Researchers from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Virginia Tech have introduced a continuous fiber reinforcement (CFR) deposition tool designed for multi-axis 3D printing, significantly enhancing mechanical performance in composite structures. Led by Kieran D. Beaumont, Joseph R. Kubalak, and Christopher B. Williams, and published in Springer Nature Link, the study demonstrates an 820% improvement in maximum load capacity compared to conventional planar short carbon fiber (SCF) 3D printing methods. This tool integrates three key functions: reliable fiber cutting and re-feeding, in situ fiber volume fraction control, and a slender collision volume to support complex multi-axis toolpaths. The newly developed deposition tool addresses critical challenges in CFR additive manufacturing. It is capable of cutting and re-feeding continuous fibers during travel movements, a function required to create complex geometries without material tearing or print failure. In situ control of fiber volume fraction is also achieved by adjusting the polymer extrusion rate. A slender geometry minimizes collisions between the tool and the printed part during multi-axis movements. The researchers designed the tool to co-extrude a thermoplastic polymer matrix with a continuous carbon fiber (CCF) towpreg. This approach allowed reliable fiber re-feeding after each cut and enabled printing with variable fiber content within a single part. The tool’s slender collision volume supports increased range of motion for the robotic arm used in the experiments, allowing alignment of fibers with three-dimensional load paths in complex structures. The six Degree-of-Freedom Robotic Arm printing a multi-axis geometry from a CFR polymer composite. Photo via Springer Nature Link. Mechanical Testing Confirms Load-Bearing Improvements Mechanical tests evaluated the impact of continuous fiber reinforcement on polylactic acid (PLA) parts. In tensile tests, samples reinforced with continuous carbon fibers achieved a tensile strength of 190.76 MPa and a tensile modulus of 9.98 GPa in the fiber direction. These values compare to 60.31 MPa and 3.01 GPa for neat PLA, and 56.92 MPa and 4.30 GPa for parts containing short carbon fibers. Additional tests assessed intra-layer and inter-layer performance, revealing that the continuous fiber–reinforced material had reduced mechanical properties in these orientations. Compared to neat PLA, intra-layer tensile strength and modulus dropped by 66% and 63%, respectively, and inter-layer strength and modulus decreased by 86% and 60%. Researchers printed curved tensile bar geometries using three methods to evaluate performance in parts with three-dimensional load paths: planar short carbon fiber–reinforced PLA, multi-axis short fiber–reinforced samples, and multi-axis continuous fiber–reinforced composites. The multi-axis short fiber–reinforced parts showed a 41.6% increase in maximum load compared to their planar counterparts. Meanwhile, multi-axis continuous fiber–reinforced parts absorbed loads 8.2 times higher than the planar short fiber–reinforced specimens. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of fracture surfaces revealed fiber pull-out and limited fiber-matrix bonding, particularly in samples with continuous fibers. Schematic illustration of common continuous fiber reinforcement–material extrusion (CFR-MEX) modalities: in situ impregnation, towpreg extrusion, and co-extrusion with towpreg. Photo via Springer Nature Link. To verify the tool’s fiber cutting and re-feeding capability, the researchers printed a 100 × 150 × 3 mm rectangular plaque that required 426 cutting and re-feeding operations across six layers. The deposition tool achieved a 100% success rate, demonstrating reliable cutting and re-feeding without fiber clogging. This reliability is critical for manufacturing complex structures that require frequent travel movements between deposition paths. In situ fiber volume fraction control was validated through printing a rectangular prism sample with varying polymer feed rates, road widths, and layer heights. The fiber volume fractions achieved in different sections of the part were 6.51%, 8.00%, and 9.86%, as measured by cross-sectional microscopy and image analysis. Although lower than some literature reports, the researchers attributed this to the specific combination of tool geometry, polymer-fiber interaction time, and print speed. The tool uses Anisoprint’s CCF towpreg, a pre-impregnated continuous carbon fiber product with a fiber volume fraction of 57% and a diameter of 0.35 mm. 3DXTECH’s black PLA and SCF-PLA filaments were selected to ensure consistent matrix properties and avoid the influence of pigment variations on mechanical testing. The experiments were conducted using an ABB IRB 4600–40/2.55 robotic arm equipped with a tool changer for switching between the CFR-MEX deposition tool and a standard MEX tool with an elongated nozzle for planar prints. Deposition Tool CAD and Assembly. Photo via Springer Nature Link. Context Within Existing Research and Future Directions Continuous fiber reinforcement in additive manufacturing has previously demonstrated significant improvements in part performance, with some studies reporting tensile strengths of up to 650 MPa for PLA composites reinforced with continuous carbon fibers. However, traditional three-axis printing methods restrict fiber orientation to planar directions, limiting these gains to within the XY-plane. Multi-axis 3D printing approaches have demonstrated improved load-bearing capacity in short-fiber reinforced parts. For example, multi-axis printed samples have shown failure loads several times higher than planar-printed counterparts in pressure cap and curved geometry applications. Virginia Tech’s tool integrates multiple functionalities that previous tools in literature could not achieve simultaneously. It combines a polymer feeder based on a dual drive extruder, a fiber cutter and re-feeder assembly, and a co-extrusion hotend with adjustable interaction time for fiber-polymer bonding. A needle-like geometry and external pneumatic cooling pipes reduce the risk of collision with the printed part during multi-axis reorientation. Measured collision volume angles were 56.2° for the full tool and 41.6° for the hotend assembly. Load-extension performance graphs for curved tensile bars. Photo via Springer Nature Link. Despite these advances, the researchers identified challenges related to weak bonding between the fiber and the polymer matrix. SEM images showed limited impregnation of the polymer into the fiber towpreg, with the fiber-matrix interface remaining a key area for future work. The study highlights that optimizing fiber tow sizing and improving the fiber-polymer interaction time during printing could enhance inter-layer and intra-layer performance. The results also suggest that advanced toolpath planning algorithms could further leverage the tool’s ability to align fiber deposition along three-dimensional load paths, improving mechanical performance in functional parts. The publication in Springer Nature Link documents the full design, validation experiments, and mechanical characterization of the CFR-MEX tool. The work adds to a growing body of research on multi-axis additive manufacturing, particularly in combining continuous fiber reinforcement with complex geometries. Take the 3DPI Reader Survey — shape the future of AM reporting in under 5 minutes. Ready to discover who won the 20243D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to stay updated with the latest news and insights. Featured photo shows the six Degree-of-Freedom Robotic Arm printing a multi-axis geometry. Photo via Springer Nature Link. Anyer Tenorio Lara Anyer Tenorio Lara is an emerging tech journalist passionate about uncovering the latest advances in technology and innovation. With a sharp eye for detail and a talent for storytelling, Anyer has quickly made a name for himself in the tech community. Anyer's articles aim to make complex subjects accessible and engaging for a broad audience. In addition to his writing, Anyer enjoys participating in industry events and discussions, eager to learn and share knowledge in the dynamic world of technology.

Larry Fabbroni is an architect, strategic advisor, and Chief Innovation Officer for Practice of Architecture. Throughout his career, he has led efforts to reform studio culture and innovate practice. He earned his MBA from the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business. In 2017, as leaders in the AIA’s Young Architects Forum (YAF), we led the launch of the Practice Innovation Lab (PIL) and hosted a symposium that imagined new architectural practice models. At that time, we already felt that practice innovation was overdue in a profession that has not seen scaled disruption to its business model in over a century. Today, we are confident that there has never been a more critical time for the profession to embrace innovation. Redefining Innovation Henley Hall: Institute for Energy Efficiency by KieranTimberlake, Santa Barbara, California | KieranTimberlake’s research expertise creates value beyond a baseline labor model.  Currently, artificial intelligence dominates strategy conversations, but just as we saw back in 2017, larger patterns prompt calls for innovation. Talent attraction is increasingly challenging, disruptive technology continues to emerge, and actors from outside our industry show growing interest in the space. While incremental innovation has long been a part of the profession, relatively few firms have adopted new practices that create value beyond a baseline labor model. Firms such as KieranTimberlake have shown that research expertise can do this. MASS Design has pioneered a mission-driven approach. BIG has taken on the role of architect-as-developer. Snøhetta houses a product design division. We could continue to list great firms that have pushed the boundaries of practice, but they represent exceptions that have yet to be recognized as new standards. Indeed, the confluence of those factors that led to the original PIL continues to make the case that the time for scaled innovation is now. A Melting Iceberg: Incremental Changes Depleting the Profession Powerhouse Telemark by Snøhetta, Vestfold og Telemark, Norway | Photo by Ivar Kvaal | Snøhetta houses a product design division, innovatively presenting a alternative business model for firms.  One of the dangers of operating in a slow-moving industry is that change is difficult to detect and even more challenging to comprehend. If an iceberg loses 1% of mass per year, it’s tough to take notice, but the end result is catastrophic. This is what is happening to our profession. For newcomers, if it feels like there are increasingly more attractive opportunities elsewhere, that’s because there are. For seasoned professionals, if it feels like it’s become more challenging to maintain the same levels of prosperity, that’s because it has. Less(er) Talent In some ways, the shift towards companies recognizing “talent” as their most excellent resource has bewildered architects: we have always relied on talent. However, the patterns of talent leaving our profession are concerning. We say “feel” because there is no significant data. We spoke to Kendall A. Nicholson, Senior Director of Research at the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture (ACSA), who confirmed that aggregated data on graduate placement does not exist. So we inquired about what placement looks like at several programs around the country. Omar Khan, Head of the Carnegie Mellon University School of Architecture, informed us that approximately 90% of students pursue a minor to expand their horizons, and that in 2022, nearly one in three graduates entered the tech sector. Khan stated that these opportunities aren’t just student-driven — large innovative companies increasingly seek the value that graduates of architecture schools will provide. This increasing difficulty in capturing the talent that architecture schools are producing results in a shrinking and diluted talent pool. For a profession so reliant on human resources, this presents extreme risk. Pay Gaps In an increasingly expensive world, we are not able to compete for the best talent with emerging industries. It’s easy to understand why a popular career pivot for architects has become UX design. Designing user experience for websites pays significantly better than designing the same for the built environment. According to Glassdoor, 2023 entry-level UX designers earned an average of $78K, while the AIA salary calculator suggests architecture grads can expect to earn an average of $59 K. The talent we do attract into the profession often loses interest when they experience low pay and long hours, all while most firms lack clear paths and criteria for advancement or compensation increases. A Smaller Piece of the Pie Examining data in isolation, one might conclude that the profession continues to grow; the number of architects has increased substantially over the last century, and this trend has persisted in recent years. The problem with this growth is that the estimated share of the US GDP for Architectural Services has shrunk over time. This is not a manageable number to measure before 1999, when NCARB first aggregated local jurisdictional data. Due to limitations in industry economic data, we’re only showing data since 2011 for the purposes of this article. In that time, the number of architects has grown, the market size for services has grown, but the share those services represent as a portion of the US GDP has declined — by 15% if we use US Census data to almost 30% if we use industry research data (we used IbisWorld.com, however we found data that suggested a worse and others that offered a slightly better picture). To put it another way, architecture is a stagnant industry with a shrinking share of the economy. It’s challenging to examine this data and emerge feeling confident about the profession, but there is a silver lining. The biggest impediment to innovation for architects is not a lack of talent, but rather the business model. Design thinking has been widely adopted throughout the world as a key component of innovation processes; however, the problem is that we operate in the realm of professional services, which inherently is not well-suited to promoting innovation. Reliance on that formula is causing our iceberg to melt. The Tsunami: The AI Tidal Wave is Here The Rwanda Institute for Conservation Agriculture by MASS Design Group, Rwanda | MASS Design has pioneered a mission-driven approach that creates value beyond a baseline labor model.  As we confront the exodus of talent, it is easy for both firm owners and clients to imagine AI bringing efficiencies and replacing “CAD-monkeys” with machines. However, any firm that wants to operate — and win — as anything more than a low-cost provider will need a strategy to increase value, not just cut costs. AI is merely part of the toolbox required to confront a perfect storm of forces. Jobs will Disappear Goldman Sachs predicts that as much as 37% of our industry tasks will be replaced by AI. Many see this as a pathway to lower costs and increased profits. However, that is short-sighted. Markets will adjust quickly and demand lower costs for services; additional new value will need to be articulated and proven, and this will only happen through innovation. New Jobs will Emerge (but fewer of them) AI prophets often emphasize that technological innovation has historically led to net employment gains. Previous World Economic Forum estimates predicted losses of up to 85 million existing jobs worldwide, with parallel gains of as many as 97 million new jobs. However, these estimates were revised in the WEF 2023 Economic Outlook, which now anticipates a net loss of 14 million jobs. This stark outlook signals an even greater need for architects to become more innovative. The 2024 RIBA AI Report indicates that 41% of architecture firms were already utilizing AI, though current tools are indeed just the beginning. Marketing, business development and content creation will be standard areas of AI deployment moving forward. Still, revolutionary changes will come in how we learn, not only to use new tools, but also to collaborate with digital agents. How will this happen? We can theorize, but it is not possible to know for sure until it arrives, so we need to have a plan before we can see the tidal wave from land. The Alien Invasion: Outsiders Are Entering Our Orbit VIA 57 West by BIG – Bjarke Ingels Group, New York City, New York | BIG has pioneered a new model for practice by taking on the role of architect-as-developer. For years, we’ve heard cries that “architects gave away the role of master builder.” But how much did architects actually give, and how much was taken by innovative competition? This distinction is critical because the wagons are circling, and the AEC space has become ever more attractive to investors. Venture Capital and Private Equity Investment The numbers are often difficult to parse because architecture can impact so many verticals and does not operate as its own sector in the investment realm; however, the trends suggest a groundswell is underway. A 2023 McKinsey report shows that construction tech deals nearly doubled from 2019 to 2022, growing by 85%. At the same period, the number of deals increased by 30%, indicating that interest continues to grow. An increasing size of deals also suggests a maturity of the market. As interest in infrastructure investments has declined from its high in 2020, and along with real estate, has been blunted by high interest rates, institutional investors continue to see opportunities in the AEC space. Firm Acquisitions AEC firms that deliver predictable returns have proven to be attractive targets for PE firms. In the second quarter of 2024, private equity firms accounted for over one-third of AEC firm mergers and acquisitions. For M&A deals, the industry has seen an increase in attractiveness with expanded infrastructure spending as a catalyst. However, this interest can also be tied to the lack of innovation that has resulted in an industry ripe for consolidation. M&A orchestrators generate large amounts of profit by streamlining operations, eliminating redundancies, and then stamping out competition. An entire community has been built around this, with AEC Advisors hosting an annual “Private Equity Summit” that brings together CEOs of AEC firms with PE investors. Startups As an extension of the growing interest from venture capital in the space, there is an upward trend in the AEC space being targeted for disruption by entrepreneurs who see an industry that represents a significant portion of the global GDP. AEC Works, a project of e-verse that catalogs AEC startups and investors, lists nearly 800 startups from around the world, with almost 200 identified as “architecture-focused.” The signal is clear: startups are looking to figure out how to do what you do cheaper, better, or perhaps both. Combining this environment with depleted talent pools, a declining share of GDP, and revolutionary technology, it is a correct response to be alarmed. Significant change is inevitable. It is time for architects to see the same opportunities that investors and entrepreneurs see, and learn to navigate within these spaces. The Great Opportunity Throughout history, new actors have enjoyed a “leap-frog” effect and been able to surpass established incumbents to reshape industries, markets and economies. From climate change to pandemic ripple effects, to the housing crisis, to generational shifts in the workforce, there are many forces that directly impact the work of architects and call for innovation. The need for new ways of designing and delivering different components of the built environment is ever-present and will be solved by teams that either include — and might be led by — architects, or those that do not. Most end users will only care if the resulting product is superior. This time of tension is indeed a time of great opportunity. Architects who embrace innovation in pursuing new iterations of our dated business models may actually achieve what many of us have dreamed of from the start: to leave a positive mark on the world. We think the future of the profession depends on it. Top image: Powerhouse Telemark by Snøhetta, Vestfold og Telemark, Norway The post Architects, Your Real Competition Isn’t AI — It’s Business Complacency appeared first on Journal.

Ahead of the TechEx North America event on June 4-5, we’ve been lucky enough to speak to Kieran Norton, Deloitte’s US Cyber AI & Automation leader, who will be one of the speakers at the conference on June 4th. Kieran’s 25+ years in the sector mean that as well as speaking authoritatively on all matters cybersecurity, his most recent roles include advising Deloitte clients on many issues around cybersecurity when using AI in business applications.The majority of organisations have in place at least the bare minimum of cybersecurity, and thankfully, in most cases, operate a decently comprehensive raft of cybersecurity measures that cover off communications, data storage, and perimeter defences.However, in the last couple of years, AI has changed the picture, both in terms of how companies can leverage the technology internally, and in how AI is used in cybersecurity – in advanced detection, and in the new ways the tech is used by bad actors.As a Considered a relatively new area, AI, smart automation, data governance and security all inhabit a niche at present. But given the growing presence of AI in the enterprise, those niches are set to become mainstream issues: problems, solutions, and advice that will need to be observed in every organisation, sooner rather than later.Governance and riskIntegrating AI into business processes isn’t solely about the technology and methods for its deployment. Internal processes will need to change to make best use of AI, and to better protect the business that’s using AI daily. Kieran draws a parallel to earlier changes made necessary by new technologies: “I would correlate [AI] with cloud adoption where it was a fairly significant shift. People understood the advantages of it and were moving in that direction, although sometimes it took them more time than others to get there.”Those changes mean casting the net wide, to encompass the update of governance frameworks, establishing secure architectures, even leveraging a new generation of specialists to ensure AI and the data associated with it are used safely and responsibly. Companies actively using AI have to detect and correct bias, test for hallucinations, impose guardrails, manage where, and by whom AI is used, and more. As Kieran puts it: “You probably weren’t doing a lot of testing for hallucination, bias, toxicity, data poisoning, model vulnerabilities, etc. That now has to be part of your process.”These are big subjects, and for the fuller picture, we advocate that readers attend the two talks at TechEx North America that Kieran’s to give. He’ll be exploring both sides of the AI coin – issues around AI deployment for the business, and the methods that companies can implement to deter and detect the new breed of AI-powered malware and attack vectors.The right use-casesKieran advocates that companies start with smaller, lower-risk AI implementations. While some of the first sightings of AI ‘in the wild’ have been chatbots, he was quick to differentiate between a chatbot that can intelligently answer questions from customers, and agents, which can take action by means of triggering interactions with the apps and services the business operates. “So there’s a delineation […] chatbots have been one of the primary starting places […] As we get into agents and agentic, that changes the picture. It also changes the complexity and risk profile.”Customer-facing agentic AI instances are indubitably higher risk, as a misstep can have  significant effects on a brand. “That’s a higher risk scenario. Particularly if the agent is executing financial transactions or making determinations based on healthcare coverage […] that’s not the first use case you want to try.”“If you plug 5, 6, 10, 50, a hundred agents together, you’re getting into a network of agency […] the interactions become quite complex and present different issues,” he said.In some ways, the issues around automation and system-to-system interfaces have been around for close on a decade. Data silos and RPA (robotic process automation) challenges are the hurdles enterprises have been trying to jump for several years. “You still have to know where your data is, know what data you have, have access to it […] The fundamentals are still true.”In the AI era, fundamental questions about infrastructure, data visibility, security, and sovereignty are arguably more relevant. Any discussions about AI tend to circle around the same issues, which throws into relief Kieran’s statements that a conversation about AI in the enterprise has to be wide-reaching and concern many of the operational and infrastructural underpinnings of the enterprise.Kieran therefore emphasises the importance of practicality, and a grounded assessment of need and ability as needing careful examination before AI can gain a foothold. “If you understand the use case […] you should have a pretty good idea of the ROI […] and therefore whether or not it’s worth the pain and suffering to go through building it.”At Deloitte, AI is being put to use where there is a clear use case with a measurable return: in the initial triage-ing of SOC tickets. Here the AI acts as a Level I incident analysis engine. “We know how many tickets get generated a day […] if we can take 60 to 80% of the time out of the triage process, then that has a significant impact.” Given the technology’s nascence, demarcating a specific area of operations where AI can be used acts as both prototype and proof of effectiveness. The AI is not customer-facing, and there are highly-qualified experts in their fields who can check and oversee the AI’s deliberations.ConclusionKieran’s message for business professionals investigating AI uses for their organisations was not to build an AI risk assessment and management programme from scratch. Instead, companies should evolve existing systems, have a clear understanding of each use-case, and avoid the trap of building for theoretical value.“You shouldn’t create another programme just for AI security on top of what you’re already doing […] you should be modernising your programme to address the nuances associated with AI workloads.” Success in AI starts with clear, realistic goals built on solid foundations.You can read more about TechEx North America here and sign up to attend. Visit the Deloitte team at booth #153 and drop in on its sessions on June 4: ‘Securing the AI Stack’ on the AI & Big Data stage from 9:20am-9:50am, and ‘Leveraging AI in Cybersecurity for business transformation’ on the Cybersecurity stage, 10:20am – 10:50am.Learn more about Deloitte’s solutions and service offerings for AI in business and cybersecurity or email the team at uscyberai@deloitte.com.(Image source: “Symposium Cisco Ecole Polytechnique 9-10 April 2018 Artificial Intelligence & Cybersecurity” by Ecole polytechnique / Paris / France is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.)

Once again, Sam Altman wants to show you the future. The CEO of OpenAI is standing on a sparse stage in San Francisco, preparing to reveal his next move to an attentive crowd. “We needed some way for identifying, authenticating humans in the age of AGI,” Altman explains, referring to artificial general intelligence. “We wanted a way to make sure that humans stayed special and central.” The solution Altman came up with is looming behind him. It’s a white sphere about the size of a beach ball, with a camera at its center. The company that makes it, known as Tools for Humanity, calls this mysterious device the Orb. Stare into the heart of the plastic-and-silicon globe and it will map the unique furrows and ciliary zones of your iris. Seconds later, you’ll receive inviolable proof of your humanity: a 12,800-digit binary number, known as an iris code, sent to an app on your phone. At the same time, a packet of cryptocurrency called Worldcoin, worth approximately $42, will be transferred to your digital wallet—your reward for becoming a “verified human.” Altman co-founded Tools for Humanity in 2019 as part of a suite of companies he believed would reshape the world. Once the tech he was developing at OpenAI passed a certain level of intelligence, he reasoned, it would mark the end of one era on the Internet and the beginning of another, in which AI became so advanced, so human-like, that you would no longer be able to tell whether what you read, saw, or heard online came from a real person. When that happened, Altman imagined, we would need a new kind of online infrastructure: a human-verification layer for the Internet, to distinguish real people from the proliferating number of bots and AI “agents.”And so Tools for Humanity set out to build a global “proof-of-humanity” network. It aims to verify 50 million people by the end of 2025; ultimately its goal is to sign up every single human being on the planet. The free crypto serves as both an incentive for users to sign up, and also an entry point into what the company hopes will become the world’s largest financial network, through which it believes “double-digit percentages of the global economy” will eventually flow. Even for Altman, these missions are audacious. “If this really works, it’s like a fundamental piece of infrastructure for the world,” Altman tells TIME in a video interview from the passenger seat of a car a few days before his April 30 keynote address.Internal hardware of the Orb in mid-assembly in March. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe project’s goal is to solve a problem partly of Altman’s own making. In the near future, he and other tech leaders say, advanced AIs will be imbued with agency: the ability to not just respond to human prompting, but to take actions independently in the world. This will enable the creation of AI coworkers that can drop into your company and begin solving problems; AI tutors that can adapt their teaching style to students’ preferences; even AI doctors that can diagnose routine cases and handle scheduling or logistics. The arrival of these virtual agents, their venture capitalist backers predict, will turbocharge our productivity and unleash an age of material abundance.But AI agents will also have cascading consequences for the human experience online. “As AI systems become harder to distinguish from people, websites may face difficult trade-offs,” says a recent paper by researchers from 25 different universities, nonprofits, and tech companies, including OpenAI. “There is a significant risk that digital institutions will be unprepared for a time when AI-powered agents, including those leveraged by malicious actors, overwhelm other activity online.” On social-media platforms like X and Facebook, bot-driven accounts are amassing billions of views on AI-generated content. In April, the foundation that runs Wikipedia disclosed that AI bots scraping their site were making the encyclopedia too costly to sustainably run. Later the same month, researchers from the University of Zurich found that AI-generated comments on the subreddit /r/ChangeMyView were up to six times more successful than human-written ones at persuading unknowing users to change their minds.  Photograph by Davide Monteleone for TIMEBuy a copy of the Orb issue hereThe arrival of agents won’t only threaten our ability to distinguish between authentic and AI content online. It will also challenge the Internet’s core business model, online advertising, which relies on the assumption that ads are being viewed by humans. “The Internet will change very drastically sometime in the next 12 to 24 months,” says Tools for Humanity CEO Alex Blania. “So we have to succeed, or I’m not sure what else would happen.”For four years, Blania’s team has been testing the Orb’s hardware abroad. Now the U.S. rollout has arrived. Over the next 12 months, 7,500 Orbs will be arriving in dozens of American cities, in locations like gas stations, bodegas, and flagship stores in Los Angeles, Austin, and Miami. The project’s founders and fans hope the Orb’s U.S. debut will kickstart a new phase of growth. The San Francisco keynote was titled: “At Last.” It’s not clear the public appetite matches the exultant branding. Tools for Humanity has “verified” just 12 million humans since mid 2023, a pace Blania concedes is well behind schedule. Few online platforms currently support the so-called “World ID” that the Orb bestows upon its visitors, leaving little to entice users to give up their biometrics beyond the lure of free crypto. Even Altman isn’t sure whether the whole thing can work. “I can see [how] this becomes a fairly mainstream thing in a few years,” he says. “Or I can see that it’s still only used by a small subset of people who think about the world in a certain way.” Blania (left) and Altman debut the Orb at World’s U.S. launch in San Francisco on April 30, 2025. Jason Henry—The New York Times/ReduxYet as the Internet becomes overrun with AI, the creators of this strange new piece of hardware are betting that everybody in the world will soon want—or need—to visit an Orb. The biometric code it creates, they predict, will become a new type of digital passport, without which you might be denied passage to the Internet of the future, from dating apps to government services. In a best-case scenario, World ID could be a privacy-preserving way to fortify the Internet against an AI-driven deluge of fake or deceptive content. It could also enable the distribution of universal basic income (UBI)—a policy that Altman has previously touted—as AI automation transforms the global economy. To examine what this new technology might mean, I reported from three continents, interviewed 10 Tools for Humanity executives and investors, reviewed hundreds of pages of company documents, and “verified” my own humanity. The Internet will inevitably need some kind of proof-of-humanity system in the near future, says Divya Siddarth, founder of the nonprofit Collective Intelligence Project. The real question, she argues, is whether such a system will be centralized—“a big security nightmare that enables a lot of surveillance”—or privacy-preserving, as the Orb claims to be. Questions remain about Tools for Humanity’s corporate structure, its yoking to an unstable cryptocurrency, and what power it would concentrate in the hands of its owners if successful. Yet it’s also one of the only attempts to solve what many see as an increasingly urgent problem. “There are some issues with it,” Siddarth says of World ID. “But you can’t preserve the Internet in amber. Something in this direction is necessary.”In March, I met Blania at Tools for Humanity’s San Francisco headquarters, where a large screen displays the number of weekly “Orb verifications” by country. A few days earlier, the CEO had attended a $1 million-per-head dinner at Mar-a-Lago with President Donald Trump, whom he credits with clearing the way for the company’s U.S. launch by relaxing crypto regulations. “Given Sam is a very high profile target,” Blania says, “we just decided that we would let other companies fight that fight, and enter the U.S. once the air is clear.” As a kid growing up in Germany, Blania was a little different than his peers. “Other kids were, like, drinking a lot, or doing a lot of parties, and I was just building a lot of things that could potentially blow up,” he recalls. At the California Institute of Technology, where he was pursuing research for a masters degree, he spent many evenings reading the blogs of startup gurus like Paul Graham and Altman. Then, in 2019, Blania received an email from Max Novendstern, an entrepreneur who had been kicking around a concept with Altman to build a global cryptocurrency network. They were looking for technical minds to help with the project. Over cappuccinos, Altman told Blania he was certain about three things. First, smarter-than-human AI was not only possible, but inevitable—and it would soon mean you could no longer assume that anything you read, saw, or heard on the Internet was human-created. Second, cryptocurrency and other decentralized technologies would be a massive force for change in the world. And third, scale was essential to any crypto network’s value. The Orb is tested on a calibration rig, surrounded by checkerboard targets to ensure precision in iris detection. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe goal of Worldcoin, as the project was initially called, was to combine those three insights. Altman took a lesson from PayPal, the company co-founded by his mentor Peter Thiel. Of its initial funding, PayPal spent less than $10 million actually building its app—but pumped an additional $70 million or so into a referral program, whereby new users and the person who invited them would each receive $10 in credit. The referral program helped make PayPal a leading payment platform. Altman thought a version of that strategy would propel Worldcoin to similar heights. He wanted to create a new cryptocurrency and give it to users as a reward for signing up. The more people who joined the system, the higher the token’s value would theoretically rise. Since 2019, the project has raised $244 million from investors like Coinbase and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. That money paid for the $50 million cost of designing the Orb, plus maintaining the software it runs on. The total market value of all Worldcoins in existence, however, is far higher—around $12 billion. That number is a bit misleading: most of those coins are not in circulation and Worldcoin’s price has fluctuated wildly. Still, it allows the company to reward users for signing up at no cost to itself. The main lure for investors is the crypto upside. Some 75% of all Worldcoins are set aside for humans to claim when they sign up, or as referral bonuses. The remaining 25% are split between Tools for Humanity’s backers and staff, including Blania and Altman. “I’m really excited to make a lot of money,” ” Blania says.From the beginning, Altman was thinking about the consequences of the AI revolution he intended to unleash. (On May 21, he announced plans to team up with famed former Apple designer Jony Ive on a new AI personal device.) A future in which advanced AI could perform most tasks more effectively than humans would bring a wave of unemployment and economic dislocation, he reasoned. Some kind of wealth redistribution might be necessary. In 2016, he partially funded a study of basic income, which gave $1,000 per-month handouts to low-income individuals in Illinois and Texas. But there was no single financial system that would allow money to be sent to everybody in the world. Nor was there a way to stop an individual human from claiming their share twice—or to identify a sophisticated AI pretending to be human and pocketing some cash of its own. In 2023, Tools for Humanity raised the possibility of using the network to redistribute the profits of AI labs that were able to automate human labor. “As AI advances,” it said, “fairly distributing access and some of the created value through UBI will play an increasingly vital role in counteracting the concentration of economic power.”Blania was taken by the pitch, and agreed to join the project as a co-founder. “Most people told us we were very stupid or crazy or insane, including Silicon Valley investors,” Blania says. At least until ChatGPT came out in 2022, transforming OpenAI into one of the world’s most famous tech companies and kickstarting a market bull-run. “Things suddenly started to make more and more sense to the external world,” Blania says of the vision to develop a global “proof-of-humanity” network. “You have to imagine a world in which you will have very smart and competent systems somehow flying through the Internet with different goals and ideas of what they want to do, and us having no idea anymore what we’re dealing with.”After our interview, Blania’s head of communications ushers me over to a circular wooden structure where eight Orbs face one another. The scene feels like a cross between an Apple Store and a ceremonial altar. “Do you want to get verified?” she asks. Putting aside my reservations for the purposes of research, I download the World App and follow its prompts. I flash a QR code at the Orb, then gaze into it. A minute or so later, my phone buzzes with confirmation: I’ve been issued my own personal World ID and some Worldcoin.The first thing the Orb does is check if you’re human, using a neural network that takes input from various sensors, including an infrared camera and a thermometer. Davide Monteleone for TIMEWhile I stared into the Orb, several complex procedures had taken place at once. A neural network took inputs from multiple sensors—an infrared camera, a thermometer—to confirm I was a living human. Simultaneously, a telephoto lens zoomed in on my iris, capturing the physical traits within that distinguish me from every other human on Earth. It then converted that image into an iris code: a numerical abstraction of my unique biometric data. Then the Orb checked to see if my iris code matched any it had seen before, using a technique allowing encrypted data to be compared without revealing the underlying information. Before the Orb deleted my data, it turned my iris code into several derivative codes—none of which on its own can be linked back to the original—encrypted them, deleted the only copies of the decryption keys, and sent each one to a different secure server, so that future users’ iris codes can be checked for uniqueness against mine. If I were to use my World ID to access a website, that site would learn nothing about me except that I’m human. The Orb is open-source, so outside experts can examine its code and verify the company’s privacy claims. “I did a colonoscopy on this company and these technologies before I agreed to join,” says Trevor Traina, a Trump donor and former U.S. ambassador to Austria who now serves as Tools for Humanity’s chief business officer. “It is the most privacy-preserving technology on the planet.”Only weeks later, when researching what would happen if I wanted to delete my data, do I discover that Tools for Humanity’s privacy claims rest on what feels like a sleight of hand. The company argues that in modifying your iris code, it has “effectively anonymized” your biometric data. If you ask Tools for Humanity to delete your iris codes, they will delete the one stored on your phone, but not the derivatives. Those, they argue, are no longer your personal data at all. But if I were to return to an Orb after deleting my data, it would still recognize those codes as uniquely mine. Once you look into the Orb, a piece of your identity remains in the system forever. If users could truly delete that data, the premise of one ID per human would collapse, Tools for Humanity’s chief privacy officer Damien Kieran tells me when I call seeking an explanation. People could delete and sign up for new World IDs after being suspended from a platform. Or claim their Worldcoin tokens, sell them, delete their data, and cash in again. This argument fell flat with European Union regulators in Germany, who recently declared that the Orb posed “fundamental data protection issues” and ordered the company to allow European users to fully delete even their anonymized data. (Tools for Humanity has appealed; the regulator is now reassessing the decision.) “Just like any other technology service, users cannot delete data that is not personal data,” Kieran said in a statement. “If a person could delete anonymized data that can’t be linked to them by World or any third party, it would allow bad actors to circumvent the security and safety that World ID is working to bring to every human.”On a balmy afternoon this spring, I climb a flight of stairs up to a room above a restaurant in an outer suburb of Seoul. Five elderly South Koreans tap on their phones as they wait to be “verified” by the two Orbs in the center of the room. “We don’t really know how to distinguish between AI and humans anymore,” an attendant in a company t-shirt explains in Korean, gesturing toward the spheres. “We need a way to verify that we’re human and not AI. So how do we do that? Well, humans have irises, but AI doesn’t.”The attendant ushers an elderly woman over to an Orb. It bleeps. “Open your eyes,” a disembodied voice says in English. The woman stares into the camera. Seconds later, she checks her phone and sees that a packet of Worldcoin worth 75,000 Korean won (about $54) has landed in her digital wallet. Congratulations, the app tells her. You are now a verified human.A visitor views the Orbs in Seoul on April 14, 2025. Taemin Ha for TIMETools for Humanity aims to “verify” 1 million Koreans over the next year. Taemin Ha for TIMEA couple dozen Orbs have been available in South Korea since 2023, verifying roughly 55,000 people. Now Tools for Humanity is redoubling its efforts there. At an event in a traditional wooden hanok house in central Seoul, an executive announces that 250 Orbs will soon be dispersed around the country—with the aim of verifying 1 million Koreans in the next 12 months. South Korea has high levels of smartphone usage, crypto and AI adoption, and Internet access, while average wages are modest enough for the free Worldcoin on offer to still be an enticing draw—all of which makes it fertile testing ground for the company’s ambitious global expansion. Yet things seem off to a slow start. In a retail space I visited in central Seoul, Tools for Humanity had constructed a wooden structure with eight Orbs facing each other. Locals and tourists wander past looking bemused; few volunteer themselves up. Most who do tell me they are crypto enthusiasts who came intentionally, driven more by the spirit of early adoption than the free coins. The next day, I visit a coffee shop in central Seoul where a chrome Orb sits unassumingly in one corner. Wu Ruijun, a 20-year-old student from China, strikes up a conversation with the barista, who doubles as the Orb’s operator. Wu was invited here by a friend who said both could claim free cryptocurrency if he signed up. The barista speeds him through the process. Wu accepts the privacy disclosure without reading it, and widens his eyes for the Orb. Soon he’s verified. “I wasn’t told anything about the privacy policy,” he says on his way out. “I just came for the money.”As Altman’s car winds through San Francisco, I ask about the vision he laid out in 2019: that AI would make it harder for us to trust each other online. To my surprise, he rejects the framing. “I’m much more [about] like: what is the good we can create, rather than the bad we can stop?” he says. “It’s not like, ‘Oh, we’ve got to avoid the bot overrun’ or whatever. It’s just that we can do a lot of special things for humans.” It’s an answer that may reflect how his role has changed over the years. Altman is now the chief public cheerleader of a $300 billion company that’s touting the transformative utility of AI agents. The rise of agents, he and others say, will be a boon for our quality of life—like having an assistant on hand who can answer your most pressing questions, carry out mundane tasks, and help you develop new skills. It’s an optimistic vision that may well pan out. But it doesn’t quite fit with the prophecies of AI-enabled infopocalypse that Tools for Humanity was founded upon.Altman waves away a question about the influence he and other investors stand to gain if their vision is realized. Most holders, he assumes, will have already started selling their tokens—too early, he adds. “What I think would be bad is if an early crew had a lot of control over the protocol,” he says, “and that’s where I think the commitment to decentralization is so cool.” Altman is referring to the World Protocol, the underlying technology upon which the Orb, Worldcoin, and World ID all rely. Tools for Humanity is developing it, but has committed to giving control to its users over time—a process they say will prevent power from being concentrated in the hands of a few executives or investors. Tools for Humanity would remain a for-profit company, and could levy fees on platforms that use World ID, but other companies would be able to compete for customers by building alternative apps—or even alternative Orbs. The plan draws on ideas that animated the crypto ecosystem in the late 2010s and early 2020s, when evangelists for emerging blockchain technologies argued that the centralization of power—especially in large so-called “Web 2.0” tech companies—was responsible for many of the problems plaguing the modern Internet. Just as decentralized cryptocurrencies could reform a financial system controlled by economic elites, so too would it be possible to create decentralized organizations, run by their members instead of CEOs. How such a system might work in practice remains unclear. “Building a community-based governance system,” Tools for Humanity says in a 2023 white paper, “represents perhaps the most formidable challenge of the entire project.”Altman has a pattern of making idealistic promises that shift over time. He founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, with a mission to develop AGI safely and for the benefit of all humanity. To raise money, OpenAI restructured itself as a for-profit company in 2019, but with overall control still in the hands of its nonprofit board. Last year, Altman proposed yet another restructure—one which would dilute the board’s control and allow more profits to flow to shareholders. Why, I ask, should the public trust Tools for Humanity’s commitment to freely surrender influence and power? “I think you will just see the continued decentralization via the protocol,” he says. “The value here is going to live in the network, and the network will be owned and governed by a lot of people.” Altman talks less about universal basic income these days. He recently mused about an alternative, which he called “universal basic compute.” Instead of AI companies redistributing their profits, he seemed to suggest, they could instead give everyone in the world fair access to super-powerful AI. Blania tells me he recently “made the decision to stop talking” about UBI at Tools for Humanity. “UBI is one potential answer,” he says. “Just giving [people] access to the latest [AI] models and having them learn faster and better is another.” Says Altman: “I still don’t know what the right answer is. I believe we should do a better job of distribution of resources than we currently do.” When I probe the question of why people should trust him, Altman gets irritated. “I understand that you hate AI, and that’s fine,” he says. “If you want to frame it as the downside of AI is that there’s going to be a proliferation of very convincing AI systems that are pretending to be human, and we need ways to know what is really human-authorized versus not, then yeah, I think you can call that a downside of AI. It’s not how I would naturally frame it.” The phrase human-authorized hints at a tension between World ID and OpenAI’s plans for AI agents. An Internet where a World ID is required to access most services might impede the usefulness of the agents that OpenAI and others are developing. So Tools for Humanity is building a system that would allow users to delegate their World ID to an agent, allowing the bot to take actions online on their behalf, according to Tiago Sada, the company’s chief product officer. “We’ve built everything in a way that can be very easily delegatable to an agent,” Sada says. It’s a measure that would allow humans to be held accountable for the actions of their AIs. But it suggests that Tools for Humanity’s mission may be shifting beyond simply proving humanity, and toward becoming the infrastructure that enables AI agents to proliferate with human authorization. World ID doesn’t tell you whether a piece of content is AI-generated or human-generated; all it tells you is whether the account that posted it is a human or a bot. Even in a world where everybody had a World ID, our online spaces might still be filled with AI-generated text, images, and videos.As I say goodbye to Altman, I’m left feeling conflicted about his project. If the Internet is going to be transformed by AI agents, then some kind of proof-of-humanity system will almost certainly be necessary. Yet if the Orb becomes a piece of Internet infrastructure, it could give Altman—a beneficiary of the proliferation of AI content—significant influence over a leading defense mechanism against it. People might have no choice but to participate in the network in order to access social media or online services.I thought of an encounter I witnessed in Seoul. In the room above the restaurant, Cho Jeong-yeon, 75, watched her friend get verified by an Orb. Cho had been invited to do the same, but demurred. The reward wasn’t enough for her to surrender a part of her identity. “Your iris is uniquely yours, and we don’t really know how it might be used,” she says. “Seeing the machine made me think: are we becoming machines instead of humans now? Everything is changing, and we don’t know how it’ll all turn out.”—With reporting by Stephen Kim/Seoul. This story was supported by Tarbell Grants.Correction, May 30The original version of this story misstated the market capitalization of Worldcoin if all coins were in circulation. It is $12 billion, not $1.2 billion.

Last year Hunger Games social media accounts made shocking news when they announced there would be a new book and movie in the series. Shortly afterward, Collins released the novel on March 18, 2025 where it promptly sold 1.2 million copies in its first week in the U.S.—three times more than what Mockingjay, which closed out Collins’ original Hunger Games trilogy, did in the same time frame.  Sunrise on the Reaping follows Peeta and Katniss’ mentor, Haymitch Abernathy, when he is chosen to compete in the 50th Hunger Games, which due to the anniversary means there will be double the amount of tributes. The novel tells the story of Haymitch’s life in District 12 and his rebellion against the Capitol, which led him to become the unfriendly mentor we know from the original series.  This is the second prequel Collins has released after The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, which followed a young Coriolanus Snow on his journey to becoming the ruthless president in the original trilogy. The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes movie grossed $349 million worldwide, and Collins and Lionsgate are likely eager to repeat that success at the box office with a Sunrise on the Reaping film.  The most successful movie in the franchise has been The Hunger Games: Catching Fire with a worldwide box office gross of almost $845 million. Hunger Games hasn’t been able to recreate those numbers since. But the Sunrise on the Reaping movie will follow a character the audience already connects with (as opposed to despite like Coriolanus), which may encourage more casual fans to see it. The announcement of Sunrise on the Reaping release brought new life to the Hunger Games audience, with many fans speculating about casting and production choices for the already confirmed movie adaptation, which is set to release in November 2026.  The Sunrise on the Reaping movie starts production in July and reportedly has a budget of over $150 million, according to a Deadline report, which could make it the largest budget Hunger Games movie to date. Fans of the franchise have been eagerly awaiting information about the highly anticipated movie adaptation, and they won’t have to wait long to get it. Here’s a look at some of the casting choices so far and what the expectations are for the upcoming film.  Amazon Joseph Zada as Haymitch Abernathy There were many fan castings following the release of the book involving popular actors such as Outer Banks’ Rudy Pankow and Harris Dickinson from Babygirl. Instead the lead role went to industry newcomer Joseph Zada, who will bring a fresh perspective. Zada is an Australian actor who began his career in 2019 in a film directed by his father, Jeremy Cumpston. He continued acting and has only been involved in four projects before his casting in Hunger Games, two movies (Bilched and The Speedway Murders), one small role in the Australian TV show Total Control, and a lead role in the currently airing Australian show, Invisible Boys. The Sunrise on the Reaping movie will be Zada’s first Hollywood blockbuster role.    In Sunrise on the Reaping, Haymitch’s character suffers unimaginable loss and faces treacherous conditions in the arena, so it will be interesting to see what Zada brings to the emotional impact of his journey.  Zada will also be starring in another anticipated book-adaptation, We Were Liars, which is set to release in June. Also of note, at age 20, Zada is actually the appropriate age to be playing a 16-year-old, which differs from both fan casting and a franchise that previously has cast actors over 25 as teenagers. Photo by: Nick Morgulis Mckenna Grace as Maysilee Donner Maysilee is a fierce but kindhearted character, which is not uncommon ground for Mckenna Grace. Grace is one of the more well-known additions to the cast, having starred in Gifted alongside Chris Evans, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, and Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. Many fans were in favor of this choice on social media as well.   Grace will have the task of conveying the multiple layers to Maysilee’s arc. At the start of the novel, the character is viewed as a stuck-up rich girl but as the story progresses, Haymitch realizes there is more to her that meets the eye, and the two characters form a strong bond. Grace’s performance will ride on her ability to capture Maysilee’s development in a way that will have audiences empathizing with her until the very end. Grace already has almost three million followers on Instagram and five million on TikTok because of her popularity with a Gen Z audience, which likely appealed to the Lionsgate marketing department as well. She’s also only 18 years old, making this another case of the filmmakers again avoiding the common Hollywood issue of folks pushing 30 playing teens.  A24 Jesse Plemons as Plutarch Heavensbee Plutarch is a recurring character in the original trilogy, having a pivotal role in Mockingjay where he helps Katniss take down President Snow and the Capitol. In the film version, he was played by Philip Seymour Hoffman in one of the actor’s final roles. In Sunrise on the Reaping, we see Plutarch’s rise to power and how he gained the trust of the president while also helping the rebel cause. Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! Jesse Plemons was cast to play a younger Plutarch in the upcoming movie. It will be hard to live up to Hoffman’s charisma and talent, but Plemons seems up for the job. In fact, Plemons and Hoffman have actually shared the screen together when Plemons played Hoffman’s son in the 2012 film The Master. Plemons has been in the industry for a while and, most notably, played a role in the popular TV series Breaking Bad. He was also nominated for an Oscar as a supporting actor in The Power of the Dog. Max/WBD Whitney Peak as Lenore Dove Whitney Peak was cast to play Lenore Dove, the musical, free-spirited girlfriend of Haymitch, who is a part of the traveling musical band in District 12, or the “Covey.” Peak is a relatively new actress, best known for her roles in teen dramas like Chilling Adventures of Sabrina on Netflix and the Gossip Girl reboot on Max.  We will see if Peak can capture the same wild, whimsical energy that Rachel Zegler did when she played a very similar role as Lucy Gray Baird in The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes movie. Zegler captured the hearts of Hunger Games fans, helping her to land roles afterward like Y2K and the latest Broadway production of  Romeo and Juliet. Zegler has already expressed her support for Peak’s casting on social media, writing, “I know she’s gonna do the Baird name proud.” Searchlight Pictures Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Beetee Beetee is a major character in the second Hunger Games novel, Catching Fire, where he uses his intelligence and knowledge of the arena to help stop the Games. In Sunrise on the Reaping, we learn about his family and his previous involvement in the rebellion, making his actions in the original trilogy more impactful. Young Beetee will be played by Kelvin Harrison Jr. who has had roles in other major movies like Elvis, The Trial of Chicago 7, Luce, and Waves and has been acting since 2013.  The character was previously played by Jeffrey Wright in the original trilogy, who unsurprisingly did a good job of coming across as shy and dorky while simultaneously using his intelligence to take down the Capitol. Harrison will act as a mentor to young Haymitch in Sunrise on the Reaping and aid him in his rebellion against the Capitol, showing that just because he’s nerdy doesn’t mean he’s not dangerous.  Netflix Maya Hawke as Wiress  Wiress is one of Haymitch’s mentors in the novel who won the Hunger Games the year before by outsmarting the gamemakers and the other tributes. Wiress will be played by Maya Hawke, who is known for being the daughter of famous actors Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman as well as her role in the popular TV series Stranger Things. Many fans of her and the franchise were satisfied with the charismatic choice.  Like Beetee, Wiress’s character is introduced in Catching Fire as the smart but mentally disturbed tribute from District 3. In Sunrise on the Reaping, we see that she used to be able to communicate normally before the Capitol tortured her for her involvement in the rebellion. She was played in the original movies by Amanda Plummer, who embodied her eccentric, odd demeanor well, but Hawke will be playing a more sane and coherent version of Wiress. She will have to embody the young, capable victor who encourages the District 12 kids to use their intelligence to succeed in the Hunger Games without having to kill.  Amazon Prime Lili Taylor as Mags The kind and loveable mentor Mags will be played by Lili Taylor. The American actress has had roles in many successful movies, including Mystic Pizza, The Conjuring, I Shot Andy Warhol and Dogfight. Mags was also introduced in Catching Fire as Finnick’s mentor and a sweet, maternal figure. We see more of her in Sunrise on the Reaping as she helps Haymitch and the District 12 tributes prepare and shows us what she was like before the Capitol’s influence on her.  Mags was played in the Catching Fire movie by Lynn Cohen, but she was nonverbal and frail after years of Capitol torment. The Mags in this movie will be different, more energetic and able-bodied while still retaining the same affectionate nature. We will see her taking care of the tributes and making them feel like human beings even though they are headed to almost certain death.  Sony Pictures Ben Wang as Wyatt Callow Wyatt Callow is one of the District 12 tributes and a mathematical genius. Wyatt is known to take bets on the Hunger Games and calculate the odds of each tribute for his father, which Haymitch doesn’t like. The two characters get off to a rocky start, but Haymitch eventually realizes Wyatt is a good person with how loyal he is to their group.  Ben Wang will be playing Wyatt in the upcoming adaptation. Wang is also about to star in Karate Kid: Legend and has also appeared in the Mean Girls remake and the Disney+ series American Born Chinese.  Wyatt is socially awkward, but kind-hearted, and Wang will have to portray the depth of his character beyond just his intelligence.  Focus Features Ralph Fiennes as President Snow The ruthless President Snow will be played by the legendary Ralph Fiennes. The British actor has received multiple Academy Award nominations for his roles in Schindler’s List, Conclave, and The English Patient. His legacy also extends to some of the most popular movies of the last 30 years, running the gamut from Skyfall to The Grand Budapest Hotel. Fiennes is one of the most veteran members of the cast and someone that the younger actors can look up to as a mentor.  Of course Fiennes is no stranger to playing ruthless dictators either since his transformation into the role of Voldemort in the Harry Potter series is etched into the memories of generations. Fiennes will be playing the heartless president of Panem in Sunrise on the Reaping when he confronts Haymitch, the rebellion, and the 50th Hunger Games. There is no doubt that Fiennes will be able to portray Snow in the movie just as intimidating and coldhearted as fans have imagined him to be. Hulu Elle Fanning as Effie Trinket The most recent casting announcement has been Elle Fanning as the Capitol mentor Effie Trinket. Fanning was actually who many fans suggested should play the role, and it seems like the Hunger Games producers that request seriously. Fanning is the sister of the actress Dakota Fanning and has been in a number of popular films including A Complete Unknown, Maleficent, and The Great TV series.  Effie is a constant character throughout the original series (where she is played by Elizabeth Banks onscreen), and in Sunrise on the Reaping, we get to see how she obtained her position in District 12 and her first meeting with her fellow mentor Haymitch. Effie is sympathetic toward the district kids, but the Capitol propaganda prevents her from fully understanding their struggles. She thinks it’s sad they have to go into the Hunger Games but believes it’s necessary to keep the peace. Fanning will have to play the naïve and extravagant character who has a very ignorant outlook toward the real world. HBO Kieran Culkin as Caesar Flickerman  Caesar Flickerman is the charismatic entertainer and showman we see in the original trilogy interviewing the tributes before they enter the arena. In Sunrise on the Reaping, we get to see more of a younger Caesar conducting interviews before the 50th Hunger Games, but we also get some insight into how he can manipulate and sell a certain narrative to the Capitol audience. The character was previously played by Stanley Tucci who completely transformed himself into the role and really brought the preening media personality to life. And now Kieran Culkin has been cast for the upcoming prequel where he will get the chance to commit to the same eccentric hair, makeup, and outfits that Tucci made iconic.  Culkin is a seasoned actor and will almost certainly be up for the challenge. After all, he just won an Oscar for A Real Pain, and before that he won an Emmy (and was nominated for several more) due to his turn as Roman Roy on HBO’s Succession. Of course for a whole generation of movie watchers, he will always be Fuller from Home Alone. Molly McCann as Louella McCoy and Iona Bell as Lou Lou Louella and Lou Lou are two very similar looking characters who will each have to play very different roles. Louella will be played by Molly McCann who will have to play the sweet, innocent girl who Haymitch vows to protect when she is reaped in the Hunger Games at just 13. McCann is a young Irish actress who has already been a part of 19 projects, including movies and TV shows, and nominated for an Irish Film and TV award in 2021.  On the other hand, Iona Bell is cast as Lou Lou, who is an unknown girl from District 11 who was tortured by the Capitol and has been driven to almost insanity as a result. Bell is a British actress who has only been a part of one project before this casting. The teenage actress is currently filming in a few independent films, as well as a movie with Taika Waititi (Fing!) which will come out later this year. Her character in Sunrise on the Reaping is an odd one, but you can’t help but sympathize with her because of what she’s been through. 

Succession star Kieran Culkin has secured the part of a young Caesar Flickerman in Lionsgate’s The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping movie adaptation, following months of rumors.Lionsgate confirmed the news on X/Twitter today, confirming that Culkin would indeed appear as The Hunger Games’ colorful and eccentric TV host in next year’s book-to-movie adaptation. The mystery of who would play Caesar Flickerman has had readers’ heads spinning since rumors began to swirl earlier this year. Now that the fancast has been officially confirmed, all eyes are on Lionsgate to bring its prequel to life.Sunrise on the Reaping is yet another prequel adaptation for eager Hunger Games readers. It takes place after 2023’s The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes and long before the events of the Jennifer Lawrence-led Hunger Games movies that premiered throughout the 2010s. Stanley Tucci was prominently featured as Caesar Flickerman in the film series that finished its story in 2015, leaving Culkin with big shoes to fill as he preps to play a younger version of the character.“Kieran’s scene-stealing presence and undeniable charm are perfect for Caesar Flickerman, the sickeningly watchable host of Panem’s darkest spectacle,” Lionsgate Motion Picture Group Co-President Erin Westerman said in a statement. “Stanley Tucci made Caesar unforgettable—and now Kieran will make the role entirely his own.”Culkin has left a massive mark on TV and film in the last few years thanks to his roles as characters like Roman Roy in Succession and Benji Kaplan in last year’s A Real Pain (which won Culkin a BAFTA Award, a Golden Globe Award, and an Academy Award). Movie fans may also recognize Culkin from his time as a child actor in films like 1991’s Father of the Bride as well as 1990’s Home Alone, where he appeared alongside his brother, Macaulay Culkin. Kieran’s recent time in the spotlight has seen him build a career off of his quick wit, making his casting as The Hunger Games’ dystopian TV host in Sunrise on the Reaping feel like a match made in heaven.The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping’s release date is currently set for November 20, 2026. When it brings Suzanne Collins’ novel of the same name to the big screen, viewers can expect to see Culkin star alongside Ralph Fiennes (Conclave, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows) as President Coriolanus Snow, Elle Fanning (Super 8) as Effie Trinket, Jesse Plemons (Civil War, Breaking Bad) as Plutarch Heavensbee, Joseph Zada (Total Control) as Haymitch Abernathy, and more.Michael Cripe is a freelance contributor with IGN. He's best known for his work at sites like The Pitch, The Escapist, and OnlySP. Be sure to give him a follow on Bluesky (@mikecripe.bsky.social) and Twitter (@MikeCripe).