How to Do a Barbell Squat When You Don’t Have a Squat Rack

How to Do a Barbell Squat When You Don’t Have a Squat Rack

To lift weights at home, first you need the weights. That’s simple enough—if you’re into barbell lifts, just buy a barbell set.

But your next problem is figuring out how you squat. Squatting typically involves a squat rack, and that’s a luxury many home gymmers don’t have. THat doesn't mean you have to forgo squatting altogether though. Let’s look at your options. 

Before I get into it, note that none of the options I'll be discussing include safeties, which a real squat rack would have. That’s okay, because they all assume that you are either working with light enough weights that you won’t fail your lift, or that you know how to bail out by dumping the weight if you can’t complete the rep. This is a learnable skill, and it won’t damage your equipment if you use bumper plates—keep that in mind if you’re living the no-rack life.

Get squat stands instead of a rack

A solid squat rack is an investment, so I understand not wanting to splurge on one right away. (Heck, my own pandemic home gym went without a squat rack for about a year—not because I decided against one, but because it didn’t occur to me that a squat rack might be affordable or feasible in my small garage.) 

The truth is, supports for squatting aren’t nearly as expensive as you might think. You can order a pair of lightweight but strong squat stands like these for $50 to $60, or make your own out of concrete and 2x4s. I've gone on the record saying a good squat rack is worth the investment, but I also believe that makeshift stands like these are an excellent stopgap if you aren’t ready to take that step. 

Pros: Cheap, lightweight, can move out of the way for storage. The only limit to the amount of weight you can squat this way is the limit of the equipment

Cons: Not free. You also don’t get to learn any strange new skills, like the options below.

Clean the weight and do front squats

Olympic lifters and Crossfitters will probably be most comfortable with this option: Instead of squatting with the bar on your back, clean the bar into a front rack position. That means you grab it while it’s on the ground, launch it upwards, and catch it on your shoulders, just in front of your neck.

The ending position of a clean is the same as the starting position for front squats, so you can then do as many reps of front squats as you like. 

The main problem with this approach is that if you aren’t a weightlifter or Crossfitter, you probably aren’t very good at cleans. It takes time, practice, and ideally some good coaching to get efficient enough at cleans to be able to handle a realistic weight for front squats. If you’re committed to lifting without a squat rack, this is a skill worth learning. Otherwise, you might want to check out the other options.

Pros: Easy if you know how to do it. Lets you make the most of a small amount of weight (front squats are harder than back squats at the same weight).

Cons: Requires you to be pretty good at cleans. Also, this doesn’t give you a way to do heavy back squats.

Zercher squats

The zercher is often seen as esoteric—an odd lift only done by odd people. But it’s actually a solid option for squats, whether or not you have a rack available. Sometimes called a “low bar front squat,” it lets you go a lot heavier than a regular front squat, but you don’t need to know how to clean a barbell to get the weight into position. 

How to do zercher squats: 

  1. Stand in front of the bar with your feet wider than your arms (same idea as a sumo deadlift, but you don’t have to get as wide as sumo deadlifters do). 

  2. Deadlift the bar.

  3. Bend your knees so that you’re in a squatting position, and set the bar down into your lap. 

  4. One at a time, slip each arm between your legs and under the bar. 

  5. Now that the bar is in the crooks of your elbows, stand up. You’ve completed your first rep.

  6. For subsequent reps, just bend and straighten your knees as you would in a normal squat. (No need to return the bar to the ground each rep, although you can if you want.) 

If your first thought is “ow, that would hurt my elbows,” well, you’re right—at first. Turns out the elbows adapt; people who zercher squat regularly find that it’s not really a problem. You can always wrap the bar in a towel or barbell pad, or wear elbow sleeves for extra cushioning. If I haven’t zerchered in a while, I’ll sometimes wear a sweatshirt and slip my knee sleeves over my elbows. Anyway, you get used to it. 

Pros: Free. No special skills required. Heavy weights are possible. You get to do a deadlift with every set. 

Cons: Elbows might hurt. You have to do a deadlift with every set.

Steinborn squats

Alright, now this one is an odd lift for odd people. You could become one of those people, though. 

To do tit, you’ll need a clear space around you, non-slip flooring, and just enough bravery and stupidity to think “sure, what the hell, I probably won’t die.” (It will not surprise readers to hear that I check all three boxes, and thus have gone on to set a national record in my weight class in this lift.) 

To be fair, it’s not as dangerous as it looks. You do need a little bit of practice to know how to stabilize the bar and center yourself underneath it, but I found it easier to learn than the Olympic clean discussed above. Would this be my first pick for somebody who wants to squat and doesn’t have a squat rack? No. But is it a viable option for a person who thinks it’s cool? Absolutely.

Pros: Free. Heavy weights are possible. Impress your friends, scare your neighbors.

Cons: Requires plenty of space and nerves of steel. Scares your neighbors.

Squat alternatives I don’t recommend

The following things are not replacements for barbell squats, in my opinion: 

  • Barbell hack lifts are behind-the-back deadlifts. They involve the quads a little more than a regular deadlift, but they’re not squats.

  • Trap bar deadlifts, ditto. Great as a deadlift variation, but not a squat.

  • Goblet squats. These are a fine exercise, but if you’re strong enough to do barbell squats, goblets probably aren’t going to cut it as a main lift. 

  • Lifting the bar over your head and onto your back: If you can do this, the weight is too light for a heavy set of squats. 

Not-quite-squat options that are still great

The following are exercises that aren’t the same as normal barbell squats, but they’ll still build strong legs and are worth considering as you explore your options. 

  • Bulgarian split squats: these can be done with lighter weights than regular squats, so dumbbells or a relatively light barbell can do the job.

  • Leg press machines, any kind (I’m including the hack squat machine here). If your gym has a leg press but no squat rack, these would be my first pick for a squat replacement.

  • Pistol squats: I find these to be too hard on the knees to fully replace squats, but they’ll certainly give your legs a serious challenge. 

  • Lunges and step-ups: This type of single leg work is always challenging to the quads, and doesn’t require as much weight as two-legged squats.

I’d also like to give an honorable mention to Arthur lifts. This is where you hack lift the bar until you can get it onto your lower back, then bounce it up to your shoulders. From there, you can squat it normally. Honestly, this only didn’t make the main list because I don’t personally like it. I consider it more painful than a Zercher and scarier than a Steinborn. But if you are intrepid enough to try it, knock yourself out. 



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/Z54dKyO
https://ift.tt/Rc9HgDq
Read More

This Air Fried Pork Tenderloin Is an Easy Work Week Dinner

This Air Fried Pork Tenderloin Is an Easy Work Week Dinner

Hands-off dinners are a valuable part of any home cook’s bag of tricks. That’s usually where the instant pot and slow cooker step in, but I’m not always in the mood for something that needs hours of stewing or a lot of ingredient prep. My current easy favorite is a main course that gives me the freedom to go do something else—like heat up leftover rice, or sit and rest my weary bones—and it requires very little else from me. It’s air fryer roast pork tenderloin, and you should add it to your weekly rotation. 

The whole reason I bought the pre-trimmed package of pork tenderloin from Trader Joe’s was that I wanted a lean cut of protein on a tight budget. This pound of pork fit the bill. It was only five bucks, has low fat content, and it’s a mild protein that loves to be seasoned. On the subway ride home, I was pretty stoked to roast it. But then I thought of how long it would take in the conventional oven—45 to 60 minutes—and how that length of time in an arid environment would surely dry it out. This is where the air fryer saved me. 

Air fryer roast pork tenderloin cooks in a jiffy, browns nicely on the outside, and stays tender and juicy in the center. The key is the convection heating of the air fryer: The fan whips hot air around the pork, rapidly cooking the protein on the outside while gently heating the inside. The typical air fryer basket, about ten inches square, is also the perfect size for a pound of pork tenderloin, perfectly fitting diagonally across. With almost no fuss (just a single flip halfway through the cooking time), you’ve got your main event set up for any accompanying side dishes. 

How to roast pork tenderloin in the air fryer

1. Season the pork

I like to marinate pork for at least 30 minutes prior to cooking, but if you only have time for a heavy sprinkle of salt, pepper, and oil, so be it. If you’re marinating it, set the loin in a deep container and add the seasonings. A simple mixture of soy sauce, a spoonful of sugar, MSG, and a bit of cooking oil is usually plenty. Use your hands to thoroughly coat the meat and leave it to sit in the fridge for 30 minutes or a couple hours. Flip it halfway through the marinating time.

2. Set it and forget it (but remember to flip, and then forget it again)

Set the air fryer to the “roast” setting for 350°F degrees. Arrange the pork in the basket and cook it for 20 to 25 minutes, flipping it halfway through. I recommend checking the internal temperature after 20 minutes to see if you’ve reached your desired temperature. The USDA recommends a temperature of 145°F with three minutes of rest time. 

While your pork is cooking, prepare other parts of the meal, or delegate those tasks to someone else and kick up your feet for a spell. A pound of pork makes about three comfortable servings with sides. (A real boss move would be to make two roasts in the air fryer and save one for some mean Cubano sandwiches the next day.) 

Air Fryer Roast Pork Tenderloin Recipe

Ingredients:

1. Marinate the pork for 30 minutes, or a couple hours, in a deep container with all of the other ingredients. Make sure to flip the meat around to thoroughly coat it in the seasonings.

2. Preheat the air fryer to 350°F on the “roast” setting. Arrange the tenderloin in the air fryer and cook it for 20 to 25 minutes, flipping it halfway through the cooking time. Check for doneness with a probe thermometer. Let the meat rest and cool for at least 3 minutes before slicing and serving. 



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/OiCTB6K
https://ift.tt/xpE12ZD
Read More

Google Is Bringing Streaming and Gaming Android Apps to Parked Cars

Google Is Bringing Streaming and Gaming Android Apps to Parked Cars

Cars with screens aren’t going away anytime soon. Even as scientists bemoan their distractions, companies are embracing them for their adaptability. Case in point: Google is adding even more apps to cars with Android Auto (which runs off a phone) or Google built-in (which is powered by the car itself). Plus, devs are going to have a much easier time bringing their own games and streaming apps to cars in the future.

The news follows Google’s I/O keynote yesterday, and is one of the company’s bigger drops outside of the realms of AI or mobile phones. The best part? Google doesn’t have to do much to make it work, and neither do developers.

Essentially, Google will now bring existing Android apps to cars “without the need for new development or a new release to be created,” Google product managers Vivek Radhakrishnan and Seung Nam said in a press release. This means the Android Auto and Google built-in ecosystems are potentially about to get much larger, all while relying on work that already exists. 

Any app that already works with a large screen could soon naturally also work in the car, with a new tiered system that differentiates Android apps between those built specifically for auto, those with special features on auto, and those made for tablet or phone that just happen to also work on auto. Developers looking to get in on that final tier, “Car ready mobile apps,” can request a review to participate soon, but Google will also start automatically distributing existing Android apps it considers car ready “in the coming months.”

Those concerned about safety can breathe a sigh of relief for now. While Google says it will be starting with categories like gaming apps, video apps, and web browsers, these will only work while the car is parked. There are plans to “expand to other app categories in the future,” so we have yet to see whether any car ready mobile apps will actually be available while driving.

In the meantime, Google is proactively adding a few apps to auto as well, though only to cars with Google built-in. These include Max and Peacock, as well as a version of Angry Birds. Customers with compatible Rivian cars will also soon be able to cast video content to their vehicle, a first for the famously mirroring-prone brand. Other brands are set to follow suit, though again, only those with Google built-in. Again, all of these apps will need your car to be parked for them to work.

None of these quite match Elon Musk’s promise to turn Teslas into full gaming rigs, but for those of us who miss the days of physical buttons and dials, maybe that’s not such a bad thing.



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/jod9tiH
https://ift.tt/mT9QPjZ
Read More

The Latest iPhone Update Might Have Restored Your Old, Embarrassing Photos

The Latest iPhone Update Might Have Restored Your Old, Embarrassing Photos

iOS 17.5 is officially out, bringing the latest security updates to all applicable iPhones. Alongside fixing some major security flaws that Apple needed to address, the update also had an unintended effect: It's bringing back deleted photos.

This iOS 17.5 bug has caused quite an uproar in the Apple community, with some raising concerns over Apple's privacy claims, and wondering if the company's software keeps old photos even after you've deleted them.

The big concern here is the possibility for not safe for work photos to unexpectedly rear their heads again: One Reddit user says that nudes (and some less compromising photos) that were deleted "years ago" reappeared in their recent images after updating their phone. You don't even need to be connected to iCloud, according to another Reddit user experiencing the issue. Locally stored photos are supposedly coming back, too.

Unfortunately, there isn't exactly a clear reason for what is happening here. Given that many of the photos are from years ago, it isn't likely to be an issue with the recently deleted settings on the iPhone, which only keeps photos for 30 days after deletion, in case you accidentally delete a photo and need to restore it.

It's possible that these reports could all come down to an indexing issue, some kind of corruption in the photo library, or, in the case of photos backed up online, a syncing issue between iCloud and local devices. Related to the latter point, it's possible that Apple made a mistake while trying to fix a syncing issue reported by users in a previous iOS 17 update.

The explanation is likely innocent, though: Deleted files are never truly gone from a device until overwritten, so it's possible the bug is simply resurfacing them instead of keeping them available to be rewritten. That might also explain a similar bug another user experienced where old voicemails came back.

For the moment, there isn't much you can do to avoid the bug if you already updated to iOS 17.5. However, holding off on the update isn't recommended, as it does address some security flaws that iPhone users will want to resolve as soon as possible. It's arguably more important to protect yourself from a Find My bug that could let a malicious app track your current location, than it is to prevent iOS from resurfacing your old deleted photos—however embarrassing that may be.



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/UBZtDAW
https://ift.tt/5JwQORk
Read More

These Are the Best Free Gardening Apps

These Are the Best Free Gardening Apps

While one point of gardening is to be enjoying the great outdoors, using tech doesn’t take anything away from that. In fact, I’d argue it enables being outside, because you don’t have to be tethered to paperwork or books—all you need is on your phone or tablet. Although I had long embraced using spreadsheets for charting what I was planting in seed trays or Adobe Illustrator for mapping my garden beds, I was slower to embracing gardening apps. I had, somewhat naively, waited for “the one,” the app that would do everything, for while I’d happily pay for. What’s happened instead is that I use a variety of apps in small ways for almost every aspect of gardening, depending on what I need.

The best, free way to identify plants

It never fails to amuse me how many friends send me pictures of plants asking me to ID them, because usually, I have no idea what I’m looking at. In my own garden, I figure out what I’m looking at by using a plant ID app, and I benefit from Plantnet weekly. It has rarely disappointed me in being able to identify plants, even from a less-than-stellar picture, and immediately links to information about the plant. You can use it offline, too, so you don't need service. 

ADHD-proof succession planting

Succession planting (or planting crops every few weeks so you have crops ready to harvest at various times instead of all at once) is a test of best intentions. Keeping track of when you should seed, when you should harvest, and then actually following through is a test for anyone, but I really struggle with it and need reminders to stay on track.  While Seedtime is advertised as a planting app to help manage your whole garden, and is incredibly popular, I really just use the succession planning aspect. While you could much of the same result using spreadsheets, Google Calendar and your own research, Seedtime does a lot of the legwork for you, plotting out a customized calendar based on the crops you want to grow. There are paid tiers, but you can remain on a free plan and get a lot of the functionality, including one planting calendar. Paid tiers will net you more functions to use Seedtime as a gardening journal (which is a great idea) and the ability to save more data from your gardens, like yields and germination rates. 

Eliminate crowdscaping

Almost every gardener I know grows or buys too many starts and then packs their beds too full. It’s easy to do when the plants are so small—the beds can look sparse at this point. Apps like Planter help you understand how much space each plant really needs, as they all grow to different sizes, and some grow vertically while others grow horizontally. To really get a sense of what you can pack into a particular bed, this is the app I use to help me come back down to earth and get real about spacing. Like Seedtime, Planter tries to be an app that does everything for your garden, so you can also use the growing calendar, but I think Seedtime does that aspect better, while Planter is better for planning your beds. Planter has plans that start about $1/month, which is great, but you’ll get most of what you need on the free plan. 

Companion planting on the fly

Over time, you can learn what crops benefit from being planted together, and more importantly, which crops can’t be interplanted. While there are great charts to detail this, they’re hard to refer to while out in your garden. Instead, I use the Seed to Spoon app. I can quickly, from the garden, look up a specific vegetable or flower and get data on what to interplant and what to avoid, as well as a bunch of other growing info about a particular plant. There are some other features I like about this app, like the general reminders about what to plant now, or what to plant soon, on the home page, but mostly, I use this app as a reference library for interplanting. Seed to Spoon can be used for free, but you can upgrade for $47 a year to get access to more features, like an AI garden chatbot. 

Take advantage of free online tools

While not an app, Johnny Seeds has a ton of free tools that you should use. I use the seed quantity calculator to figure out how many seeds or starts of a particular plant I should get based on the space I have. There’s also a seed planting scheduler that does many of the calculations for you based on frost dates. Take time to peruse the tool list for planning, growing and harvesting. Gardenate is a free online tool that will tell you what to grow in your zip code right now, and whether to direct sow or plant starts. 



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/ZczdQ5H
https://ift.tt/in2fEVS
Read More

How Much Exercise Do You Really Need?

How Much Exercise Do You Really Need?

Zero exercise is not enough. Going for a walk every day is probably a good thing. And if you’re training for a marathon, you’ll be on your feet for a couple hours of hard workouts every week. But what is the benchmark for a human being just trying to squeeze enough healthy exercise into their life? Let’s break it down.

The basics: 150 minutes of cardio and two days of strength training every week

Fortunately, all the major public health organizations are in agreement. The World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Heart Association are all on board with the following guidelines for aerobic exercise:

  • At least 150 minutes per week of moderate intensity (cardio) exercise like walking or easy jogging, or 75 minutes per week of vigorous exercise like running, or a combination. (If you can easily meet that, more is better.)

  • At least two days per week of muscle strengthening activity, like lifting weights or doing other strength training like pushups, resistance band exercises, or even heavy manual labor like shoveling.

A previous edition of the guidelines said that you need to do your cardio for a minimum of 10 minutes at a time for it to count, but the current recommendation is to get it in however you can, even if that includes some shorter bursts here and there.

What do "moderate" and "vigorous" cardio mean?

If you need help telling these two levels apart, moderate cardio is the kind you can do continuously without feeling too tired. Vigorous cardio is the kind where you find yourself hoping that you'll get a break soon, because oh god I can't keep this up much longer. Or if you're used to exercising with a heart rate monitor, moderate cardio is often considered zone 2 cardio, and vigorous is anything harder.

When you're doing moderate cardio, you'll be a little bit sweatier or breathing a little harder than when you're at rest, but the activity is sustainable: You can speak comfortably in full sentences—think of going on an easy jog with a friend while telling them how your week has been.

Here are some examples of moderate cardio:

  • A brisk walk (but if this feels too easy, you may need to jog to meet the same level of effort).

  • Jogging, if you're able to find an easy pace. Alternating between jogging and walking also counts.

  • Commuting or doing errands by bike, on relatively flat ground.

  • Using a spin bike or other cardio machines like the elliptical, so long as you do it at a low intensity, steady pace.

By contrast, vigorous cardio includes activities where you're working hard and breathing hard. You might not be able to keep it up very long. This could include:

  • Running fast

  • Bicycling uphill

  • Pushing yourself to finish a Crossfit WOD with a good time

  • Swimming laps

  • Playing a game of soccer or basketball

Can I combine moderate and vigorous cardio?

You can mix and match these two intensities. The math is simple if you think about 150 minutes as your target, and consider every minute of vigorous cardio counting double. Here are some examples:

  • A 20 minute brisk walk every weekday morning (20 minutes x 5 days = 100 minutes moderate cardio) plus a 30-minute spin class that has you working pretty hard (30 minutes counted double is 60; add that to the 100 and you're at 160 minutes).

  • An hour of hiking, three days a week (60 minutes x 3 sessions = 180 minutes moderate cardio)

  • Three 30-minute jogs (30 minutes x 3 = 90 minutes moderate cardio) plus a workout with 10 minutes easy jogging for a warmup and then 20 minutes of hard running, followed by a cooldown of another 10 minutes easy. (20 minutes vigorous x 2 is equivalent to 40 minutes moderate cardio, plus we can add the warmup and cooldown for another 20 moderate minutes). That gives you 150 total.

  • Go for a 30-minute easy bike ride on Monday. Try a 45-minute water aerobics class on Wednesday. Take a short hike on Saturday. Mow the lawn for an hour on Saturday. (30 + 45 + 30 + 60 = 165 moderate cardio)

If that's too easy, level up to 300 minutes

If you’re pretty athletic, the above won’t sound like much. Good news! The WHO has set a secondary goal for folks like you. It’s simple: just do double the above. So you can aim for 300 minutes of moderate cardio, or 150 minutes per week of vigorous activity. Here's what that might look like:

  • An intense, hour-long martial arts class three times a week (60 x 3 = 180, but this is vigorous cardio, so the minutes count double)

  • Run 30 miles per week at an easy pace (if you're fit enough to run your easy pace at about a 10 minute mile, that's 300 minutes moderate cardio)

  • Commute to work, 20 minutes each way (40 minutes per day x 5 days per week = 200 minutes moderate cardio) and play rec league soccer for two matches per week (50 minutes each game, for some combination of moderate and vigorous cardio, definitely puts us over 300).

Can you get too much exercise?

What about an upper limit on how much exercise you get? There isn’t one, from a public health point of view. More is better. (And even if you are doing less than the recommendations, anything is better than nothing.) That said, it is always possible for you, as an individual, to do more exercise than your body is ready for. Don’t jump from a life of occasional strolling to a marathon training plan. (And if you are on that marathon training plan and you’re feeling worn down, take a break already.)

Strength, Flexibility, and More

So far we’ve been talking about aerobic exercise, which is the kind where you’re continuously moving (or, perhaps, doing quick work/rest intervals) and your heart rate is up. But there are other important forms of exercise, too. The WHO and other organizations recommend two days per week of “high intensity muscle strengthening activity,” which includes anything where you’re thinking in terms of sets and reps. (Three sets of eight to 10 reps is a good structure to start.)

That activity can be anything that challenges your muscles, and where the 10th rep is a lot harder than the first: lifting weights, or resistance band exercises, or bodyweight exercises like push-ups. So if you run three days per week but have time for more, don’t just fit in extra runs; try adding two days in the weight room instead.

The strength training recommendations are for two days per week, per muscle group. If you like to work your upper body and lower body separately, that would mean two upper body days and two lower body days. If you prefer workouts that work all your muscles, you only need to do those twice a week at minimum.



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/d9W6y0g
https://ift.tt/9POsdhU
Read More

The Biggest Differences Between Claude AI and ChatGPT

The Biggest Differences Between Claude AI and ChatGPT

AI is a fascinating field, one that has seen a ton of advancements in recent years. In fact, OpenAI's ChatGPT has singlehandedly increased the hype around generative AI to new levels. But the days of ChatGPT being the only viable AI chatbot option are long gone. Now, others are available, including Anthropic's Claude AI, which has some key differences from the AI chatbot most people are familiar with. The question is this: Can Anthropic's version of ChatGPT stand up to the original?

What is Anthropic AI?

Anthropic is an AI startup co-founded by ex-OpenAI members. It's especially notable because the company has a much stricter set of ethics surrounding its AI than OpenAI currently does. The company includes the Amodei siblings, Daniela and Dario, who were instrumental in creating GPT-3.

The Amodei siblings, as well as others, left OpenAI and founded Anthropic to create an alternative to ChatGPT that addressed their AI safety concerns better. One way that Anthropic has differentiated itself from OpenAI is by training its AI to align with a "document of constitutional AI principles," like opposition to inhumane treatment, as well as support of freedom and privacy.

What is Claude AI?

Claude AI, or the latest version of the model, Claude 3, is Anthropic's version of ChatGPT. Like ChatGPT, Claude 3 is an AI chatbot with a special large language model (LLM) running behind it. However, it is designed by a different company, and thus offers some differences than OpenAI's current GPT model. It's probably the strongest competitor out of the various ChatGPT alternatives that have popped up, and Anthropic continues to update it with a ton of new features and limitations.

Anthropic technically offers four versions of Claude, including Claude 1, Claude 2, Claude-Instant, and the latest update, Claude 3. While each is similar in nature, the language models all offer some subtle differences in capability.

Can Claude do the same things as ChatGPT?

If you have any experience using ChatGPT, you're already well on your way to using Claude, too. The system uses a simple chat box, in which you can post queries to get responses from the system. It's as simple as it gets, and you can even copy the responses Claude offers, retry your question, or ask it to provide additional feedback. It's very similar to ChatGPT.

While Claude can do a lot of the same things that ChatGPT can, there are some limitations. Where ChatGPT now has internet access, Claude is only trained on the information that the developers at Anthropic have provided it with, which is limited to August 2023, according to the latest notes from Anthropic. As such, it cannot look beyond that scope.

Claude also cannot interpret or create images, something that you can now do in ChatGPT thanks to the introduction of DALL-E 3. The company does offer similar things to ChatGPT, including a cheaper and faster processing option—Claude-Instant—that is more premium than Claude 3. The previous update, Claude-2, is considered on-par with ChatGPT's GPT-4 model. Claude 3, on the other hand, has actually outperformed GPT-4 in a number of areas.

Of course, all of that pales in comparison to what OpenAI has made possible with the newly released GPT-4o. While all of its newest ground-breaking features haven't released just yet, OpenAI has really upped the ante, bringing full multimodal support to the AI chatbot. Now, ChatGPT will be able to respond directly to questions, you'll be able to interrupt its answers when using voice mode, and you can even capture both live video and your device's display and share them directly with the chatbot to get real-time responses.

How much does Claude cost?

Claude AI is actually free to try, though that freedom comes with some limitations, like how many questions you can ask and how much data the chatbot can process. There is a premium subscription, called Claude Pro, which will grant you additional data for just $20 a month.

Unlike ChatGPT's premium subscription, using the free version of Claude actually gives you access to Claude's latest model, though you miss out on the added data tokens and higher priority that a subscription offers.

How does Claude's free version compare to ChatGPT's?

Like ChatGPT, Claude offers a free version. Both are solid options to try out the AI chatbots, but if you plan to use them extensively, it's definitely worth looking at the more premium subscription plans that they offer.

While Claude gives you access to its more advanced Claude 3 in the free version, it does come with severe limits. You can't process PDFs larger than 10 megabytes, for instance, and its usage limits can vary depending on the current load. Anthropic hasn't shared an exact limit or even a range that you can expect, but CNBC estimates it's about five summaries every four hours. At the end of the day, it depends on how many people are using the system when you are. The nice thing about Claude 3 is that it brings in a ton of new features you can try out in Claude's free version, including multilingual capabilities, vision and image processing, as well as easier to steer prompting.

ChatGPT used to limit free users to GPT-3.5, locking them to the older and thus less reliable model. That, however, has changed with the release of GPT-4o, which introduces limited usage rates for free ChatGPT accounts. OpenAI hasn't shared specifics on how limited GPT-4o is with the free version, but it does give you access to all the improvements the system offers, until you eventually run out of usage and get bumped back down to GPT-3.5.

Still, that does mean you can technically use GPT-4o without paying a single cent. However, there are some limitations in place if the service is extremely busy, and you may see your requests taking much longer or even returned if usage is high. It's also possible that your free ChatGPT account may not even be available during certain times of high activity, as OpenAI sometimes limits access to free accounts to help mitigate high server usage.

It's also important to note that ChatGPT 3.5 is more likely to hallucinate than GPT-4 and the newer GPT-4o does, so it's important to double-check all the information that it provides. (That said, you should always double-check important information generated by AI.) The free version of ChatGPT also now has access to the GPT Store: Here, you can make use of various GPTs, which personalize the chatbot to respond to your questions and queries in different ways. Claude doesn't currently offer any kind of system like this, so you'll have to word your prompts correctly to get the most out of it.

Claude Pro vs. ChatGPT Plus: How much is a subscription?

If you're planning to use Claude or ChatGPT extensively, it might be worth upgrading to one of the currently available monthly plans. Both Anthropic and OpenAI offer subscription plans, so how do you decide which one to purchase? Here's how they stack up against each other.

Claude Pro costs $20 a month. Unlike ChatGPT Plus (which gives you access to OpenAI's GPT-4 and GPT-4 Turbo model), Claude already offers its latest and greatest model in the free and limited plan. As such, subscribing for $20 a month will simply reward you with at least five times the usage of the free service, making it easier to send longer messages and have longer conversations before the context tokens on the AI run out (context tokens determine how much information the AI can understand when it responds), as well as increasing the length of files that you can attach. Claude Pro will also get you faster response times and higher availability and priority when demand is high.

On the other hand, ChatGPT Plus seems to offer a bit more for that $20 subscription, as it nets you GPT-4 and GPT-4 Turbo, OpenAI's most complex and successful language models. These models are capable of far more than the free systems available in ChatGPT without a subscription. Subscribing to ChatGPT Plus will also get you faster response times, priority access when demand for the chatbot is high, and access to the newest features, such as DALL-E 3's image creation option.

Is Claude AI more accurate than ChatGPT?

Accuracy is an area that AI language models, such as those that run Claude and ChatGPT, still struggle with. While these models can be accurate and are trained on terabytes of data, they have been known to "hallucinate" and create their own facts and data.

My own experience has shown that Claude tends to be more factually accurate when summarizing things than ChatGPT, but that's based on a very small subset of data. And Claude's data is extremely outdated if you're looking to discuss recent happenings. It also doesn't have open access to the internet, so you're more limited in the possible ways that it can hallucinate or pull from bad sources, which is a blessing and a curse, as it locks you out of the good sources, too.

No matter which service you go with, they're both going to have problems, and you'll want to double-check any information that ChatGPT or Claude provides you with to ensure it isn't plagiarized from something else—or just entirely made up.

Is Claude better than ChatGPT?

There are some places where Claude is better than ChatGPT, though Claude 3 reportedly outperforms ChatGPT's latest models based on Anthropic's data. The biggest difference, for starters, is that Claude offers a much safer approach to the use of AI, with more restrictions placed upon its language models that ChatGPT just doesn't offer. This includes more restrictive ethics, though ChatGPT has continued to evolve how it approaches the ethics of AI as a whole.

Claude also offers longer context token limits than ChatGPT currently does. Tokens are broken-down pieces of text the AI can understand (OpenAI says one token is roughly four characters of text.) Claude offers 200,000 tokens for Claude 3, while GPT-4 tops out at 32,000 in some plans, which may be useful for those who want to have longer conversations before they have to worry about the AI model losing track of what they are talking about. This increased size in context tokens means that Claude is much better at analyzing large files, which is something to keep in mind if you plan to use it for that sort of thing.

However, there are also several areas that ChatGPT comes ahead. Access to the internet is a big one: Having open access to the internet means ChatGPT is always up-to-date on the latest information on the web. It also means the bot is susceptible to more false information, though, so there's definitely a trade-off. With the introduction of GPT-4o's upcoming features like voice mode, ChatGPT will be able to respond to your queries in real-time: If Claude has plans for a similar feature set, it hasn't entertained it publicly just yet.

OpenAI has also made it easy to create your own custom GPTs using its API and language models, something that, as I noted above, Claude doesn't support just yet. In addition. ChatGPT gives you in-chat image creation thanks to DALL-E 3, which is actually impressive for AI image generation.

Ultimately, Claude and ChatGPT are both great AI chatbots that offer a ton of usability for those looking to dip their toes in the AI game. If you want the latest, cutting-edge, though, the trophy currently goes to ChatGPT, as the things you're able to do with GPT-4o open entirely new doors that Claude isn't trying to open just yet.



from LifeHacker https://ift.tt/WwdsxL2
https://ift.tt/1wvu0o3
Read More