog

When it comes to flash drives, there are a few things to take into consideration: capacity, speed, and compatibility. That last one is a problem with the growing prevalence of USB-C because there just aren’t that many good USB-C flash drives around. But right now, you can get the Samsung Type-C flash drive for only $18 on Amazon!

You’re getting 128GB of storage space for the price of a couple fancy coffees, which is pretty impressive when you look at the big picture. As the name suggests, this one has a USB-C connector so you can plug it into your laptop, smartphone, tablet—nearly any modern device. It’s also fast, with transfer speeds up to 400 MB/s. When you need to quickly back up files or move them between devices, this is the one to rely on.

And it’s super compact, too. You can slip it into your pocket and forget it’s there. The sleek design looks great, but it’s also robust with a cap that protects the connector and a sturdy build that’s waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, magnet-proof, X-ray-proof, and good to use even in extreme temperatures. Oh, and it’ll survive drops and bumps.

Snag your very own 128GB Samsung USB-C flash drive for next to nothing on Amazon while you can. Need more capacity? The other sizes are also on sale, including the 256GB version for $27 (was $35) and 512GB version for $50 (was $65). It’s up to you and how much you’re willing to spend for how much space you think you’ll need.

This compact 128GB USB-C flash drive is a bargain for $18

You know those color LED light strips that sync with the images on your TV screen? I’m not a fan. They’re eye-catching, sure, but they’re also distracting (especially when they’re not working properly, which happens frequently), they mess with the perceived picture color, and they’re expensive.

There’s a far better and cheaper way to boost the picture on your TV, and as a bonus, you’ll be easing the eye strain that comes from watching a bright image in a dark room. This product—the Scenic Labs LX1 Bias Lighting strip—is one I’ve been using for years, and I swear by it.

Yes, it’s still a light strip, but instead of the fancy color-syncing variety, it’s a white-light LED strip that’s tuned to 6500 Kelvin, the same daylight color temperature used as a reference by TV calibrators, video professionals, and filmmakers.

Instead of putting on a dazzling light show, this “bias” light strip shines dimly but steadily, at a brightness that’s roughly 10 to 15 percent of the maximum brightness of your TV screen. With the brightness set just right, you’ll barely notice the light at all during, say, a Netflix binge-watching session. But the faint glow of the LED strip is there, and it does a few key things.

Ben Patterson/Foundry

First, because it’s tuned to 6500K (assuming you pick a light strip that’s been properly temperature tuned), the colors on your screen will look more natural. For video pros, 6500K is considered the standard for “white,” and they use it when color-grading their creations. So with a faint 6500K glow behind your TV, the colors on your screen have a better chance of appearing the way the filmmakers intended. Conversely, the garish color shows served up by picture-syncing LED light strips will distort your perception of the picture.

Second, a properly tuned 6500K light strip can do wonders for the perceived contrast of your TV images, especially if you own a non-OLED TV. The pale halo from the strip will make dark or gray areas on the screen appear darker than they would in a pitch-black room (you can read more about this effect here), giving you a quasi HDR-type boost. The effect won’t be as dramatic on an OLED TV, which already has terrific contrast ratios. But on an older LCD TV, a LED light strip could provide an instant and inexpensive contrast upgrade.

Ben Patterson/Foundry

Finally, a white-light LED light strip can reduce the eye strain that comes with watching a bright image in a dark room for lengthy periods. By boosting the light in the room just a tad, the faint LED glow eases the contrast between your overall dark surroundings and the bright screen, thus giving your pupils a break and avoiding eye strain symptoms like soreness, watery eyes, blurred vision, and headaches.

The Scenic Labs LX1 Bias Lighting strip (which, besides being my personal choice, is also a TechHive’s Editors’ Choice) can be ordered directly from the company at prices ranging from $26.95 (for a one-meter strip) to $51.95 (for six meters). That’s a little pricier than the LED lights strips you’ll find on Amazon, but this model is known for its color accuracy, and it’s been serving me well for three years without any hiccups.

That said, there are cheaper options available on Amazon, including this 6500K light strip from Govee for about $30 (16.4 feet).

Either way, I highly recommend an LED bias light strip for any TV owner—and by the way, they work great with PC monitors, too (I have a couple in my office).

You know those color LED light strips that sync with the images on your TV screen? I’m not a fan. They’re eye-catching, sure, but they’re also distracting (especially when they’re not working properly, which happens frequently), they mess with the perceived picture color, and they’re expensive.

There’s a far better and cheaper way to boost the picture on your TV, and as a bonus, you’ll be easing the eye strain that comes from watching a bright image in a dark room. This product—the Scenic Labs LX1 Bias Lighting strip—is one I’ve been using for years, and I swear by it.

Yes, it’s still a light strip, but instead of the fancy color-syncing variety, it’s a white-light LED strip that’s tuned to 6500 Kelvin, the same daylight color temperature used as a reference by TV calibrators, video professionals, and filmmakers.

Instead of putting on a dazzling light show, this “bias” light strip shines dimly but steadily, at a brightness that’s roughly 10 to 15 percent of the maximum brightness of your TV screen. With the brightness set just right, you’ll barely notice the light at all during, say, a Netflix binge-watching session. But the faint glow of the LED strip is there, and it does a few key things.

Ben Patterson/Foundry

First, because it’s tuned to 6500K (assuming you pick a light strip that’s been properly temperature tuned), the colors on your screen will look more natural. For video pros, 6500K is considered the standard for “white,” and they use it when color-grading their creations. So with a faint 6500K glow behind your TV, the colors on your screen have a better chance of appearing the way the filmmakers intended. Conversely, the garish color shows served up by picture-syncing LED light strips will distort your perception of the picture.

Second, a properly tuned 6500K light strip can do wonders for the perceived contrast of your TV images, especially if you own a non-OLED TV. The pale halo from the strip will make dark or gray areas on the screen appear darker than they would in a pitch-black room (you can read more about this effect here), giving you a quasi HDR-type boost. The effect won’t be as dramatic on an OLED TV, which already has terrific contrast ratios. But on an older LCD TV, a LED light strip could provide an instant and inexpensive contrast upgrade.

Ben Patterson/Foundry

Finally, a white-light LED light strip can reduce the eye strain that comes with watching a bright image in a dark room for lengthy periods. By boosting the light in the room just a tad, the faint LED glow eases the contrast between your overall dark surroundings and the bright screen, thus giving your pupils a break and avoiding eye strain symptoms like soreness, watery eyes, blurred vision, and headaches.

The Scenic Labs LX1 Bias Lighting strip (which, besides being my personal choice, is also a TechHive’s Editors’ Choice) can be ordered directly from the company at prices ranging from $26.95 (for a one-meter strip) to $51.95 (for six meters). That’s a little pricier than the LED lights strips you’ll find on Amazon, but this model is known for its color accuracy, and it’s been serving me well for three years without any hiccups.

That said, there are cheaper options available on Amazon, including this 6500K light strip from Govee for about $30 (16.4 feet).

Either way, I highly recommend an LED bias light strip for any TV owner—and by the way, they work great with PC monitors, too (I have a couple in my office).

UK banks and payment firms have been urged to strengthen their anti-fraud systems for international payments after a rise in scammers tricking people into sending money abroad.

After years of horror stories about people losing huge sums through bank transfer scams, rules came into force last October requiring UK banks and other payment firms to refund those who have been manipulated into sending money to criminals. This week, industry data revealed that the number of cases of this type of crime had fallen to its lowest level for five years.

The frauds are known as authorised push payment (APP) scams. The number of cases fell by 20% last year to just under 186,000, said the banking body UK Finance, which issued the data. In 2023, there were more than 232,000 cases. The decrease is thought to be down in part to the new rules, plus other initiatives and greater awareness.

But the figures came with some stings in the tail. While the number of cases fell substantially, the total amount lost to APP fraud decreased by just 2% to £450m. In other words, as UK Finance put it, “fewer people are handing over bigger sums of money”.

There was also a “notable increase” in APP scams involving international payments, in which criminals trick people into sending money outside the UK. This is not covered by the new rules, which apply to money that is moved from one UK bank account to another.

This week’s data revealed that international payments accounted for 11% of APP scam losses in 2024 – almost double the 2023 figure.

Rocio Concha, the director of policy and advocacy at Which?, said: “Fraudsters are constantly evolving their tactics, so it is disheartening but unsurprising to see a rise in the number of cases in which scammers trick their victims into sending money abroad.”

As these payments are not covered, the victims are very unlikely to get their money back.

“Banks and payment firms should enhance their anti-fraud controls for international payments, and the independent review of the mandatory reimbursement scheme in October should take note of these emerging trends,” said Concha.

Most of the APP frauds reported last year (71%) were purchase scams, in which the victim hands over money for goods or services – perhaps a car, a mobile phone or gig tickets – that either do not exist or never arrive.

When it comes to the total amount of money lost, investment scams dominate. Typically, the criminal convinces victims to move their money to a fictitious fund or pay for a fake investment. Cryptocurrencies often feature heavily. More than £144m was stolen via this type of APP fraud in 2024 – up 34% on 2023, despite a sizeable fall in the number of cases.

UK Finance is itself not immune to being targeted by scammers. This week there was a prominent warning on its website saying: “We are aware of a potential scam involving people being offered loans for an upfront fee by an individual posing as a representative of UK Finance.” The organisation doesn’t offer any financial products, “and anyone claiming to provide such products on our behalf is fraudulent,” it said.

Meanwhile, the payments firm Visa this week revealed four fraud tactics that it said had been gaining ground across the UK and Europe in recent months. They are:

Fake sales websites

Fraudsters offer high-value goods – such as exercise machines – at low prices. Shoppers are tricked into handing over the one-time passcode banks send customers to authorise transactions. These are then used by criminals to carry out fraud.

Malicious app scams

Fake apps impersonating trusted organisations are stealing personal and financial data.

‘Ghost taps’

Scammers get hold of people’s card details via phishing and then link these to criminal-controlled digital wallets. They then use software that allows them to make contactless payments using these details remotely from anywhere in the world.

AI-driven identity fraud

Generative artificial intelligence is increasingly being used to create convincing fake IDs and open fraudulent accounts.

The framework seeks to address long-standing concerns from local taxi operators about the impact of out-of-state vehicles on local livelihoods
| Photo Credit:
VIJAYA BHASKAR CH

The Goa Transport Department has released the draft Transport Aggregator Guidelines 2025, proposing a regulatory framework to allow app-based ride-hailing services to operate in the state formally — a move welcomed by major mobility players.

Under the proposed policy, aggregators will be allowed to offer app-based taxi services using vehicles that are either registered in Goa or possess valid permits issued by the state. This clause seeks to address long-standing concerns from local taxi operators about the impact of out-of-state vehicles on local livelihoods.

To ensure compliance and safety, the draft mandates that all drivers affiliated with ride-hailing platforms must hold a Public Vehicle Service Badge, as required under the Goa Motor Vehicles Rules, 1991.

Industry stakeholders have responded positively, saying the policy could pave the way for more structured and sustainable mobility solutions in the state, particularly in high-tourism zones where demand for reliable transport remains elevated.

“We believe tourists as much as locals in Goa deserve more mobility choices, and there is already strong existing demand for reliable ride options in the state. This regulatory update makes it possible for platforms like Uber to serve that demand more effectively and responsibly. As we review the draft guidelines in detail, we will submit our formal comments and continue collaborating with all stakeholders to ensure the final framework delivers long-term value for riders, drivers, and Goa’s tourism-led economy,” said an Uber spokesperson.

“The Transport Aggregator Policy introduced by the Goa Transport Department is a progressive move toward building a transparent, safe, and inclusive mobility ecosystem. At Rapido, we believe this policy marks a significant step toward digitising mobility and empowering local micro-entrepreneurs,” according to a Rapido spokesperson.

“Beyond enhancing last-mile connectivity, our aim is to generate 3–4 lakh livelihood opportunities over the next year, empowering captains with meaningful earning potential. Safety remains at the core of our platform — with features such as SOS alerts, trip tracking, and driver verification helping ensure physical and mental peace for riders. We look forward to working closely with the Goa Transport Department and all stakeholders to support seamless rollout and contribute to the state’s growth in terms of mobility, job creation and economy,” the spokesperson added.

More Like This

Published on May 31, 2025

A video went viral on X a few months ago that I can’t stop watching. It’s 2003: the band that later becomes MGMT are performing their song Kids to their peers, years before they become a pop sensation, in a dusty quad at Wesleyan University, Connecticut. Social media doesn’t exist yet. There is something about the way people look and behave and inhabit the space that tugs at my heartstrings and fills me with nostalgia. No one is dressed that well; the camera zooms unsteadily to capture the crowd’s awkwardness, slumped shoulders and arrhythmic bopping. Beyond the footage we’re watching, no one seems to be filming.

I was only four when the video was filmed, so why does watching it make me feel as if I’ve lost a whole world? A recent survey suggests I’m not alone – that almost half of young people would prefer a world without the internet. If anything, I expected a higher percentage. This doesn’t mean my generation really would like to reverse everything that’s happened in the last few decades, but there’s clearly something we feel we’re missing out on that older people have had, and we attribute it to the internet – or at least to its current form, dominated as it is by social media.

What exactly do we think we’re missing? Personally, I assume that before the social internet people behaved in more authentic and idiosyncratic ways. Social media has sped up trend cycles, resulting in an eerie uniformity across styles and personalities: we buy the same products, wear the same clothes, act in the same way, reference the same memes – even quirkiness itself or more “unique” behaviour can be ascribed to trends.

I also imagine that if we weren’t on display all the time, our friendships and interactions could be less commodified. Now, spending time with friends is material to be documented and then demonstrated to a faceless audience.

I’m sure these are rose-tinted assumptions, and I’m conscious too of the things I take for granted about an age of connectivity. Having to trawl through a few measly books and encyclopedias to find anything useful, or growing up in a remote area with little connection to the wider world, surely must have felt both inhibiting and claustrophobic.

But it may be that these “negative” aspects are what young people yearning for disconnectivity actually want – we have a sense that there was a value, now largely lost, in the practical effort required for social interaction, for finding good music, or joining a subculture. Life now in comparison seems streamlined, efficient, more yassifiedin a phenomenon that writer Michael Harris calls a “loss of lack”.

Recently, my office manager showed me the technology he and his friends used to “watch” the football on: Reprun. The football score would load on a television screen via the changing of a single digit. They would spend the afternoon just sitting on the sofa, waiting for the digit to change (or not). I felt envious of this. Why? If anything, this is clearly a case where an experience has improved exponentially. And yet I’m captivated by the sense of mystery: if they weren’t watching the game or reading the updates, what were they doing? What were they occupying their thoughts with?

The reality might be that they were bored, another scarce experience in a connected age. At least, if bored, they would have entertained themselves with internal rather than external resources. It doesn’t even matter if that was really the case – it is precisely because this experience is unknowable that it is compelling to me. I am haunted by the feeling that spending so much time on our phones has stolen something human and vital from our lives.

It is of course true that each era experiences a crisis about the new wave of tech destroying people’s souls – when it wasn’t the internet, it was TV, or the radio, or the printing press, even papyrus scrolls, and nostalgia is common across every generation. But I don’t think any previous generations were ever so down on their own era, in such large numbers, to the point they’d erase its major salient feature. We feel nostalgic for a world that can’t be brought back. As Donald Trump said, now “everything is computer”.

Ironically, my nostalgia for a pre-internet age is being fed by the internet itself: the machine constantly feeding me clips of the past, footage of young people operating decades ago where everything seems refreshingly unobserved and carefree.

So the very engine of this nostalgia is the thing half of us wish to do away with, despite the fact that it’s an incredible resource, that has allowed unparalleled access to older music, knowledge, ways of living – and is also by nature democratic, questioning traditional media outlets on global affairs and challenging convention.

If this survey is a canary in the mine, what should we do? Enjoyable as it is, I don’t think being misty-eyed about the past is the solution; neither is fetishising a perceived authenticity of the past. “Authenticity”, I think, looks like the power to opt in or out, perform or not, when you want to – in other words: freedom. So when it comes to the internet, if switching off entirely isn’t possible any more, then surely the words of MGMT can be useful: control yourself, take only what you need from it.

A video went viral on X a few months ago that I can’t stop watching. It’s 2003: the band that later becomes MGMT are performing their song Kids to their peers, years before they become a pop sensation, in a dusty quad at Wesleyan University, Connecticut. Social media doesn’t exist yet. There is something about the way people look and behave and inhabit the space that tugs at my heartstrings and fills me with nostalgia. No one is dressed that well; the camera zooms unsteadily to capture the crowd’s awkwardness, slumped shoulders and arrhythmic bopping. Beyond the footage we’re watching, no one seems to be filming.

I was only four when the video was filmed, so why does watching it make me feel as if I’ve lost a whole world? A recent survey suggests I’m not alone – that almost half of young people would prefer a world without the internet. If anything, I expected a higher percentage. This doesn’t mean my generation really would like to reverse everything that’s happened in the last few decades, but there’s clearly something we feel we’re missing out on that older people have had, and we attribute it to the internet – or at least to its current form, dominated as it is by social media.

What exactly do we think we’re missing? Personally, I assume that before the social internet people behaved in more authentic and idiosyncratic ways. Social media has sped up trend cycles, resulting in an eerie uniformity across styles and personalities: we buy the same products, wear the same clothes, act in the same way, reference the same memes – even quirkiness itself or more “unique” behaviour can be ascribed to trends.

I also imagine that if we weren’t on display all the time, our friendships and interactions could be less commodified. Now, spending time with friends is material to be documented and then demonstrated to a faceless audience.

I’m sure these are rose-tinted assumptions, and I’m conscious too of the things I take for granted about an age of connectivity. Having to trawl through a few measly books and encyclopedias to find anything useful, or growing up in a remote area with little connection to the wider world, surely must have felt both inhibiting and claustrophobic.

But it may be that these “negative” aspects are what young people yearning for disconnectivity actually want – we have a sense that there was a value, now largely lost, in the practical effort required for social interaction, for finding good music, or joining a subculture. Life now in comparison seems streamlined, efficient, more yassifiedin a phenomenon that writer Michael Harris calls a “loss of lack”.

Recently, my office manager showed me the technology he and his friends used to “watch” the football on: Reprun. The football score would load on a television screen via the changing of a single digit. They would spend the afternoon just sitting on the sofa, waiting for the digit to change (or not). I felt envious of this. Why? If anything, this is clearly a case where an experience has improved exponentially. And yet I’m captivated by the sense of mystery: if they weren’t watching the game or reading the updates, what were they doing? What were they occupying their thoughts with?

The reality might be that they were bored, another scarce experience in a connected age. At least, if bored, they would have entertained themselves with internal rather than external resources. It doesn’t even matter if that was really the case – it is precisely because this experience is unknowable that it is compelling to me. I am haunted by the feeling that spending so much time on our phones has stolen something human and vital from our lives.

It is of course true that each era experiences a crisis about the new wave of tech destroying people’s souls – when it wasn’t the internet, it was TV, or the radio, or the printing press, even papyrus scrolls, and nostalgia is common across every generation. But I don’t think any previous generations were ever so down on their own era, in such large numbers, to the point they’d erase its major salient feature. We feel nostalgic for a world that can’t be brought back. As Donald Trump said, now “everything is computer”.

Ironically, my nostalgia for a pre-internet age is being fed by the internet itself: the machine constantly feeding me clips of the past, footage of young people operating decades ago where everything seems refreshingly unobserved and carefree.

So the very engine of this nostalgia is the thing half of us wish to do away with, despite the fact that it’s an incredible resource, that has allowed unparalleled access to older music, knowledge, ways of living – and is also by nature democratic, questioning traditional media outlets on global affairs and challenging convention.

If this survey is a canary in the mine, what should we do? Enjoyable as it is, I don’t think being misty-eyed about the past is the solution; neither is fetishising a perceived authenticity of the past. “Authenticity”, I think, looks like the power to opt in or out, perform or not, when you want to – in other words: freedom. So when it comes to the internet, if switching off entirely isn’t possible any more, then surely the words of MGMT can be useful: control yourself, take only what you need from it.

A video went viral on X a few months ago that I can’t stop watching. It’s 2003: the band that later becomes MGMT are performing their song Kids to their peers, years before they become a pop sensation, in a dusty quad at Wesleyan University, Connecticut. Social media doesn’t exist yet. There is something about the way people look and behave and inhabit the space that tugs at my heartstrings and fills me with nostalgia. No one is dressed that well; the camera zooms unsteadily to capture the crowd’s awkwardness, slumped shoulders and arrhythmic bopping. Beyond the footage we’re watching, no one seems to be filming.

I was only four when the video was filmed, so why does watching it make me feel as if I’ve lost a whole world? A recent survey suggests I’m not alone – that almost half of young people would prefer a world without the internet. If anything, I expected a higher percentage. This doesn’t mean my generation really would like to reverse everything that’s happened in the last few decades, but there’s clearly something we feel we’re missing out on that older people have had, and we attribute it to the internet – or at least to its current form, dominated as it is by social media.

What exactly do we think we’re missing? Personally, I assume that before the social internet people behaved in more authentic and idiosyncratic ways. Social media has sped up trend cycles, resulting in an eerie uniformity across styles and personalities: we buy the same products, wear the same clothes, act in the same way, reference the same memes – even quirkiness itself or more “unique” behaviour can be ascribed to trends.

I also imagine that if we weren’t on display all the time, our friendships and interactions could be less commodified. Now, spending time with friends is material to be documented and then demonstrated to a faceless audience.

I’m sure these are rose-tinted assumptions, and I’m conscious too of the things I take for granted about an age of connectivity. Having to trawl through a few measly books and encyclopedias to find anything useful, or growing up in a remote area with little connection to the wider world, surely must have felt both inhibiting and claustrophobic.

But it may be that these “negative” aspects are what young people yearning for disconnectivity actually want – we have a sense that there was a value, now largely lost, in the practical effort required for social interaction, for finding good music, or joining a subculture. Life now in comparison seems streamlined, efficient, more yassifiedin a phenomenon that writer Michael Harris calls a “loss of lack”.

Recently, my office manager showed me the technology he and his friends used to “watch” the football on: Reprun. The football score would load on a television screen via the changing of a single digit. They would spend the afternoon just sitting on the sofa, waiting for the digit to change (or not). I felt envious of this. Why? If anything, this is clearly a case where an experience has improved exponentially. And yet I’m captivated by the sense of mystery: if they weren’t watching the game or reading the updates, what were they doing? What were they occupying their thoughts with?

The reality might be that they were bored, another scarce experience in a connected age. At least, if bored, they would have entertained themselves with internal rather than external resources. It doesn’t even matter if that was really the case – it is precisely because this experience is unknowable that it is compelling to me. I am haunted by the feeling that spending so much time on our phones has stolen something human and vital from our lives.

It is of course true that each era experiences a crisis about the new wave of tech destroying people’s souls – when it wasn’t the internet, it was TV, or the radio, or the printing press, even papyrus scrolls, and nostalgia is common across every generation. But I don’t think any previous generations were ever so down on their own era, in such large numbers, to the point they’d erase its major salient feature. We feel nostalgic for a world that can’t be brought back. As Donald Trump said, now “everything is computer”.

Ironically, my nostalgia for a pre-internet age is being fed by the internet itself: the machine constantly feeding me clips of the past, footage of young people operating decades ago where everything seems refreshingly unobserved and carefree.

So the very engine of this nostalgia is the thing half of us wish to do away with, despite the fact that it’s an incredible resource, that has allowed unparalleled access to older music, knowledge, ways of living – and is also by nature democratic, questioning traditional media outlets on global affairs and challenging convention.

If this survey is a canary in the mine, what should we do? Enjoyable as it is, I don’t think being misty-eyed about the past is the solution; neither is fetishising a perceived authenticity of the past. “Authenticity”, I think, looks like the power to opt in or out, perform or not, when you want to – in other words: freedom. So when it comes to the internet, if switching off entirely isn’t possible any more, then surely the words of MGMT can be useful: control yourself, take only what you need from it.

Amazon is currently offering two big reasons to upgrade your Kindle and try something a whole lot more impressive. The online retailer is running a huge sale event right now with massive discounts on Fire TV Sticks, Echo speakersphones, and wireless earbuds. Along with those top tech price cuts, there are also some very decent discounts on the firm’s most premium Kindleswhich make them look way more attractive.

The first bargain that’s worth a mention is a limited-time offer on the Kindle Colorsoft Signature Edition.

As the name suggests, this is Amazon’s only e-reader that also features a colour display. That means you’ll get a more immersive experience on the 7-inch screen – especially when reading things such as comics.

SEE THE COLORSOFT DEAL HERE

Other extras include a battery life that lasts for eight weeks, there’s 32GB of storage and its design is waterproof so it can survive a dip in the bath.

This colourful Kindle usually costs £269.99 but that has been dropped to just £219.99 in this latest sale event – that’s 30 percent off.

Want to know more, read our full Colorsoft review here

The next bonus worth mentioning is a whopping £100 off the older Kindle Scribe. This device offers more than just a way of reading books; owners can also scribble on the 10.2-inch glare-free screen using a stylus.

That means notes can be taken, PDFs marked up and annotations added to books.

It also features a long battery, an adjustable light for reading at night and 16GB of storage for you best sellers.

This is a very good deal that now makes the more affordable. You’ll see the offer here for £229.99.

The only thing to be aware of is that this price is for the 2022 version.

A newer Scribe was launched last year and features an improved design, more features and better stylus. All those upgrades mean it also costs more with the 2024 device priced at £379.99.

If you don’t want to shop at Amazon, some other retailers, including Argos, are also selling these Kindle devices at a lower price.

New Delhi: US President Donald Trump’s announcement to double tariffs on imported steel and aluminium will impact Indian exporters, particularly those engaged in value-added and finished steel products and auto-components, experts say.

Expressing concern over the Trump-administration’s move, they said the Indian government should take up the matter bilaterally with the US authorities.

On May 30, Trump announced that he would double the existing 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from June 4.
This hike comes under Section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act of 1962, a law that allows the president to impose tariffs or other trade restrictions, if imports are deemed a threat to national security.

Trump originally invoked this provision in 2018 to set the 25 per cent tariff on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium. He raised tariffs on aluminium to 25 per cent in February 2025.

For India, the consequences are direct, the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) said. In 2024-25, India exported USD 4.56 billion worth of iron, steel, and aluminium products to the US, with key categories, including USD 587.5 million in iron and steel, USD 3.1 billion in articles of iron or steel, and USD 860 million in aluminium and related articles. “These exports are now exposed to sharply higher US tariffs, threatening the profitability of Indian producers and exporters,” GTRI founder Ajay Srivastava said.

India has already issued a formal notice at the World Trade Organization (WTO) signalling its intention to impose retaliatory tariffs on US goods in response to the earlier steel tariffs.

“With Trump now doubling the tariffs, it remains to be seen whether India will carry out the retaliation by increasing tariffs on certain US exports within a month,” he said.

The Federation of Indian Export Organisations (FIEO) President S C Ralhan said the proposed increase in import duty will have a significant bearing on India’s steel exports, especially in semi-finished and finished categories like stainless steel pipes, structural steel components, and automotive steel parts.

“These products are part of India’s growing engineering exports, and higher duties could erode our price competitiveness in the American market,” he said.

The US is among the top destinations for Indian steel manufacturers, who have been gradually increasing market share through high-quality production and competitive pricing.

“Such sharp increases in tariffs send discouraging signals to global trade and manufacturing supply chains. We urge the government to take up the issue at the bilateral level to ensure that Indian exporters are not unfairly disadvantaged… as 25 per cent additional duty will be a huge burden, which is difficult to be absorbed by the exporter/importer,” Ralhan said.

The FIEO chief also emphasized on the need for Indian exporters to diversify their markets and invest in higher-grade value-added products to mitigate the impact of such protectionist measures.