PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteSome links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
On March 14, 2025, SXSW’s technology conference ended with three sharply different visions of technological progress: Bryan Johnson proposed measuring contaminants in food, AI ethicist Rumman Chowdhury warned of institutional disruption tied to Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and a TechCrunch reporter finally experienced an Austin Waymo robotaxi after requesting a ride through Uber. The ride was ordinary; getting matched with one was not guaranteed.
A final-day dispatch, not one long interview
TechCrunch’s SXSW 2025 live-coverage storyline ran from March 7 through March 14 and contained 36 updates. Its final-day dispatch captured the conference portion winding down in Austin; music programming continued afterward. The result is best read as a snapshot assembled from separate reports, not as a single event where all three subjects shared a stage. TechCrunch’s full SXSW storyline provides the chronology and individual updates.
The contrast was telling: one idea aimed to make personal health more measurable, another questioned the cost of rapid change inside government, and the robotaxi offered a practical test of automation in a passenger’s everyday journey.
Bryan Johnson proposed a “foodome” database
Johnson said he wanted to begin what he called “foodome sequencing”—an effort, analogous in concept to genome sequencing, to analyze the composition of food and look for contaminants. His stated target was to test about 20% of foods that make up 80% of the American diet, then build a public database. He said donations could help fund tests of particular foods and brands.
#1 Best Overall
The proposed screening would include heavy metals, microplastics and other toxins associated with food production or processing. Johnson argued that consumers have difficulty knowing which foods are genuinely “clean” and suggested that organic products could still raise questions about processing. Those were his claims and ambitions at SXSW, not findings established by the event’s reporting.
“Foodome sequencing” should not be mistaken for an established scientific discipline or a completed public database. A contaminant detection is not, by itself, proof of meaningful health risk: interpretation depends on the substance, concentration, exposure, testing method and relevant standards. Results from one sample also cannot automatically represent every batch or product. The SXSW coverage did not establish the project’s methodology, representativeness, peer review or operating status.
Rank #2
Rumman Chowdhury raised concerns about Musk and DOGE
Rumman Chowdhury, described in the coverage as the former director of Twitter’s machine ethics team, criticized Musk’s role in DOGE and voiced concerns about the effects of its approach on government institutions. She pointed to workers’ uncertainty about funding and jobs, chaotic management and the possible loss of experienced personnel—a potential “brain drain,” in her framing.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Her remarks were a warning about institutional continuity and expertise, not a neutral audit of DOGE’s impact. The point was that government work depends on people who understand how systems operate; abrupt or politicized change can put that knowledge at risk. The reported comments do not, on their own, quantify any resulting harm or establish its scale. TechCrunch’s account attributes those concerns to Chowdhury.
Getting a Waymo through Uber was possible, not assured
Austin’s Waymo-Uber service had launched about a week before SXSW. Unlike the direct Waymo app service available in cities including Phoenix, San Francisco and Los Angeles, Austin riders could request a trip in the Uber app and might be assigned a Waymo robotaxi. They could not count on every Uber request being autonomous; a human-driven Uber remained the more usual outcome.
The coverage recounts both a coordinated ride and a less arranged match through Uber. The eventual drive was uneventful, but the route took longer than Google Maps had suggested. Waymo said its vehicles were routing around certain areas. That was an observation from one trip, not evidence that the service routinely takes longer routes. Road closures, service boundaries, congestion and routing constraints can all matter, and a difference from a map’s suggested route does not alone show that either route was wrong.
Inside the car, displays visualized the vehicle’s surroundings. They showed turn signals, hazard lights and brake lights on nearby vehicles, and used different colors to distinguish pedestrians, cyclists and parked vehicles. As the car approached its destination, the interface also showed the destination building, stop signs and traffic cones. These screens gave riders a view of how the vehicle was representing nearby objects and road conditions; they did not, by themselves, prove the system’s safety or reliability.
The central consumer trade-off was convenience versus choice. Uber gave Waymo access to an existing ride-request channel, but passengers had limited control over whether a particular trip would be autonomous. A smooth ride showed what one passenger experienced; it could not establish fleetwide safety, availability, price advantage or typical journey times.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.From a trade-secrets dispute to a commercial partnership
The collaboration carried an unusual history. Seven years before the Austin launch, Waymo and Uber had fought over trade secrets in a case that settled five days into trial, after Waymo alleged Uber had stolen self-driving technology. The later partnership was a notable shift from litigation to commercial cooperation, not proof that every competitive tension had disappeared. TechCrunch’s related coverage recounts that history.
A quieter exhibition floor, with AI everywhere
TechCrunch described the exhibition hall as lighter on technology and startups than in previous years, with more activity dispersed among branded houses and off-floor activations. That was an on-the-ground impression, not a measured count of exhibitors. AI remained a dominant theme across the program, while transportation stood out through Rivian, Uber and Waymo; quantum computing also received notable stage attention.
By the final conference day, SXSW’s tech programming was giving way to music. Yet the most revealing stories were not just product demonstrations: they asked what technology might measure, what rapid institutional change might unsettle, and how autonomous systems behave when a rider simply asks for a trip.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
