• IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029

    IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029

    By John P. Mello Jr.
    June 11, 2025 5:00 AM PT

    IBM unveiled its plan to build IBM Quantum Starling, shown in this rendering. Starling is expected to be the first large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum system.ADVERTISEMENT
    Enterprise IT Lead Generation Services
    Fuel Your Pipeline. Close More Deals. Our full-service marketing programs deliver sales-ready leads. 100% Satisfaction Guarantee! Learn more.

    IBM revealed Tuesday its roadmap for bringing a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer, IBM Quantum Starling, online by 2029, which is significantly earlier than many technologists thought possible.
    The company predicts that when its new Starling computer is up and running, it will be capable of performing 20,000 times more operations than today’s quantum computers — a computational state so vast it would require the memory of more than a quindecillionof the world’s most powerful supercomputers to represent.
    “IBM is charting the next frontier in quantum computing,” Big Blue CEO Arvind Krishna said in a statement. “Our expertise across mathematics, physics, and engineering is paving the way for a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer — one that will solve real-world challenges and unlock immense possibilities for business.”
    IBM’s plan to deliver a fault-tolerant quantum system by 2029 is ambitious but not implausible, especially given the rapid pace of its quantum roadmap and past milestones, observed Ensar Seker, CISO at SOCRadar, a threat intelligence company in Newark, Del.
    “They’ve consistently met or exceeded their qubit scaling goals, and their emphasis on modularity and error correction indicates they’re tackling the right challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld. “However, moving from thousands to millions of physical qubits with sufficient fidelity remains a steep climb.”
    A qubit is the fundamental unit of information in quantum computing, capable of representing a zero, a one, or both simultaneously due to quantum superposition. In practice, fault-tolerant quantum computers use clusters of physical qubits working together to form a logical qubit — a more stable unit designed to store quantum information and correct errors in real time.
    Realistic Roadmap
    Luke Yang, an equity analyst with Morningstar Research Services in Chicago, believes IBM’s roadmap is realistic. “The exact scale and error correction performance might still change between now and 2029, but overall, the goal is reasonable,” he told TechNewsWorld.
    “Given its reliability and professionalism, IBM’s bold claim should be taken seriously,” said Enrique Solano, co-CEO and co-founder of Kipu Quantum, a quantum algorithm company with offices in Berlin and Karlsruhe, Germany.
    “Of course, it may also fail, especially when considering the unpredictability of hardware complexities involved,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but companies like IBM exist for such challenges, and we should all be positively impressed by its current achievements and promised technological roadmap.”
    Tim Hollebeek, vice president of industry standards at DigiCert, a global digital security company, added: “IBM is a leader in this area, and not normally a company that hypes their news. This is a fast-moving industry, and success is certainly possible.”
    “IBM is attempting to do something that no one has ever done before and will almost certainly run into challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but at this point, it is largely an engineering scaling exercise, not a research project.”
    “IBM has demonstrated consistent progress, has committed billion over five years to quantum computing, and the timeline is within the realm of technical feasibility,” noted John Young, COO of Quantum eMotion, a developer of quantum random number generator technology, in Saint-Laurent, Quebec, Canada.
    “That said,” he told TechNewsWorld, “fault-tolerant in a practical, industrial sense is a very high bar.”
    Solving the Quantum Error Correction Puzzle
    To make a quantum computer fault-tolerant, errors need to be corrected so large workloads can be run without faults. In a quantum computer, errors are reduced by clustering physical qubits to form logical qubits, which have lower error rates than the underlying physical qubits.
    “Error correction is a challenge,” Young said. “Logical qubits require thousands of physical qubits to function reliably. That’s a massive scaling issue.”
    IBM explained in its announcement that creating increasing numbers of logical qubits capable of executing quantum circuits with as few physical qubits as possible is critical to quantum computing at scale. Until today, a clear path to building such a fault-tolerant system without unrealistic engineering overhead has not been published.

    Alternative and previous gold-standard, error-correcting codes present fundamental engineering challenges, IBM continued. To scale, they would require an unfeasible number of physical qubits to create enough logical qubits to perform complex operations — necessitating impractical amounts of infrastructure and control electronics. This renders them unlikely to be implemented beyond small-scale experiments and devices.
    In two research papers released with its roadmap, IBM detailed how it will overcome the challenges of building the large-scale, fault-tolerant architecture needed for a quantum computer.
    One paper outlines the use of quantum low-density parity checkcodes to reduce physical qubit overhead. The other describes methods for decoding errors in real time using conventional computing.
    According to IBM, a practical fault-tolerant quantum architecture must:

    Suppress enough errors for useful algorithms to succeed
    Prepare and measure logical qubits during computation
    Apply universal instructions to logical qubits
    Decode measurements from logical qubits in real time and guide subsequent operations
    Scale modularly across hundreds or thousands of logical qubits
    Be efficient enough to run meaningful algorithms using realistic energy and infrastructure resources

    Aside from the technological challenges that quantum computer makers are facing, there may also be some market challenges. “Locating suitable use cases for quantum computers could be the biggest challenge,” Morningstar’s Yang maintained.
    “Only certain computing workloads, such as random circuit sampling, can fully unleash the computing power of quantum computers and show their advantage over the traditional supercomputers we have now,” he said. “However, workloads like RCS are not very commercially useful, and we believe commercial relevance is one of the key factors that determine the total market size for quantum computers.”
    Q-Day Approaching Faster Than Expected
    For years now, organizations have been told they need to prepare for “Q-Day” — the day a quantum computer will be able to crack all the encryption they use to keep their data secure. This IBM announcement suggests the window for action to protect data may be closing faster than many anticipated.
    “This absolutely adds urgency and credibility to the security expert guidance on post-quantum encryption being factored into their planning now,” said Dave Krauthamer, field CTO of QuSecure, maker of quantum-safe security solutions, in San Mateo, Calif.
    “IBM’s move to create a large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computer by 2029 is indicative of the timeline collapsing,” he told TechNewsWorld. “A fault-tolerant quantum computer of this magnitude could be well on the path to crack asymmetric ciphers sooner than anyone thinks.”

    “Security leaders need to take everything connected to post-quantum encryption as a serious measure and work it into their security plans now — not later,” he said.
    Roger Grimes, a defense evangelist with KnowBe4, a security awareness training provider in Clearwater, Fla., pointed out that IBM is just the latest in a surge of quantum companies announcing quickly forthcoming computational breakthroughs within a few years.
    “It leads to the question of whether the U.S. government’s original PQCpreparation date of 2030 is still a safe date,” he told TechNewsWorld.
    “It’s starting to feel a lot more risky for any company to wait until 2030 to be prepared against quantum attacks. It also flies in the face of the latest cybersecurity EOthat relaxed PQC preparation rules as compared to Biden’s last EO PQC standard order, which told U.S. agencies to transition to PQC ASAP.”
    “Most US companies are doing zero to prepare for Q-Day attacks,” he declared. “The latest executive order seems to tell U.S. agencies — and indirectly, all U.S. businesses — that they have more time to prepare. It’s going to cause even more agencies and businesses to be less prepared during a time when it seems multiple quantum computing companies are making significant progress.”
    “It definitely feels that something is going to give soon,” he said, “and if I were a betting man, and I am, I would bet that most U.S. companies are going to be unprepared for Q-Day on the day Q-Day becomes a reality.”

    John P. Mello Jr. has been an ECT News Network reporter since 2003. His areas of focus include cybersecurity, IT issues, privacy, e-commerce, social media, artificial intelligence, big data and consumer electronics. He has written and edited for numerous publications, including the Boston Business Journal, the Boston Phoenix, Megapixel.Net and Government Security News. Email John.

    Leave a Comment

    Click here to cancel reply.
    Please sign in to post or reply to a comment. New users create a free account.

    Related Stories

    More by John P. Mello Jr.

    view all

    More in Emerging Tech
    #ibm #plans #largescale #faulttolerant #quantum
    IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029
    IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029 By John P. Mello Jr. June 11, 2025 5:00 AM PT IBM unveiled its plan to build IBM Quantum Starling, shown in this rendering. Starling is expected to be the first large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum system.ADVERTISEMENT Enterprise IT Lead Generation Services Fuel Your Pipeline. Close More Deals. Our full-service marketing programs deliver sales-ready leads. 100% Satisfaction Guarantee! Learn more. IBM revealed Tuesday its roadmap for bringing a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer, IBM Quantum Starling, online by 2029, which is significantly earlier than many technologists thought possible. The company predicts that when its new Starling computer is up and running, it will be capable of performing 20,000 times more operations than today’s quantum computers — a computational state so vast it would require the memory of more than a quindecillionof the world’s most powerful supercomputers to represent. “IBM is charting the next frontier in quantum computing,” Big Blue CEO Arvind Krishna said in a statement. “Our expertise across mathematics, physics, and engineering is paving the way for a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer — one that will solve real-world challenges and unlock immense possibilities for business.” IBM’s plan to deliver a fault-tolerant quantum system by 2029 is ambitious but not implausible, especially given the rapid pace of its quantum roadmap and past milestones, observed Ensar Seker, CISO at SOCRadar, a threat intelligence company in Newark, Del. “They’ve consistently met or exceeded their qubit scaling goals, and their emphasis on modularity and error correction indicates they’re tackling the right challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld. “However, moving from thousands to millions of physical qubits with sufficient fidelity remains a steep climb.” A qubit is the fundamental unit of information in quantum computing, capable of representing a zero, a one, or both simultaneously due to quantum superposition. In practice, fault-tolerant quantum computers use clusters of physical qubits working together to form a logical qubit — a more stable unit designed to store quantum information and correct errors in real time. Realistic Roadmap Luke Yang, an equity analyst with Morningstar Research Services in Chicago, believes IBM’s roadmap is realistic. “The exact scale and error correction performance might still change between now and 2029, but overall, the goal is reasonable,” he told TechNewsWorld. “Given its reliability and professionalism, IBM’s bold claim should be taken seriously,” said Enrique Solano, co-CEO and co-founder of Kipu Quantum, a quantum algorithm company with offices in Berlin and Karlsruhe, Germany. “Of course, it may also fail, especially when considering the unpredictability of hardware complexities involved,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but companies like IBM exist for such challenges, and we should all be positively impressed by its current achievements and promised technological roadmap.” Tim Hollebeek, vice president of industry standards at DigiCert, a global digital security company, added: “IBM is a leader in this area, and not normally a company that hypes their news. This is a fast-moving industry, and success is certainly possible.” “IBM is attempting to do something that no one has ever done before and will almost certainly run into challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but at this point, it is largely an engineering scaling exercise, not a research project.” “IBM has demonstrated consistent progress, has committed billion over five years to quantum computing, and the timeline is within the realm of technical feasibility,” noted John Young, COO of Quantum eMotion, a developer of quantum random number generator technology, in Saint-Laurent, Quebec, Canada. “That said,” he told TechNewsWorld, “fault-tolerant in a practical, industrial sense is a very high bar.” Solving the Quantum Error Correction Puzzle To make a quantum computer fault-tolerant, errors need to be corrected so large workloads can be run without faults. In a quantum computer, errors are reduced by clustering physical qubits to form logical qubits, which have lower error rates than the underlying physical qubits. “Error correction is a challenge,” Young said. “Logical qubits require thousands of physical qubits to function reliably. That’s a massive scaling issue.” IBM explained in its announcement that creating increasing numbers of logical qubits capable of executing quantum circuits with as few physical qubits as possible is critical to quantum computing at scale. Until today, a clear path to building such a fault-tolerant system without unrealistic engineering overhead has not been published. Alternative and previous gold-standard, error-correcting codes present fundamental engineering challenges, IBM continued. To scale, they would require an unfeasible number of physical qubits to create enough logical qubits to perform complex operations — necessitating impractical amounts of infrastructure and control electronics. This renders them unlikely to be implemented beyond small-scale experiments and devices. In two research papers released with its roadmap, IBM detailed how it will overcome the challenges of building the large-scale, fault-tolerant architecture needed for a quantum computer. One paper outlines the use of quantum low-density parity checkcodes to reduce physical qubit overhead. The other describes methods for decoding errors in real time using conventional computing. According to IBM, a practical fault-tolerant quantum architecture must: Suppress enough errors for useful algorithms to succeed Prepare and measure logical qubits during computation Apply universal instructions to logical qubits Decode measurements from logical qubits in real time and guide subsequent operations Scale modularly across hundreds or thousands of logical qubits Be efficient enough to run meaningful algorithms using realistic energy and infrastructure resources Aside from the technological challenges that quantum computer makers are facing, there may also be some market challenges. “Locating suitable use cases for quantum computers could be the biggest challenge,” Morningstar’s Yang maintained. “Only certain computing workloads, such as random circuit sampling, can fully unleash the computing power of quantum computers and show their advantage over the traditional supercomputers we have now,” he said. “However, workloads like RCS are not very commercially useful, and we believe commercial relevance is one of the key factors that determine the total market size for quantum computers.” Q-Day Approaching Faster Than Expected For years now, organizations have been told they need to prepare for “Q-Day” — the day a quantum computer will be able to crack all the encryption they use to keep their data secure. This IBM announcement suggests the window for action to protect data may be closing faster than many anticipated. “This absolutely adds urgency and credibility to the security expert guidance on post-quantum encryption being factored into their planning now,” said Dave Krauthamer, field CTO of QuSecure, maker of quantum-safe security solutions, in San Mateo, Calif. “IBM’s move to create a large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computer by 2029 is indicative of the timeline collapsing,” he told TechNewsWorld. “A fault-tolerant quantum computer of this magnitude could be well on the path to crack asymmetric ciphers sooner than anyone thinks.” “Security leaders need to take everything connected to post-quantum encryption as a serious measure and work it into their security plans now — not later,” he said. Roger Grimes, a defense evangelist with KnowBe4, a security awareness training provider in Clearwater, Fla., pointed out that IBM is just the latest in a surge of quantum companies announcing quickly forthcoming computational breakthroughs within a few years. “It leads to the question of whether the U.S. government’s original PQCpreparation date of 2030 is still a safe date,” he told TechNewsWorld. “It’s starting to feel a lot more risky for any company to wait until 2030 to be prepared against quantum attacks. It also flies in the face of the latest cybersecurity EOthat relaxed PQC preparation rules as compared to Biden’s last EO PQC standard order, which told U.S. agencies to transition to PQC ASAP.” “Most US companies are doing zero to prepare for Q-Day attacks,” he declared. “The latest executive order seems to tell U.S. agencies — and indirectly, all U.S. businesses — that they have more time to prepare. It’s going to cause even more agencies and businesses to be less prepared during a time when it seems multiple quantum computing companies are making significant progress.” “It definitely feels that something is going to give soon,” he said, “and if I were a betting man, and I am, I would bet that most U.S. companies are going to be unprepared for Q-Day on the day Q-Day becomes a reality.” John P. Mello Jr. has been an ECT News Network reporter since 2003. His areas of focus include cybersecurity, IT issues, privacy, e-commerce, social media, artificial intelligence, big data and consumer electronics. He has written and edited for numerous publications, including the Boston Business Journal, the Boston Phoenix, Megapixel.Net and Government Security News. Email John. Leave a Comment Click here to cancel reply. Please sign in to post or reply to a comment. New users create a free account. Related Stories More by John P. Mello Jr. view all More in Emerging Tech #ibm #plans #largescale #faulttolerant #quantum
    WWW.TECHNEWSWORLD.COM
    IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029
    IBM Plans Large-Scale Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer by 2029 By John P. Mello Jr. June 11, 2025 5:00 AM PT IBM unveiled its plan to build IBM Quantum Starling, shown in this rendering. Starling is expected to be the first large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum system. (Image Credit: IBM) ADVERTISEMENT Enterprise IT Lead Generation Services Fuel Your Pipeline. Close More Deals. Our full-service marketing programs deliver sales-ready leads. 100% Satisfaction Guarantee! Learn more. IBM revealed Tuesday its roadmap for bringing a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer, IBM Quantum Starling, online by 2029, which is significantly earlier than many technologists thought possible. The company predicts that when its new Starling computer is up and running, it will be capable of performing 20,000 times more operations than today’s quantum computers — a computational state so vast it would require the memory of more than a quindecillion (10⁴⁸) of the world’s most powerful supercomputers to represent. “IBM is charting the next frontier in quantum computing,” Big Blue CEO Arvind Krishna said in a statement. “Our expertise across mathematics, physics, and engineering is paving the way for a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer — one that will solve real-world challenges and unlock immense possibilities for business.” IBM’s plan to deliver a fault-tolerant quantum system by 2029 is ambitious but not implausible, especially given the rapid pace of its quantum roadmap and past milestones, observed Ensar Seker, CISO at SOCRadar, a threat intelligence company in Newark, Del. “They’ve consistently met or exceeded their qubit scaling goals, and their emphasis on modularity and error correction indicates they’re tackling the right challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld. “However, moving from thousands to millions of physical qubits with sufficient fidelity remains a steep climb.” A qubit is the fundamental unit of information in quantum computing, capable of representing a zero, a one, or both simultaneously due to quantum superposition. In practice, fault-tolerant quantum computers use clusters of physical qubits working together to form a logical qubit — a more stable unit designed to store quantum information and correct errors in real time. Realistic Roadmap Luke Yang, an equity analyst with Morningstar Research Services in Chicago, believes IBM’s roadmap is realistic. “The exact scale and error correction performance might still change between now and 2029, but overall, the goal is reasonable,” he told TechNewsWorld. “Given its reliability and professionalism, IBM’s bold claim should be taken seriously,” said Enrique Solano, co-CEO and co-founder of Kipu Quantum, a quantum algorithm company with offices in Berlin and Karlsruhe, Germany. “Of course, it may also fail, especially when considering the unpredictability of hardware complexities involved,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but companies like IBM exist for such challenges, and we should all be positively impressed by its current achievements and promised technological roadmap.” Tim Hollebeek, vice president of industry standards at DigiCert, a global digital security company, added: “IBM is a leader in this area, and not normally a company that hypes their news. This is a fast-moving industry, and success is certainly possible.” “IBM is attempting to do something that no one has ever done before and will almost certainly run into challenges,” he told TechNewsWorld, “but at this point, it is largely an engineering scaling exercise, not a research project.” “IBM has demonstrated consistent progress, has committed $30 billion over five years to quantum computing, and the timeline is within the realm of technical feasibility,” noted John Young, COO of Quantum eMotion, a developer of quantum random number generator technology, in Saint-Laurent, Quebec, Canada. “That said,” he told TechNewsWorld, “fault-tolerant in a practical, industrial sense is a very high bar.” Solving the Quantum Error Correction Puzzle To make a quantum computer fault-tolerant, errors need to be corrected so large workloads can be run without faults. In a quantum computer, errors are reduced by clustering physical qubits to form logical qubits, which have lower error rates than the underlying physical qubits. “Error correction is a challenge,” Young said. “Logical qubits require thousands of physical qubits to function reliably. That’s a massive scaling issue.” IBM explained in its announcement that creating increasing numbers of logical qubits capable of executing quantum circuits with as few physical qubits as possible is critical to quantum computing at scale. Until today, a clear path to building such a fault-tolerant system without unrealistic engineering overhead has not been published. Alternative and previous gold-standard, error-correcting codes present fundamental engineering challenges, IBM continued. To scale, they would require an unfeasible number of physical qubits to create enough logical qubits to perform complex operations — necessitating impractical amounts of infrastructure and control electronics. This renders them unlikely to be implemented beyond small-scale experiments and devices. In two research papers released with its roadmap, IBM detailed how it will overcome the challenges of building the large-scale, fault-tolerant architecture needed for a quantum computer. One paper outlines the use of quantum low-density parity check (qLDPC) codes to reduce physical qubit overhead. The other describes methods for decoding errors in real time using conventional computing. According to IBM, a practical fault-tolerant quantum architecture must: Suppress enough errors for useful algorithms to succeed Prepare and measure logical qubits during computation Apply universal instructions to logical qubits Decode measurements from logical qubits in real time and guide subsequent operations Scale modularly across hundreds or thousands of logical qubits Be efficient enough to run meaningful algorithms using realistic energy and infrastructure resources Aside from the technological challenges that quantum computer makers are facing, there may also be some market challenges. “Locating suitable use cases for quantum computers could be the biggest challenge,” Morningstar’s Yang maintained. “Only certain computing workloads, such as random circuit sampling [RCS], can fully unleash the computing power of quantum computers and show their advantage over the traditional supercomputers we have now,” he said. “However, workloads like RCS are not very commercially useful, and we believe commercial relevance is one of the key factors that determine the total market size for quantum computers.” Q-Day Approaching Faster Than Expected For years now, organizations have been told they need to prepare for “Q-Day” — the day a quantum computer will be able to crack all the encryption they use to keep their data secure. This IBM announcement suggests the window for action to protect data may be closing faster than many anticipated. “This absolutely adds urgency and credibility to the security expert guidance on post-quantum encryption being factored into their planning now,” said Dave Krauthamer, field CTO of QuSecure, maker of quantum-safe security solutions, in San Mateo, Calif. “IBM’s move to create a large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computer by 2029 is indicative of the timeline collapsing,” he told TechNewsWorld. “A fault-tolerant quantum computer of this magnitude could be well on the path to crack asymmetric ciphers sooner than anyone thinks.” “Security leaders need to take everything connected to post-quantum encryption as a serious measure and work it into their security plans now — not later,” he said. Roger Grimes, a defense evangelist with KnowBe4, a security awareness training provider in Clearwater, Fla., pointed out that IBM is just the latest in a surge of quantum companies announcing quickly forthcoming computational breakthroughs within a few years. “It leads to the question of whether the U.S. government’s original PQC [post-quantum cryptography] preparation date of 2030 is still a safe date,” he told TechNewsWorld. “It’s starting to feel a lot more risky for any company to wait until 2030 to be prepared against quantum attacks. It also flies in the face of the latest cybersecurity EO [Executive Order] that relaxed PQC preparation rules as compared to Biden’s last EO PQC standard order, which told U.S. agencies to transition to PQC ASAP.” “Most US companies are doing zero to prepare for Q-Day attacks,” he declared. “The latest executive order seems to tell U.S. agencies — and indirectly, all U.S. businesses — that they have more time to prepare. It’s going to cause even more agencies and businesses to be less prepared during a time when it seems multiple quantum computing companies are making significant progress.” “It definitely feels that something is going to give soon,” he said, “and if I were a betting man, and I am, I would bet that most U.S. companies are going to be unprepared for Q-Day on the day Q-Day becomes a reality.” John P. Mello Jr. has been an ECT News Network reporter since 2003. His areas of focus include cybersecurity, IT issues, privacy, e-commerce, social media, artificial intelligence, big data and consumer electronics. He has written and edited for numerous publications, including the Boston Business Journal, the Boston Phoenix, Megapixel.Net and Government Security News. Email John. Leave a Comment Click here to cancel reply. Please sign in to post or reply to a comment. New users create a free account. Related Stories More by John P. Mello Jr. view all More in Emerging Tech
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Probiotics can help heal ravaged coral reefs

    Get the Popular Science daily newsletter
    Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday.

    Probiotics are everywhere, claiming to help us poop, restore gut health, and more. They can also be used to help threatened coral reefs. A bacterial probiotic has helped slow the spread of stony coral tissue loss diseasein wild corals in Florida that were already infected with the disease. The findings are detailed in a study published June 5 in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science and show that applying this new probiotic treatment across coral colines helped prevent further tissue loss.
    What is stony coral tissue loss disease?
    SCTLD first emerged in Florida in 2014. In the 11 years since, it has rapidly spread throughout the Caribbean. This mysterious ailment has been confirmed in at least 20 other countries and territories.
    Other coral pathogens typically target specific species. SCTLD infects more than 30 different species of stony corals, including pillar corals and brain corals. The disease causes the soft tissue in the corals to slough off, leaving behind white patches of exposed skeleton. The disease can devastate an entire coral colony in only a few weeks to months. 
    A great star coralcolony infected with stony coral tissue lossdiseaseon the coral reef in Fort Lauderdale, FL. The lesion, where the white band of tissue occurs, typically moves across the coral, killing coral tissue along the way. CREDIT: KellyPitts, Smithsonian.
    The exact cause of SCTLD is still unknown, but it appears to be linked to some kind of harmful bacteria. Currently, the most common treatment for SCTLD is using a paste that contains the antibiotic amoxicillin on diseased corals. However, antibiotics are not a silver bullet. This amoxicillin balm can temporarily halt SCTLD’s spread, but it needs to be frequently reapplied to the lesions on the corals. This takes time and resources, while increasing the likelihood that the microbes causing SCTLD might develop resistance to amoxicillin and related antibiotics.
    “Antibiotics do not stop future outbreaks,” Valerie Paul, a study co-author and the head scientist at the Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce, Florida, said in a statement. “The disease can quickly come back, even on the same coral colonies that have been treated.”
    Finding the right probiotic
    Paul and her colleagues have spent over six years investigating whether beneficial microorganismscould be a longer lasting alternative to combat this pathogen.
    Just like humans, corals are host to communities known as microbiomes that are bustling with all different types of bacteria. Some of these miniscule organisms produce antioxidants and vitamins that can help keep their coral hosts healthy. 
    First, the team looked at the microbiomes of corals that are impervious to SCTLD to try and harvest probiotics from these disease-resistant species. In theory, these could be used to strengthen the microbiomes of susceptible corals. 
    They tested over 200 strains of bacteria from disease-resistant corals and published a study in 2023 about the probiotic Pseudoalteromonas sp. McH1-7. Taken from the great star coral, this probiotic produces several antibacterial compounds. Having such a stacked antibacterial toolbox made McH1-7 an ideal candidate to combat a pathogen like SCTLD.
    They initially tested McH1-7 on live pieces of M. cavernosa and found that the probiotic reliably prevented the spread of SCTLD in the lab. After these successful lab tests, the wild ocean called next.
    Testing in the ocean
    The team conducted several field tests on a shallow reef near Fort Lauderdale, focusing on 40 M. cavernosa colonies that showed signs of SCTLD. Some of the corals in these colonies received a paste containing the probiotic McH1-7 that was applied directly to the disease lesions. They treated the other corals with a solution of seawater containing McH1-7 and covered them using weighted plastic bags. The probiotics were administered inside the bag in order to cover the entire coral colony.  
    “This created a little mini-aquarium that kept the probiotics around each coral colony,” Paul said.
    For two and a half years, they monitored the colonies, taking multiple rounds of tissue and mucus samples to see how the corals’ microbiomes were changing over time. They found that  the McH1-7 probiotic successfully slowed the spread of SCTLD when it was delivered to the entire colony using the bag and solution method. According to the samples, the probiotic was effective without dominating the corals’ natural microbes. 
    Kelly Pitts, a research technician with the Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft. Pierce, Floridaand co-lead author of the study treats great star coralcolonies infected with SCTLD with probiotic strain McH1-7 by covering the coral colony in a plastic bag, injecting a probiotic bacteria solution into the bag and leaving the bag for two hours to allow for the bacteria to colonize on the coral. CREDIT: Hunter Noren.
    Fighting nature with nature
    While using this probiotic appears to be an effective treatment for SCTLD among the reefs of northern Florida, additional work is needed to see how it could work in other regions. Similar tests on reefs in the Florida Keys have been conducted, with mixed preliminary results, likely due to regional differences in SCTLD.
    The team believes that probiotics still could become a crucial tool for combatting SCTLD across the Caribbean, especially as scientists fine tune how to administer them. Importantly, these beneficial bacteria support what corals already do naturally. 
    “Corals are naturally rich with bacteria and it’s not surprising that the bacterial composition is important for their health,” Paul said. “We’re trying to figure out which bacteria can make these vibrant microbiomes even stronger.”
    #probiotics #can #help #heal #ravaged
    Probiotics can help heal ravaged coral reefs
    Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. Probiotics are everywhere, claiming to help us poop, restore gut health, and more. They can also be used to help threatened coral reefs. A bacterial probiotic has helped slow the spread of stony coral tissue loss diseasein wild corals in Florida that were already infected with the disease. The findings are detailed in a study published June 5 in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science and show that applying this new probiotic treatment across coral colines helped prevent further tissue loss. What is stony coral tissue loss disease? SCTLD first emerged in Florida in 2014. In the 11 years since, it has rapidly spread throughout the Caribbean. This mysterious ailment has been confirmed in at least 20 other countries and territories. Other coral pathogens typically target specific species. SCTLD infects more than 30 different species of stony corals, including pillar corals and brain corals. The disease causes the soft tissue in the corals to slough off, leaving behind white patches of exposed skeleton. The disease can devastate an entire coral colony in only a few weeks to months.  A great star coralcolony infected with stony coral tissue lossdiseaseon the coral reef in Fort Lauderdale, FL. The lesion, where the white band of tissue occurs, typically moves across the coral, killing coral tissue along the way. CREDIT: KellyPitts, Smithsonian. The exact cause of SCTLD is still unknown, but it appears to be linked to some kind of harmful bacteria. Currently, the most common treatment for SCTLD is using a paste that contains the antibiotic amoxicillin on diseased corals. However, antibiotics are not a silver bullet. This amoxicillin balm can temporarily halt SCTLD’s spread, but it needs to be frequently reapplied to the lesions on the corals. This takes time and resources, while increasing the likelihood that the microbes causing SCTLD might develop resistance to amoxicillin and related antibiotics. “Antibiotics do not stop future outbreaks,” Valerie Paul, a study co-author and the head scientist at the Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce, Florida, said in a statement. “The disease can quickly come back, even on the same coral colonies that have been treated.” Finding the right probiotic Paul and her colleagues have spent over six years investigating whether beneficial microorganismscould be a longer lasting alternative to combat this pathogen. Just like humans, corals are host to communities known as microbiomes that are bustling with all different types of bacteria. Some of these miniscule organisms produce antioxidants and vitamins that can help keep their coral hosts healthy.  First, the team looked at the microbiomes of corals that are impervious to SCTLD to try and harvest probiotics from these disease-resistant species. In theory, these could be used to strengthen the microbiomes of susceptible corals.  They tested over 200 strains of bacteria from disease-resistant corals and published a study in 2023 about the probiotic Pseudoalteromonas sp. McH1-7. Taken from the great star coral, this probiotic produces several antibacterial compounds. Having such a stacked antibacterial toolbox made McH1-7 an ideal candidate to combat a pathogen like SCTLD. They initially tested McH1-7 on live pieces of M. cavernosa and found that the probiotic reliably prevented the spread of SCTLD in the lab. After these successful lab tests, the wild ocean called next. Testing in the ocean The team conducted several field tests on a shallow reef near Fort Lauderdale, focusing on 40 M. cavernosa colonies that showed signs of SCTLD. Some of the corals in these colonies received a paste containing the probiotic McH1-7 that was applied directly to the disease lesions. They treated the other corals with a solution of seawater containing McH1-7 and covered them using weighted plastic bags. The probiotics were administered inside the bag in order to cover the entire coral colony.   “This created a little mini-aquarium that kept the probiotics around each coral colony,” Paul said. For two and a half years, they monitored the colonies, taking multiple rounds of tissue and mucus samples to see how the corals’ microbiomes were changing over time. They found that  the McH1-7 probiotic successfully slowed the spread of SCTLD when it was delivered to the entire colony using the bag and solution method. According to the samples, the probiotic was effective without dominating the corals’ natural microbes.  Kelly Pitts, a research technician with the Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft. Pierce, Floridaand co-lead author of the study treats great star coralcolonies infected with SCTLD with probiotic strain McH1-7 by covering the coral colony in a plastic bag, injecting a probiotic bacteria solution into the bag and leaving the bag for two hours to allow for the bacteria to colonize on the coral. CREDIT: Hunter Noren. Fighting nature with nature While using this probiotic appears to be an effective treatment for SCTLD among the reefs of northern Florida, additional work is needed to see how it could work in other regions. Similar tests on reefs in the Florida Keys have been conducted, with mixed preliminary results, likely due to regional differences in SCTLD. The team believes that probiotics still could become a crucial tool for combatting SCTLD across the Caribbean, especially as scientists fine tune how to administer them. Importantly, these beneficial bacteria support what corals already do naturally.  “Corals are naturally rich with bacteria and it’s not surprising that the bacterial composition is important for their health,” Paul said. “We’re trying to figure out which bacteria can make these vibrant microbiomes even stronger.” #probiotics #can #help #heal #ravaged
    WWW.POPSCI.COM
    Probiotics can help heal ravaged coral reefs
    Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. Probiotics are everywhere, claiming to help us poop, restore gut health, and more. They can also be used to help threatened coral reefs. A bacterial probiotic has helped slow the spread of stony coral tissue loss disease (SCTLD) in wild corals in Florida that were already infected with the disease. The findings are detailed in a study published June 5 in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science and show that applying this new probiotic treatment across coral colines helped prevent further tissue loss. What is stony coral tissue loss disease (SCTLD)? SCTLD first emerged in Florida in 2014. In the 11 years since, it has rapidly spread throughout the Caribbean. This mysterious ailment has been confirmed in at least 20 other countries and territories. Other coral pathogens typically target specific species. SCTLD infects more than 30 different species of stony corals, including pillar corals and brain corals. The disease causes the soft tissue in the corals to slough off, leaving behind white patches of exposed skeleton. The disease can devastate an entire coral colony in only a few weeks to months.  A great star coral (Montastraea cavernosa) colony infected with stony coral tissue lossdisease (SCTLD) on the coral reef in Fort Lauderdale, FL. The lesion, where the white band of tissue occurs, typically moves across the coral, killing coral tissue along the way. CREDIT: KellyPitts, Smithsonian. The exact cause of SCTLD is still unknown, but it appears to be linked to some kind of harmful bacteria. Currently, the most common treatment for SCTLD is using a paste that contains the antibiotic amoxicillin on diseased corals. However, antibiotics are not a silver bullet. This amoxicillin balm can temporarily halt SCTLD’s spread, but it needs to be frequently reapplied to the lesions on the corals. This takes time and resources, while increasing the likelihood that the microbes causing SCTLD might develop resistance to amoxicillin and related antibiotics. “Antibiotics do not stop future outbreaks,” Valerie Paul, a study co-author and the head scientist at the Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce, Florida, said in a statement. “The disease can quickly come back, even on the same coral colonies that have been treated.” Finding the right probiotic Paul and her colleagues have spent over six years investigating whether beneficial microorganisms (aka probiotics) could be a longer lasting alternative to combat this pathogen. Just like humans, corals are host to communities known as microbiomes that are bustling with all different types of bacteria. Some of these miniscule organisms produce antioxidants and vitamins that can help keep their coral hosts healthy.  First, the team looked at the microbiomes of corals that are impervious to SCTLD to try and harvest probiotics from these disease-resistant species. In theory, these could be used to strengthen the microbiomes of susceptible corals.  They tested over 200 strains of bacteria from disease-resistant corals and published a study in 2023 about the probiotic Pseudoalteromonas sp. McH1-7 (or McH1-7 for short). Taken from the great star coral (Montastraea cavernosa), this probiotic produces several antibacterial compounds. Having such a stacked antibacterial toolbox made McH1-7 an ideal candidate to combat a pathogen like SCTLD. They initially tested McH1-7 on live pieces of M. cavernosa and found that the probiotic reliably prevented the spread of SCTLD in the lab. After these successful lab tests, the wild ocean called next. Testing in the ocean The team conducted several field tests on a shallow reef near Fort Lauderdale, focusing on 40 M. cavernosa colonies that showed signs of SCTLD. Some of the corals in these colonies received a paste containing the probiotic McH1-7 that was applied directly to the disease lesions. They treated the other corals with a solution of seawater containing McH1-7 and covered them using weighted plastic bags. The probiotics were administered inside the bag in order to cover the entire coral colony.   “This created a little mini-aquarium that kept the probiotics around each coral colony,” Paul said. For two and a half years, they monitored the colonies, taking multiple rounds of tissue and mucus samples to see how the corals’ microbiomes were changing over time. They found that  the McH1-7 probiotic successfully slowed the spread of SCTLD when it was delivered to the entire colony using the bag and solution method. According to the samples, the probiotic was effective without dominating the corals’ natural microbes.  Kelly Pitts, a research technician with the Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft. Pierce, Floridaand co-lead author of the study treats great star coral (Montaststraea cavernosa) colonies infected with SCTLD with probiotic strain McH1-7 by covering the coral colony in a plastic bag, injecting a probiotic bacteria solution into the bag and leaving the bag for two hours to allow for the bacteria to colonize on the coral. CREDIT: Hunter Noren. Fighting nature with nature While using this probiotic appears to be an effective treatment for SCTLD among the reefs of northern Florida, additional work is needed to see how it could work in other regions. Similar tests on reefs in the Florida Keys have been conducted, with mixed preliminary results, likely due to regional differences in SCTLD. The team believes that probiotics still could become a crucial tool for combatting SCTLD across the Caribbean, especially as scientists fine tune how to administer them. Importantly, these beneficial bacteria support what corals already do naturally.  “Corals are naturally rich with bacteria and it’s not surprising that the bacterial composition is important for their health,” Paul said. “We’re trying to figure out which bacteria can make these vibrant microbiomes even stronger.”
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    203
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • NUS researchers 3D print self-powered photonic skin for underwater communication and safety

    Researchers from the National University of Singaporehave developed a 3D printed, self-powered mechanoluminescentphotonic skin designed for communication and safety monitoring in underwater environments. The stretchable device emits light in response to mechanical deformation, requires no external power source, and remains functional under conditions such as high salinity and extreme temperatures.
    The findings were published in Advanced Materials by Xiaolu Sun, Shaohua Ling, Zhihang Qin, Jinrun Zhou, Quangang Shi, Zhuangjian Liu, and Yu Jun Tan. The research was conducted at NUS and Singapore’s Agency for Science, Technology and Research.
    Schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    3D printing stretchable light-emitting skins with auxetic geometry
    The photonic skin was produced using a 3D printing method called direct-ink-writing, which involves extruding a specially formulated ink through a fine nozzle to build up complex structures layer by layer. In this case, the ink was made by mixing tiny particles of zinc sulfide doped with copper, a material that glows when stretched, with a flexible silicone rubber. These particles serve as the active ingredient that lights up when the material is deformed, while the silicone acts as a soft, stretchable support structure.
    To make the device more adaptable to movement and curved surfaces, like human skin or underwater equipment, the researchers printed it using auxetic designs. Auxetic structures have a rare mechanical property known as a negative Poisson’s ratio. Unlike most materials, which become thinner when stretched, auxetic designs expand laterally under tension. This makes them ideal for conforming to curved or irregular surfaces, such as joints, flexible robots, or underwater gear, without wrinkling or detaching.
    Encapsulating the printed skin in a clear silicone layer further improves performance by distributing mechanical stress evenly. This prevents localized tearing and ensures that the light emission remains bright and uniform, even after 10,000 cycles of stretching and relaxing. In previous stretchable light-emitting devices, uneven stress often led to dimming, flickering, or early material failure.
    Mechanical and optical performance of encapsulated photonic skin across 10,000 stretch cycles. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    Underwater signaling, robotics, and gas leak detection
    The team demonstrated multiple applications for the photonic skin. When integrated into wearable gloves, the skin enabled light-based Morse code communication through simple finger gestures. Bending one or more fingers activated the mechanoluminescence, emitting visible flashes that corresponded to messages such as “UP,” “OK,” or “SOS.” The system remained fully functional when submerged in cold water, simulating deep-sea conditions.
    In a separate test, the skin was applied to a gas tank mock-up to monitor for leaks. A pinhole defect was covered with the printed skin and sealed using stretchable tape. When pressurized air escaped through the leak, the localized mechanical force caused a bright cyan glow at the exact leak site, offering a passive, electronics-free alternative to conventional gas sensors.
    To test performance on soft and mobile platforms, the researchers also mounted the photonic skin onto a robotic fish. As the robot swam through water tanks at different temperatures, the skin continued to light up reliably, demonstrating its resilience and utility for marine robotics.
    Comparison of printed photonic skin structures with different geometries and their conformability to complex surfaces. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    Toward electronics-free underwater communication
    While LEDs and optical fibers are widely used in underwater lighting systems, their dependence on rigid form factors and external power makes them unsuitable for dynamic, flexible applications. In contrast, the stretchable ML photonic skin developed by NUS researchers provides a self-powered, adaptable alternative for diver signaling, robotic inspection, and leak detection, potentially transforming the toolkit for underwater communication and safety systems.
    Future directions include enhanced sensory integration and robotic applications, as the team continues exploring robust photonic systems for extreme environments.
    Photonic skin integrated into gloves for Morse code signaling and applied to robotic fish and gas tanks for underwater safety monitoring. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    The rise of 3D printed multifunctional materials
    The development of the photonic skin reflects a broader trend in additive manufacturing toward multifunctional materials, structures that serve more than a structural role. Researchers are increasingly using multimaterial 3D printing to embed sensing, actuation, and signaling functions directly into devices. For example, recent work by SUSTech and City University of Hong Kong on thick-panel origami structures showed how multimaterial printing can enable large, foldable systems with high strength and motion control. These and other advances, including conductive FDM processes and Lithoz’s multimaterial ceramic tools, mark a shift toward printing entire systems. The NUS photonic skin fits squarely within this movement, combining mechanical adaptability, environmental durability, and real-time optical output into a single printable form.
    Read the full article in Advanced Materials
    Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news.
    You can also follow us onLinkedIn and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry YouTube channel to access more exclusive content. At 3DPI, our mission is to deliver high-quality journalism, technical insight, and industry intelligence to professionals across the AM ecosystem.Help us shape the future of 3D printing industry news with our2025 reader survey.
    Featured image shows a schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    #nus #researchers #print #selfpowered #photonic
    NUS researchers 3D print self-powered photonic skin for underwater communication and safety
    Researchers from the National University of Singaporehave developed a 3D printed, self-powered mechanoluminescentphotonic skin designed for communication and safety monitoring in underwater environments. The stretchable device emits light in response to mechanical deformation, requires no external power source, and remains functional under conditions such as high salinity and extreme temperatures. The findings were published in Advanced Materials by Xiaolu Sun, Shaohua Ling, Zhihang Qin, Jinrun Zhou, Quangang Shi, Zhuangjian Liu, and Yu Jun Tan. The research was conducted at NUS and Singapore’s Agency for Science, Technology and Research. Schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. 3D printing stretchable light-emitting skins with auxetic geometry The photonic skin was produced using a 3D printing method called direct-ink-writing, which involves extruding a specially formulated ink through a fine nozzle to build up complex structures layer by layer. In this case, the ink was made by mixing tiny particles of zinc sulfide doped with copper, a material that glows when stretched, with a flexible silicone rubber. These particles serve as the active ingredient that lights up when the material is deformed, while the silicone acts as a soft, stretchable support structure. To make the device more adaptable to movement and curved surfaces, like human skin or underwater equipment, the researchers printed it using auxetic designs. Auxetic structures have a rare mechanical property known as a negative Poisson’s ratio. Unlike most materials, which become thinner when stretched, auxetic designs expand laterally under tension. This makes them ideal for conforming to curved or irregular surfaces, such as joints, flexible robots, or underwater gear, without wrinkling or detaching. Encapsulating the printed skin in a clear silicone layer further improves performance by distributing mechanical stress evenly. This prevents localized tearing and ensures that the light emission remains bright and uniform, even after 10,000 cycles of stretching and relaxing. In previous stretchable light-emitting devices, uneven stress often led to dimming, flickering, or early material failure. Mechanical and optical performance of encapsulated photonic skin across 10,000 stretch cycles. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. Underwater signaling, robotics, and gas leak detection The team demonstrated multiple applications for the photonic skin. When integrated into wearable gloves, the skin enabled light-based Morse code communication through simple finger gestures. Bending one or more fingers activated the mechanoluminescence, emitting visible flashes that corresponded to messages such as “UP,” “OK,” or “SOS.” The system remained fully functional when submerged in cold water, simulating deep-sea conditions. In a separate test, the skin was applied to a gas tank mock-up to monitor for leaks. A pinhole defect was covered with the printed skin and sealed using stretchable tape. When pressurized air escaped through the leak, the localized mechanical force caused a bright cyan glow at the exact leak site, offering a passive, electronics-free alternative to conventional gas sensors. To test performance on soft and mobile platforms, the researchers also mounted the photonic skin onto a robotic fish. As the robot swam through water tanks at different temperatures, the skin continued to light up reliably, demonstrating its resilience and utility for marine robotics. Comparison of printed photonic skin structures with different geometries and their conformability to complex surfaces. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. Toward electronics-free underwater communication While LEDs and optical fibers are widely used in underwater lighting systems, their dependence on rigid form factors and external power makes them unsuitable for dynamic, flexible applications. In contrast, the stretchable ML photonic skin developed by NUS researchers provides a self-powered, adaptable alternative for diver signaling, robotic inspection, and leak detection, potentially transforming the toolkit for underwater communication and safety systems. Future directions include enhanced sensory integration and robotic applications, as the team continues exploring robust photonic systems for extreme environments. Photonic skin integrated into gloves for Morse code signaling and applied to robotic fish and gas tanks for underwater safety monitoring. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. The rise of 3D printed multifunctional materials The development of the photonic skin reflects a broader trend in additive manufacturing toward multifunctional materials, structures that serve more than a structural role. Researchers are increasingly using multimaterial 3D printing to embed sensing, actuation, and signaling functions directly into devices. For example, recent work by SUSTech and City University of Hong Kong on thick-panel origami structures showed how multimaterial printing can enable large, foldable systems with high strength and motion control. These and other advances, including conductive FDM processes and Lithoz’s multimaterial ceramic tools, mark a shift toward printing entire systems. The NUS photonic skin fits squarely within this movement, combining mechanical adaptability, environmental durability, and real-time optical output into a single printable form. Read the full article in Advanced Materials Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news. You can also follow us onLinkedIn and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry YouTube channel to access more exclusive content. At 3DPI, our mission is to deliver high-quality journalism, technical insight, and industry intelligence to professionals across the AM ecosystem.Help us shape the future of 3D printing industry news with our2025 reader survey. Featured image shows a schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. #nus #researchers #print #selfpowered #photonic
    3DPRINTINGINDUSTRY.COM
    NUS researchers 3D print self-powered photonic skin for underwater communication and safety
    Researchers from the National University of Singapore (NUS) have developed a 3D printed, self-powered mechanoluminescent (ML) photonic skin designed for communication and safety monitoring in underwater environments. The stretchable device emits light in response to mechanical deformation, requires no external power source, and remains functional under conditions such as high salinity and extreme temperatures. The findings were published in Advanced Materials by Xiaolu Sun, Shaohua Ling, Zhihang Qin, Jinrun Zhou, Quangang Shi, Zhuangjian Liu, and Yu Jun Tan. The research was conducted at NUS and Singapore’s Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR). Schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. 3D printing stretchable light-emitting skins with auxetic geometry The photonic skin was produced using a 3D printing method called direct-ink-writing (DIW), which involves extruding a specially formulated ink through a fine nozzle to build up complex structures layer by layer. In this case, the ink was made by mixing tiny particles of zinc sulfide doped with copper (ZnS:Cu), a material that glows when stretched, with a flexible silicone rubber. These particles serve as the active ingredient that lights up when the material is deformed, while the silicone acts as a soft, stretchable support structure. To make the device more adaptable to movement and curved surfaces, like human skin or underwater equipment, the researchers printed it using auxetic designs. Auxetic structures have a rare mechanical property known as a negative Poisson’s ratio. Unlike most materials, which become thinner when stretched, auxetic designs expand laterally under tension. This makes them ideal for conforming to curved or irregular surfaces, such as joints, flexible robots, or underwater gear, without wrinkling or detaching. Encapsulating the printed skin in a clear silicone layer further improves performance by distributing mechanical stress evenly. This prevents localized tearing and ensures that the light emission remains bright and uniform, even after 10,000 cycles of stretching and relaxing. In previous stretchable light-emitting devices, uneven stress often led to dimming, flickering, or early material failure. Mechanical and optical performance of encapsulated photonic skin across 10,000 stretch cycles. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. Underwater signaling, robotics, and gas leak detection The team demonstrated multiple applications for the photonic skin. When integrated into wearable gloves, the skin enabled light-based Morse code communication through simple finger gestures. Bending one or more fingers activated the mechanoluminescence, emitting visible flashes that corresponded to messages such as “UP,” “OK,” or “SOS.” The system remained fully functional when submerged in cold water (~7°C), simulating deep-sea conditions. In a separate test, the skin was applied to a gas tank mock-up to monitor for leaks. A pinhole defect was covered with the printed skin and sealed using stretchable tape. When pressurized air escaped through the leak, the localized mechanical force caused a bright cyan glow at the exact leak site, offering a passive, electronics-free alternative to conventional gas sensors. To test performance on soft and mobile platforms, the researchers also mounted the photonic skin onto a robotic fish. As the robot swam through water tanks at different temperatures (24°C, 50°C, and 7°C), the skin continued to light up reliably, demonstrating its resilience and utility for marine robotics. Comparison of printed photonic skin structures with different geometries and their conformability to complex surfaces. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. Toward electronics-free underwater communication While LEDs and optical fibers are widely used in underwater lighting systems, their dependence on rigid form factors and external power makes them unsuitable for dynamic, flexible applications. In contrast, the stretchable ML photonic skin developed by NUS researchers provides a self-powered, adaptable alternative for diver signaling, robotic inspection, and leak detection, potentially transforming the toolkit for underwater communication and safety systems. Future directions include enhanced sensory integration and robotic applications, as the team continues exploring robust photonic systems for extreme environments. Photonic skin integrated into gloves for Morse code signaling and applied to robotic fish and gas tanks for underwater safety monitoring. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials. The rise of 3D printed multifunctional materials The development of the photonic skin reflects a broader trend in additive manufacturing toward multifunctional materials, structures that serve more than a structural role. Researchers are increasingly using multimaterial 3D printing to embed sensing, actuation, and signaling functions directly into devices. For example, recent work by SUSTech and City University of Hong Kong on thick-panel origami structures showed how multimaterial printing can enable large, foldable systems with high strength and motion control. These and other advances, including conductive FDM processes and Lithoz’s multimaterial ceramic tools, mark a shift toward printing entire systems. The NUS photonic skin fits squarely within this movement, combining mechanical adaptability, environmental durability, and real-time optical output into a single printable form. Read the full article in Advanced Materials Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news. You can also follow us onLinkedIn and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry YouTube channel to access more exclusive content. At 3DPI, our mission is to deliver high-quality journalism, technical insight, and industry intelligence to professionals across the AM ecosystem.Help us shape the future of 3D printing industry news with our2025 reader survey. Featured image shows a schematic of the 3D printed mechanoluminescent photonic skin showing fabrication steps and light emission under deformation. Image via Sun et al., Advanced Materials.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    192
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • TikTok is working again

    TikTok is back online after a brief outage last night. Many people started reporting problems with the platform just after 11PM ET, noting that while TikTok wasn’t completely offline, it was definitely dealing with some kind of technical issues that impacted users trying to access the service and view video comments.

    Based on reports from Reddit, Twitter, Bluesky, and looking at our own devices, some videos were able to load in TikTok’s mobile apps, but accessing other features like comments or switching between accounts wasn’t working reliably, leading some users to wonder if their accounts were banned. Trying to pull up the TikTok website, or even its support pages, displayed a message saying “An error occurred while processing your request” along with a reference code.

    TikTok didn’t make any public acknowledgement about the outage or what was causing it. At the time, status pages for some of its service providers, like Akamai and Oracle, didn’t indicate any wider problems. Downdetector listed 44,000 reports at our last check before regular service was restored at around 12AM ET, so while it’s unclear what was behind the technical issues, at least everything was restored swiftly.

    Update, June 3rd: The TikTok outage has now been resolved.
    #tiktok #working #again
    TikTok is working again
    TikTok is back online after a brief outage last night. Many people started reporting problems with the platform just after 11PM ET, noting that while TikTok wasn’t completely offline, it was definitely dealing with some kind of technical issues that impacted users trying to access the service and view video comments. Based on reports from Reddit, Twitter, Bluesky, and looking at our own devices, some videos were able to load in TikTok’s mobile apps, but accessing other features like comments or switching between accounts wasn’t working reliably, leading some users to wonder if their accounts were banned. Trying to pull up the TikTok website, or even its support pages, displayed a message saying “An error occurred while processing your request” along with a reference code. TikTok didn’t make any public acknowledgement about the outage or what was causing it. At the time, status pages for some of its service providers, like Akamai and Oracle, didn’t indicate any wider problems. Downdetector listed 44,000 reports at our last check before regular service was restored at around 12AM ET, so while it’s unclear what was behind the technical issues, at least everything was restored swiftly. Update, June 3rd: The TikTok outage has now been resolved. #tiktok #working #again
    WWW.THEVERGE.COM
    TikTok is working again
    TikTok is back online after a brief outage last night. Many people started reporting problems with the platform just after 11PM ET, noting that while TikTok wasn’t completely offline, it was definitely dealing with some kind of technical issues that impacted users trying to access the service and view video comments. Based on reports from Reddit, Twitter, Bluesky, and looking at our own devices, some videos were able to load in TikTok’s mobile apps, but accessing other features like comments or switching between accounts wasn’t working reliably, leading some users to wonder if their accounts were banned. Trying to pull up the TikTok website, or even its support pages, displayed a message saying “An error occurred while processing your request” along with a reference code. TikTok didn’t make any public acknowledgement about the outage or what was causing it. At the time, status pages for some of its service providers, like Akamai and Oracle, didn’t indicate any wider problems. Downdetector listed 44,000 reports at our last check before regular service was restored at around 12AM ET, so while it’s unclear what was behind the technical issues, at least everything was restored swiftly. Update, June 3rd: The TikTok outage has now been resolved.
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • [Automaton] “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” NIS believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t

    amara
    Member

    Nov 23, 2021

    5,532

    “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” Nippon Ichi Software believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t - AUTOMATON WEST

    Nippon Ichi Software’s new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talk about the company’s policy when it comes to making new IPs.

    automaton-media.com

    Disgaea series developer Nippon Ichi Softwareheld a live program in March during which it announced six new titles slated for launch in 2025 and 2026. Except for Fuuraiki 5 – the latest entry in the Fuuraiki travel game series – all of the announced projects were brand-new IPs, which NIS fans were happy to see. In a recent interview with Famitsu, Nippon Ichi Software's new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talked about the company's policy when it comes to making new IPs amidst the rising costs of development and risk of failure.

    From a business perspective, Saruhashi notes, making a sequel is the easier option for game companies, as you can predict sales and profit margins more reliably. "But in our case, we're more driven by whether our fans want a sequel or. If there's demand for, we'll make it."

    On the other hand, making new IPs seems like a non-negotiable for NIS, as Saruhashi comments, "On the flip side, if we were to stop taking on new challenges, we would be like a fish out of water – I think we'd die." Although it may sound dramatic, there is a sound strategy behind this – Saruhashi explains that with NIS being a mid-size company, its survival depends on daring to do the things big companies can't risk trying. This approach has worked for them too, as projects like Yomawarifound their audiences and turned out successful.

    That said, NIS isn't managing to miraculously avoid the issue of rising development costs – in the face of financial constraints, the company is limiting budgets for its more experimental titles and relying on its devs to come up with creative workarounds. Interestingly, Mizokami comments that even if she were suddenly given a multi-million budget to work with, she'd "probably get bored halfway through," preferring the thrill of problem-solving that comes with working on a tight budget. In contrast to triple-A game development, Saruhashi and Mizokami refer to NIS's approach as "speedrun/real-time attck-style game development."
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

     

    RGB
    Member

    Nov 13, 2017

    814

    On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D.
     

    Desma
    "This guy are sick"
    Member

    Oct 27, 2017

    6,779

    Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least.

    Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2. 

    t26
    Avenger

    Oct 27, 2017

    5,380

    Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs?
     

    robotnikus
    Member

    Oct 24, 2023

    693

    t26 said:

    Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs?

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Hope so.
     

    Theswweet
    RPG Site
    Verified

    Oct 25, 2017

    7,293

    California

    Desma said:

    Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least.

    Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part. 

    Desma
    "This guy are sick"
    Member

    Oct 27, 2017

    6,779

    Theswweet said:

    Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up
     

    Theswweet
    RPG Site
    Verified

    Oct 25, 2017

    7,293

    California

    Desma said:

    Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    I mean, I know no less than 4 people who worked at Geofront that are currently salaried NISA employees, if I recall correctly. 

    Shard Shinjuku
    Member

    Oct 25, 2017

    31,607

    Tampa

    There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive.
     

    Last edited: Today at 12:58 AM

    Pyro
    God help us the mods are making weekend threads
    Member

    Jul 30, 2018

    18,913

    United States

    It is a shame that most new ideas have come from small indies to mid-tier games for... a long ass time now. Over a decade? Even with new IPs made in the PS4 generation, I struggle to think of many that are breaking new ground or just original to the point of feeling that way.
     

    Ckoerner
    Member

    Aug 7, 2019

    979

    RGB said:

    On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO.
     

    CladInShadows
    Member

    May 2, 2024

    301

    I really hope they make another Labyrinth game
     

    RGB
    Member

    Nov 13, 2017

    814

    Ckoerner said:

    Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Definitely better than six, but it's not the most positive thing that I can't remember if I even finished the story.

    Ultimately even if I thought it was potentially cool on paper the automation stuff wasn't for me, especially in the post game. In six, at least, maybe it works better in seven?

    For reference my personal high bar for post game would be five or four depending on the day you asked. 

    Liam Allen-Miller
    Member

    Nov 2, 2017

    8,023

    Shibuya

    It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all.
     

    Chev
    Member

    Mar 1, 2021

    848

    Shard Shinjuku said:

    There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Yeah, but they do try new IPs all the time too.
     

    Strings
    Member

    Oct 27, 2017

    34,620

    Liam Allen-Miller said:

    It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass.
     

    Liam Allen-Miller
    Member

    Nov 2, 2017

    8,023

    Shibuya

    Strings said:

    Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass.

    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Certainly! My frustration is on both sides of the equation. Like they actually go to the effort to make lots of new stuff and for one reason or another very few make it. :didnt even localize stella abyss i thought it looked decent

    everything else yeah just kind of mediocre 
    #automaton #dont #make #new #ips
    [Automaton] “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” NIS believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t
    amara Member Nov 23, 2021 5,532 “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” Nippon Ichi Software believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t - AUTOMATON WEST Nippon Ichi Software’s new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talk about the company’s policy when it comes to making new IPs. automaton-media.com Disgaea series developer Nippon Ichi Softwareheld a live program in March during which it announced six new titles slated for launch in 2025 and 2026. Except for Fuuraiki 5 – the latest entry in the Fuuraiki travel game series – all of the announced projects were brand-new IPs, which NIS fans were happy to see. In a recent interview with Famitsu, Nippon Ichi Software's new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talked about the company's policy when it comes to making new IPs amidst the rising costs of development and risk of failure. From a business perspective, Saruhashi notes, making a sequel is the easier option for game companies, as you can predict sales and profit margins more reliably. "But in our case, we're more driven by whether our fans want a sequel or. If there's demand for, we'll make it." On the other hand, making new IPs seems like a non-negotiable for NIS, as Saruhashi comments, "On the flip side, if we were to stop taking on new challenges, we would be like a fish out of water – I think we'd die." Although it may sound dramatic, there is a sound strategy behind this – Saruhashi explains that with NIS being a mid-size company, its survival depends on daring to do the things big companies can't risk trying. This approach has worked for them too, as projects like Yomawarifound their audiences and turned out successful. That said, NIS isn't managing to miraculously avoid the issue of rising development costs – in the face of financial constraints, the company is limiting budgets for its more experimental titles and relying on its devs to come up with creative workarounds. Interestingly, Mizokami comments that even if she were suddenly given a multi-million budget to work with, she'd "probably get bored halfway through," preferring the thrill of problem-solving that comes with working on a tight budget. In contrast to triple-A game development, Saruhashi and Mizokami refer to NIS's approach as "speedrun/real-time attck-style game development." Click to expand... Click to shrink...   RGB Member Nov 13, 2017 814 On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D.   Desma "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,779 Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least. Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2.  t26 Avenger Oct 27, 2017 5,380 Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs?   robotnikus Member Oct 24, 2023 693 t26 said: Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Hope so.   Theswweet RPG Site Verified Oct 25, 2017 7,293 California Desma said: Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least. Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part.  Desma "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,779 Theswweet said: Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up   Theswweet RPG Site Verified Oct 25, 2017 7,293 California Desma said: Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up Click to expand... Click to shrink... I mean, I know no less than 4 people who worked at Geofront that are currently salaried NISA employees, if I recall correctly.  Shard Shinjuku Member Oct 25, 2017 31,607 Tampa There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive.   Last edited: Today at 12:58 AM Pyro God help us the mods are making weekend threads Member Jul 30, 2018 18,913 United States It is a shame that most new ideas have come from small indies to mid-tier games for... a long ass time now. Over a decade? Even with new IPs made in the PS4 generation, I struggle to think of many that are breaking new ground or just original to the point of feeling that way.   Ckoerner Member Aug 7, 2019 979 RGB said: On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO.   CladInShadows Member May 2, 2024 301 I really hope they make another Labyrinth game   RGB Member Nov 13, 2017 814 Ckoerner said: Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Definitely better than six, but it's not the most positive thing that I can't remember if I even finished the story. Ultimately even if I thought it was potentially cool on paper the automation stuff wasn't for me, especially in the post game. In six, at least, maybe it works better in seven? For reference my personal high bar for post game would be five or four depending on the day you asked.  Liam Allen-Miller Member Nov 2, 2017 8,023 Shibuya It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all.   Chev Member Mar 1, 2021 848 Shard Shinjuku said: There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yeah, but they do try new IPs all the time too.   Strings Member Oct 27, 2017 34,620 Liam Allen-Miller said: It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass.   Liam Allen-Miller Member Nov 2, 2017 8,023 Shibuya Strings said: Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Certainly! My frustration is on both sides of the equation. Like they actually go to the effort to make lots of new stuff and for one reason or another very few make it. :didnt even localize stella abyss i thought it looked decent everything else yeah just kind of mediocre  #automaton #dont #make #new #ips
    WWW.RESETERA.COM
    [Automaton] “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” NIS believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t
    amara Member Nov 23, 2021 5,532 “If we don’t make new IPs, we’ll die,” Nippon Ichi Software believes mid-size developers need to do what the big guns can’t - AUTOMATON WEST Nippon Ichi Software’s new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talk about the company’s policy when it comes to making new IPs. automaton-media.com Disgaea series developer Nippon Ichi Software (NIS) held a live program in March during which it announced six new titles slated for launch in 2025 and 2026. Except for Fuuraiki 5 – the latest entry in the Fuuraiki travel game series – all of the announced projects were brand-new IPs, which NIS fans were happy to see. In a recent interview with Famitsu, Nippon Ichi Software's new CEO Kenzo Saruhashi and Yomawari series creator Yu Mizokami talked about the company's policy when it comes to making new IPs amidst the rising costs of development and risk of failure. From a business perspective, Saruhashi notes, making a sequel is the easier option for game companies, as you can predict sales and profit margins more reliably. "But in our case, we're more driven by whether our fans want a sequel or. If there's demand for, we'll make it." On the other hand, making new IPs seems like a non-negotiable for NIS, as Saruhashi comments, "On the flip side, if we were to stop taking on new challenges, we would be like a fish out of water – I think we'd die." Although it may sound dramatic, there is a sound strategy behind this – Saruhashi explains that with NIS being a mid-size company, its survival depends on daring to do the things big companies can't risk trying. This approach has worked for them too, as projects like Yomawari (which director Mizokami describes as "a big risk") found their audiences and turned out successful. That said, NIS isn't managing to miraculously avoid the issue of rising development costs – in the face of financial constraints, the company is limiting budgets for its more experimental titles and relying on its devs to come up with creative workarounds. Interestingly, Mizokami comments that even if she were suddenly given a multi-million budget to work with, she'd "probably get bored halfway through," preferring the thrill of problem-solving that comes with working on a tight budget. In contrast to triple-A game development, Saruhashi and Mizokami refer to NIS's approach as "speedrun/real-time attck-style game development." Click to expand... Click to shrink...   RGB Member Nov 13, 2017 814 On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D.   Desma "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,779 Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least. Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2.  t26 Avenger Oct 27, 2017 5,380 Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs?   robotnikus Member Oct 24, 2023 693 t26 said: Will the new CEO consider localizing their VNs? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Hope so.   Theswweet RPG Site Verified Oct 25, 2017 7,293 California Desma said: Niikawa used to talk like that, so the company's in good hands at least. Just wonder what happened to their localizations. They completely stopped last year except PB2. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part.  Desma "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,779 Theswweet said: Last I heard NISA's localization teams are now focused around their Falcom releases for the most part. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up   Theswweet RPG Site Verified Oct 25, 2017 7,293 California Desma said: Yeah, no doubt they put everybody on Trails to catch up Click to expand... Click to shrink... I mean, I know no less than 4 people who worked at Geofront that are currently salaried NISA employees, if I recall correctly.  Shard Shinjuku Member Oct 25, 2017 31,607 Tampa There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive.   Last edited: Today at 12:58 AM Pyro God help us the mods are making weekend threads Member Jul 30, 2018 18,913 United States It is a shame that most new ideas have come from small indies to mid-tier games for... a long ass time now. Over a decade? Even with new IPs made in the PS4 generation, I struggle to think of many that are breaking new ground or just original to the point of feeling that way (e.g. Death Stranding).   Ckoerner Member Aug 7, 2019 979 RGB said: On the one hand, I applaud the sentiment. But on the other. I just want a good Disgaea from them if they can build upon the rocky start moving to 3D. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO.   CladInShadows Member May 2, 2024 301 I really hope they make another Labyrinth game   RGB Member Nov 13, 2017 814 Ckoerner said: Seven was good. Worth playing IMHO. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Definitely better than six, but it's not the most positive thing that I can't remember if I even finished the story. Ultimately even if I thought it was potentially cool on paper the automation stuff wasn't for me, especially in the post game. In six, at least, maybe it works better in seven? For reference my personal high bar for post game would be five or four depending on the day you asked.  Liam Allen-Miller Member Nov 2, 2017 8,023 Shibuya It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all.   Chev Member Mar 1, 2021 848 Shard Shinjuku said: There is a certain irony here given NIS needs to rely on Disgaea to survive. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yeah, but they do try new IPs all the time too.   Strings Member Oct 27, 2017 34,620 Liam Allen-Miller said: It's frustrating that NIS has legit taken so many stabs at new IPs but hardly anything has landed at all. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass.   Liam Allen-Miller Member Nov 2, 2017 8,023 Shibuya Strings said: Iunno, it's hard to be positive about the games even if they're new IP. Bar Stella Abyss, Monster Menu, Poison Control, etc are all just kinda ass. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Certainly! My frustration is on both sides of the equation (consumers letting down the great stuff, the poorer stuff letting down themselves). Like they actually go to the effort to make lots of new stuff and for one reason or another very few make it. :(   Rum&coke Member May 19, 2025 97 Is Labyrinth of Refrain the last good new IP NIS made?   hyjonx Member Nov 27, 2022 328 they (NISA) didnt even localize stella abyss i thought it looked decent everything else yeah just kind of mediocre 
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • This giant microwave may change the future of war

    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back. 

    Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night.

    “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023.

    Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required. 

    While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year.

    The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side.

    Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up. 

    That’s where Epirus comes in. 

    When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific. 

    Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon. 

    Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software.

    The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS

    Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes.

    I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency. 

    On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls.

    Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives.

    Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.”

    Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality. 

    Why zap?

    Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says.

    He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating. 

    Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers. 

    As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat.

    Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them.

    The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones.

    In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control.

    But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available.Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added.

    The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly. 

    EPIRUS

    Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo.

    As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing lessafter it downs the first wave of a swarm.

    Raytheon’s radar, reversed

    Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget.

    Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense.

    Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC. 

    While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world.

    From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS

    Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep.By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances.

    Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away. 

    The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well.

    Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project.

    Waiting for the starting gun

    On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap. 

    Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend. 

    The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.” 

    But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.”

    And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.” 

    The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats. 

    Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones. 

    Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS

    While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018.

    “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.”

    The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy. 

    While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan. 

    The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024. 

    It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade. 

    While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UASunfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.” 

    And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out.

    Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS

    In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan.

    Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langleythey’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’”

    “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.” 

    Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times.

    This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official. 
    #this #giant #microwave #change #future
    This giant microwave may change the future of war
    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back.  Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night. “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023. Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required.  While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year. The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side. Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up.  That’s where Epirus comes in.  When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific.  Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon.  Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software. The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes. I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency.  On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls. Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.” Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality.  Why zap? Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says. He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating.  Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers.  As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat. Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them. The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones. In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control. But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available.Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added. The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly.  EPIRUS Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo. As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing lessafter it downs the first wave of a swarm. Raytheon’s radar, reversed Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget. Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense. Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC.  While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world. From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep.By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances. Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away.  The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well. Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project. Waiting for the starting gun On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap.  Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend.  The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.”  But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.” And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.”  The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats.  Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones.  Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018. “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.” The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy.  While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan.  The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024.  It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade.  While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UASunfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.”  And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan. Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langleythey’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’” “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.”  Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times. This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official.  #this #giant #microwave #change #future
    WWW.TECHNOLOGYREVIEW.COM
    This giant microwave may change the future of war
    Imagine: China deploys hundreds of thousands of autonomous drones in the air, on the sea, and under the water—all armed with explosive warheads or small missiles. These machines descend in a swarm toward military installations on Taiwan and nearby US bases, and over the course of a few hours, a single robotic blitzkrieg overwhelms the US Pacific force before it can even begin to fight back.  Maybe it sounds like a new Michael Bay movie, but it’s the scenario that keeps the chief technology officer of the US Army up at night. “I’m hesitant to say it out loud so I don’t manifest it,” says Alex Miller, a longtime Army intelligence official who became the CTO to the Army’s chief of staff in 2023. Even if World War III doesn’t break out in the South China Sea, every US military installation around the world is vulnerable to the same tactics—as are the militaries of every other country around the world. The proliferation of cheap drones means just about any group with the wherewithal to assemble and launch a swarm could wreak havoc, no expensive jets or massive missile installations required.  While the US has precision missiles that can shoot these drones down, they don’t always succeed: A drone attack killed three US soldiers and injured dozens more at a base in the Jordanian desert last year. And each American missile costs orders of magnitude more than its targets, which limits their supply; countering thousand-dollar drones with missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars per shot can only work for so long, even with a defense budget that could reach a trillion dollars next year. The US armed forces are now hunting for a solution—and they want it fast. Every branch of the service and a host of defense tech startups are testing out new weapons that promise to disable drones en masse. There are drones that slam into other drones like battering rams; drones that shoot out nets to ensnare quadcopter propellers; precision-guided Gatling guns that simply shoot drones out of the sky; electronic approaches, like GPS jammers and direct hacking tools; and lasers that melt holes clear through a target’s side. Then there are the microwaves: high-powered electronic devices that push out kilowatts of power to zap the circuits of a drone as if it were the tinfoil you forgot to take off your leftovers when you heated them up.  That’s where Epirus comes in.  When I went to visit the HQ of this 185-person startup in Torrance, California, earlier this year, I got a behind-the-scenes look at its massive microwave, called Leonidas, which the US Army is already betting on as a cutting-edge anti-drone weapon. The Army awarded Epirus a $66 million contract in early 2023, topped that up with another $17 million last fall, and is currently deploying a handful of the systems for testing with US troops in the Middle East and the Pacific. (The Army won’t get into specifics on the location of the weapons in the Middle East but published a report of a live-fire test in the Philippines in early May.)  Up close, the Leonidas that Epirus built for the Army looks like a two-foot-thick slab of metal the size of a garage door stuck on a swivel mount. Pop the back cover, and you can see that the slab is filled with dozens of individual microwave amplifier units in a grid. Each is about the size of a safe-deposit box and built around a chip made of gallium nitride, a semiconductor that can survive much higher voltages and temperatures than the typical silicon.  Leonidas sits on top of a trailer that a standard-issue Army truck can tow, and when it is powered on, the company’s software tells the grid of amps and antennas to shape the electromagnetic waves they’re blasting out with a phased array, precisely overlapping the microwave signals to mold the energy into a focused beam. Instead of needing to physically point a gun or parabolic dish at each of a thousand incoming drones, the Leonidas can flick between them at the speed of software. The Leonidas contains dozens of microwave amplifier units and can pivot to direct waves at incoming swarms of drones.EPIRUS Of course, this isn’t magic—there are practical limits on how much damage one array can do, and at what range—but the total effect could be described as an electromagnetic pulse emitter, a death ray for electronics, or a force field that could set up a protective barrier around military installations and drop drones the way a bug zapper fizzles a mob of mosquitoes. I walked through the nonclassified sections of the Leonidas factory floor, where a cluster of engineers working on weaponeering—the military term for figuring out exactly how much of a weapon, be it high explosive or microwave beam, is necessary to achieve a desired effect—ran tests in a warren of smaller anechoic rooms. Inside, they shot individual microwave units at a broad range of commercial and military drones, cycling through waveforms and power levels to try to find the signal that could fry each one with maximum efficiency.  On a live video feed from inside one of these foam-padded rooms, I watched a quadcopter drone spin its propellers and then, once the microwave emitter turned on, instantly stop short—first the propeller on the front left and then the rest. A drone hit with a Leonidas beam doesn’t explode—it just falls. Compared with the blast of a missile or the sizzle of a laser, it doesn’t look like much. But it could force enemies to come up with costlier ways of attacking that reduce the advantage of the drone swarm, and it could get around the inherent limitations of purely electronic or strictly physical defense systems. It could save lives. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery, a tall guy with sparkplug energy and a rapid-fire southern Illinois twang, doesn’t shy away from talking big about his product. As he told me during my visit, Leonidas is intended to lead a last stand, like the Spartan from whom the microwave takes its name—in this case, against hordes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. While the actual range of the Leonidas system is kept secret, Lowery says the Army is looking for a solution that can reliably stop drones within a few kilometers. He told me, “They would like our system to be the owner of that final layer—to get any squeakers, any leakers, anything like that.” Now that they’ve told the world they “invented a force field,” Lowery added, the focus is on manufacturing at scale—before the drone swarms really start to descend or a nation with a major military decides to launch a new war. Before, in other words, Miller’s nightmare scenario becomes reality.  Why zap? Miller remembers well when the danger of small weaponized drones first appeared on his radar. Reports of Islamic State fighters strapping grenades to the bottom of commercial DJI Phantom quadcopters first emerged in late 2016 during the Battle of Mosul. “I went, ‘Oh, this is going to be bad,’ because basically it’s an airborne IED at that point,” he says. He’s tracked the danger as it’s built steadily since then, with advances in machine vision, AI coordination software, and suicide drone tactics only accelerating.  Then the war in Ukraine showed the world that cheap technology has fundamentally changed how warfare happens. We have watched in high-definition video how a cheap, off-the-shelf drone modified to carry a small bomb can be piloted directly into a faraway truck, tank, or group of troops to devastating effect. And larger suicide drones, also known as “loitering munitions,” can be produced for just tens of thousands of dollars and launched in massive salvos to hit soft targets or overwhelm more advanced military defenses through sheer numbers.  As a result, Miller, along with large swaths of the Pentagon and DC policy circles, believes that the current US arsenal for defending against these weapons is just too expensive and the tools in too short supply to truly match the threat. Just look at Yemen, a poor country where the Houthi military group has been under constant attack for the past decade. Armed with this new low-tech arsenal, in the past 18 months the rebel group has been able to bomb cargo ships and effectively disrupt global shipping in the Red Sea—part of an effort to apply pressure on Israel to stop its war in Gaza. The Houthis have also used missiles, suicide drones, and even drone boats to launch powerful attacks on US Navy ships sent to stop them. The most successful defense tech firm selling anti-drone weapons to the US military right now is Anduril, the company started by Palmer Luckey, the inventor of the Oculus VR headset, and a crew of cofounders from Oculus and defense data giant Palantir. In just the past few months, the Marines have chosen Anduril for counter-drone contracts that could be worth nearly $850 million over the next decade, and the company has been working with Special Operations Command since 2022 on a counter-drone contract that could be worth nearly a billion dollars over a similar time frame. It’s unclear from the contracts what, exactly, Anduril is selling to each organization, but its weapons include electronic warfare jammers, jet-powered drone bombs, and propeller-driven Anvil drones designed to simply smash into enemy drones. In this arsenal, the cheapest way to stop a swarm of drones is electronic warfare: jamming the GPS or radio signals used to pilot the machines. But the intense drone battles in Ukraine have advanced the art of jamming and counter-jamming close to the point of stalemate. As a result, a new state of the art is emerging: unjammable drones that operate autonomously by using onboard processors to navigate via internal maps and computer vision, or even drones connected with 20-kilometer-long filaments of fiber-optic cable for tethered control. But unjammable doesn’t mean unzappable. Instead of using the scrambling method of a jammer, which employs an antenna to block the drone’s connection to a pilot or remote guidance system, the Leonidas microwave beam hits a drone body broadside. The energy finds its way into something electrical, whether the central flight controller or a tiny wire controlling a flap on a wing, to short-circuit whatever’s available. (The company also says that this targeted hit of energy allows birds and other wildlife to continue to move safely.) Tyler Miller, a senior systems engineer on Epirus’s weaponeering team, told me that they never know exactly which part of the target drone is going to go down first, but they’ve reliably seen the microwave signal get in somewhere to overload a circuit. “Based on the geometry and the way the wires are laid out,” he said, one of those wires is going to be the best path in. “Sometimes if we rotate the drone 90 degrees, you have a different motor go down first,” he added. The team has even tried wrapping target drones in copper tape, which would theoretically provide shielding, only to find that the microwave still finds a way in through moving propeller shafts or antennas that need to remain exposed for the drone to fly.  EPIRUS Leonidas also has an edge when it comes to downing a mass of drones at once. Physically hitting a drone out of the sky or lighting it up with a laser can be effective in situations where electronic warfare fails, but anti-drone drones can only take out one at a time, and lasers need to precisely aim and shoot. Epirus’s microwaves can damage everything in a roughly 60-degree arc from the Leonidas emitter simultaneously and keep on zapping and zapping; directed energy systems like this one never run out of ammo. As for cost, each Army Leonidas unit currently runs in the “low eight figures,” Lowery told me. Defense contract pricing can be opaque, but Epirus delivered four units for its $66 million initial contract, giving a back-of-napkin price around $16.5 million each. For comparison, Stinger missiles from Raytheon, which soldiers shoot at enemy aircraft or drones from a shoulder-mounted launcher, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, meaning the Leonidas could start costing less (and keep shooting) after it downs the first wave of a swarm. Raytheon’s radar, reversed Epirus is part of a new wave of venture-capital-backed defense companies trying to change the way weapons are created—and the way the Pentagon buys them. The largest defense companies, firms like Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin, typically develop new weapons in response to research grants and cost-plus contracts, in which the US Department of Defense guarantees a certain profit margin to firms building products that match their laundry list of technical specifications. These programs have kept the military supplied with cutting-edge weapons for decades, but the results may be exquisite pieces of military machinery delivered years late and billions of dollars over budget. Rather than building to minutely detailed specs, the new crop of military contractors aim to produce products on a quick time frame to solve a problem and then fine-tune them as they pitch to the military. The model, pioneered by Palantir and SpaceX, has since propelled companies like Anduril, Shield AI, and dozens of other smaller startups into the business of war as venture capital piles tens of billions of dollars into defense. Like Anduril, Epirus has direct Palantir roots; it was cofounded by Joe Lonsdale, who also cofounded Palantir, and John Tenet, Lonsdale’s colleague at the time at his venture fund, 8VC. (Tenet, the son of former CIA director George Tenet, may have inspired the company’s name—the elder Tenet’s parents were born in the Epirus region in the northwest of Greece. But the company more often says it’s a reference to the pseudo-mythological Epirus Bow from the 2011 fantasy action movie Immortals, which never runs out of arrows.)  While Epirus is doing business in the new mode, its roots are in the old—specifically in Raytheon, a pioneer in the field of microwave technology. Cofounded by MIT professor Vannevar Bush in 1922, it manufactured vacuum tubes, like those found in old radios. But the company became synonymous with electronic defense during World War II, when Bush spun up a lab to develop early microwave radar technology invented by the British into a workable product, and Raytheon then began mass-producing microwave tubes—known as magnetrons—for the US war effort. By the end of the war in 1945, Raytheon was making 80% of the magnetrons powering Allied radar across the world. From padded foam chambers at the Epirus HQ, Leonidas devices can be safely tested on drones.EPIRUS Large tubes remained the best way to emit high-power microwaves for more than half a century, handily outperforming silicon-based solid-state amplifiers. They’re still around—the microwave on your kitchen counter runs on a vacuum tube magnetron. But tubes have downsides: They’re hot, they’re big, and they require upkeep. (In fact, the other microwave drone zapper currently in the Pentagon pipeline, the Tactical High-power Operational Responder, or THOR, still relies on a physical vacuum tube. It’s reported to be effective at downing drones in tests but takes up a whole shipping container and needs a dish antenna to zap its targets.) By the 2000s, new methods of building solid-state amplifiers out of materials like gallium nitride started to mature and were able to handle more power than silicon without melting or shorting out. The US Navy spent hundreds of millions of dollars on cutting-edge microwave contracts, one for a project at Raytheon called Next Generation Jammer—geared specifically toward designing a new way to make high-powered microwaves that work at extremely long distances. Lowery, the Epirus CEO, began his career working on nuclear reactors on Navy aircraft carriers before he became the chief engineer for Next Generation Jammer at Raytheon in 2010. There, he and his team worked on a system that relied on many of the same fundamentals that now power the Leonidas—using the same type of amplifier material and antenna setup to fry the electronics of a small target at much closer range rather than disrupting the radar of a target hundreds of miles away.  The similarity is not a coincidence: Two engineers from Next Generation Jammer helped launch Epirus in 2018. Lowery—who by then was working at the augmented-reality startup RealWear, which makes industrial smart glasses—joined Epirus in 2021 to run product development and was asked to take the top spot as CEO in 2023, as Leonidas became a fully formed machine. Much of the founding team has since departed for other projects, but Raytheon still runs through the company’s collective CV: ex-Raytheon radar engineer Matt Markel started in January as the new CTO, and Epirus’s chief engineer for defense, its VP of engineering, its VP of operations, and a number of employees all have Raytheon roots as well. Markel tells me that the Epirus way of working wouldn’t have flown at one of the big defense contractors: “They never would have tried spinning off the technology into a new application without a contract lined up.” The Epirus engineers saw the use case, raised money to start building Leonidas, and already had prototypes in the works before any military branch started awarding money to work on the project. Waiting for the starting gun On the wall of Lowery’s office are two mementos from testing days at an Army proving ground: a trophy wing from a larger drone, signed by the whole testing team, and a framed photo documenting the Leonidas’s carnage—a stack of dozens of inoperative drones piled up in a heap.  Despite what seems to have been an impressive test show, it’s still impossible from the outside to determine whether Epirus’s tech is ready to fully deliver if the swarms descend.  The Army would not comment specifically on the efficacy of any new weapons in testing or early deployment, including the Leonidas system. A spokesperson for the Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO, which is the subsection responsible for contracting with Epirus to date, would only say in a statement that it is “committed to developing and fielding innovative Directed Energy solutions to address evolving threats.”  But various high-ranking officers appear to be giving Epirus a public vote of confidence. The three-star general who runs RCCTO and oversaw the Leonidas testing last summer told Breaking Defense that “the system actually worked very well,” even if there was work to be done on “how the weapon system fits into the larger kill chain.” And when former secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, then the service’s highest-ranking civilian, gave a parting interview this past January, she mentioned Epirus in all but name, citing “one company” that is “using high-powered microwaves to basically be able to kill swarms of drones.” She called that kind of capability “critical for the Army.”  The Army isn’t the only branch interested in the microwave weapon. On Epirus’s factory floor when I visited, alongside the big beige Leonidases commissioned by the Army, engineers were building a smaller expeditionary version for the Marines, painted green, which it delivered in late April. Videos show that when it put some of its microwave emitters on a dock and tested them out for the Navy last summer, the microwaves left their targets dead in the water—successfully frying the circuits of outboard motors like the ones propelling Houthi drone boats.  Epirus is also currently working on an even smaller version of the Leonidas that can mount on top of the Army’s Stryker combat vehicles, and it’s testing out attaching a single microwave unit to a small airborne drone, which could work as a highly focused zapper to disable cars, data centers, or single enemy drones.  Epirus’s microwave technology is also being tested in devices smaller than the traditional Leonidas. EPIRUS While neither the Army nor the Navy has yet to announce a contract to start buying Epirus’s systems at scale, the company and its investors are actively preparing for the big orders to start rolling in. It raised $250 million in a funding round in early March to get ready to make as many Leonidases as possible in the coming years, adding to the more than $300 million it’s raised since opening its doors in 2018. “If you invent a force field that works,” Lowery boasts, “you really get a lot of attention.” The task for Epirus now, assuming that its main customers pull the trigger and start buying more Leonidases, is ramping up production while advancing the tech in its systems. Then there are the more prosaic problems of staffing, assembly, and testing at scale. For future generations, Lowery told me, the goal is refining the antenna design and integrating higher-powered microwave amplifiers to push the output into the tens of kilowatts, allowing for increased range and efficacy.  While this could be made harder by Trump’s global trade war, Lowery says he’s not worried about their supply chain; while China produces 98% of the world’s gallium, according to the US Geological Survey, and has choked off exports to the US, Epirus’s chip supplier uses recycled gallium from Japan.  The other outside challenge may be that Epirus isn’t the only company building a drone zapper. One of China’s state-owned defense companies has been working on its own anti-drone high-powered microwave weapon called the Hurricane, which it displayed at a major military show in late 2024.  It may be a sign that anti-electronics force fields will become common among the world’s militaries—and if so, the future of war is unlikely to go back to the status quo ante, and it might zag in a different direction yet again. But military planners believe it’s crucial for the US not to be left behind. So if it works as promised, Epirus could very well change the way that war will play out in the coming decade.  While Miller, the Army CTO, can’t speak directly to Epirus or any specific system, he will say that he believes anti-drone measures are going to have to become ubiquitous for US soldiers. “Counter-UAS [Unmanned Aircraft System] unfortunately is going to be like counter-IED,” he says. “It’s going to be every soldier’s job to think about UAS threats the same way it was to think about IEDs.”  And, he adds, it’s his job and his colleagues’ to make sure that tech so effective it works like “almost magic” is in the hands of the average rifleman. To that end, Lowery told me, Epirus is designing the Leonidas control system to work simply for troops, allowing them to identify a cluster of targets and start zapping with just a click of a button—but only extensive use in the field can prove that out. Epirus CEO Andy Lowery sees the Leonidas as providing a last line of defense against UAVs.EPIRUS In the not-too-distant future, Lowery says, this could mean setting up along the US-Mexico border. But the grandest vision for Epirus’s tech that he says he’s heard is for a city-scale Leonidas along the lines of a ballistic missile defense radar system called PAVE PAWS, which takes up an entire 105-foot-tall building and can detect distant nuclear missile launches. The US set up four in the 1980s, and Taiwan currently has one up on a mountain south of Taipei. Fill a similar-size building full of microwave emitters, and the beam could reach out “10 or 15 miles,” Lowery told me, with one sitting sentinel over Taipei in the north and another over Kaohsiung in the south of Taiwan. Riffing in Greek mythological mode, Lowery said of drones, “I call all these mischief makers. Whether they’re doing drugs or guns across the border or they’re flying over Langley [or] they’re spying on F-35s, they’re all like Icarus. You remember Icarus, with his wax wings? Flying all around—‘Nobody’s going to touch me, nobody’s going to ever hurt me.’” “We built one hell of a wax-wing melter.”  Sam Dean is a reporter focusing on business, tech, and defense. He is writing a book about the recent history of Silicon Valley returning to work with the Pentagon for Viking Press and covering the defense tech industry for a number of publications. Previously, he was a business reporter at the Los Angeles Times. This piece has been updated to clarify that Alex Miller is a civilian intelligence official. 
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life

    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant.“We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead, a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.”Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More:
    #openai #wants #chatgpt #super #assistant
    OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life
    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant.“We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead, a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.”Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More: #openai #wants #chatgpt #super #assistant
    WWW.THEVERGE.COM
    OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life
    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant. (Coincidentally, Apple is rumored to soon let iOS users also select Google’s Gemini for Siri queries. Meta AI just hit one billion users as well, thanks mostly to its many hooks in Instagram, WhatsApp, and Facebook.) “We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead (reasoning, multimodal), a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group at Amazon called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.” (He’s joining Anthropic’s corporate board, not the supervising board of its public benefit trust that can hire and fire corporate directors.)Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More:
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Harvard just fired a tenured professor for the first time in 80 years. Good.

    In the summer of 2023, I wrote about a shocking scandal at Harvard Business School: Star professor Francesca Gino had been accused of falsifying data in four of her published papers, with whispers there was falsification in others, too. A series of posts on Data Colada, a blog that focuses on research integrity, documented Gino’s apparent brazen data manipulation, which involved clearly changing study data to better support her hypotheses. This was a major accusation against a researcher at the top of her field, but Gino’s denials were unconvincing. She didn’t have a good explanation for what had gone wrong, asserting that maybe a research assistant had done it, even though she was the only author listed across all four of the falsified studies. Harvard put her on unpaid administrative leave and barred her from campus.The cherry on top? Gino’s main academic area of study was honesty in business.As I wrote at the time, my read of the evidence was that Gino had most likely committed fraud. That impression was only reinforced by her subsequent lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada authors. Gino complained that she’d been defamed and that Harvard hadn’t followed the right investigation process, but she didn’t offer any convincing explanation of how she’d ended up putting her name to paper after paper with fake data.This week, almost two years after the news first broke, the process has reached its resolution: Gino was stripped of tenure, the first time Harvard has essentially fired a tenured professor in at least 80 years.What we do right and wrong when it comes to scientific fraudHarvard is in the news right now for its war with the Trump administration, which has sent a series of escalating demands to the university, canceled billions of dollars in federal grants and contracts, and is now blocking the university from enrolling international students, all in an apparent attempt to force the university to conform to MAGA’s ideological demands. Stripping a celebrity professor of tenure might not seem like the best look at a moment when Harvard is in an existential struggle for its right to exist as an independent academic institution. But the Gino situation, which long predates the conflict with Trump, shouldn’t be interpreted solely through the lens of that fight. Scientific fraud is a real problem, one that is chillingly common across academia. But far from putting the university in a bad light, Harvard’s handling of the Gino case has actually been unusually good, even though it still underscores just how much further academia has to go to ensure scientific fraud becomes rare and is reliably caught and punished.There are two parts to fraud response: catching it and punishing it. Academia clearly isn’t very good at the first part. The peer-review process that all meaningful research undergoes tends to start from the default assumption that data in a reviewed paper is real, and instead focuses on whether the paper represents a meaningful advance and is correctly positioned with respect to other research. Almost no reviewer is going back to check to see if what is described in a paper actually happened.Fraud, therefore, is often caught only when other researchers actively try to replicate a result or take a close look at the data. Science watchdogs who find these fraud cases tell me that we need a strong expectation that data be made public — which makes it much harder to fake — as well as a scientific culture that embraces replications.. It is these watchdogs, not anyone at Harvard or in the peer-review process, who caught the discrepancies that ultimately sunk Gino.Crime and no punishmentEven when fraud is caught, academia too often fails to properly punish it. When third-party investigators bring a concern to the attention of a university, it’s been unusual for the responsible party to actually face consequences. One of Gino’s co-authors on one of the retracted papers was Dan Ariely, a star professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. He, too, has been credibly accused of falsifying data: For example, he published one study that he claimed took place at UCLA with the assistance of researcher Aimee Drolet Rossi. But UCLA says the study didn’t happen there, and Rossi says she did not participate in it. In a past case, he claimed on a podcast to have gotten data from the insurance company Delta Dental, which the company says it did not collect. In another case, an investigation by Duke reportedly found that data from a paper he co-authored with Gino had been falsified, but that there was no evidence Ariely had used fake data knowingly.Frankly, I don’t buy this. Maybe an unlucky professor might once end up using data that was faked without their knowledge. But if it happens again, I’m not willing to credit bad luck, and at some point, a professor who keeps “accidentally” using falsified or nonexistent data should be out of a job even if we can’t prove it was no accident. But Ariely, who has maintained his innocence, is still at Duke. Or take Olivier Voinnet, a plant biologist who had multiple papers conclusively demonstrated to contain image manipulation. He was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for two years. It’s hard to imagine a higher scientific sin than faking and manipulating data. If you can’t lose your job for that, the message to young scientists is inevitably that fraud isn’t really that serious. What it means to take fraud seriouslyGino’s loss of tenure, which is one of a few recent cases where misconduct has had major career consequences, might be a sign that the tides are changing. In 2023, around when the Gino scandal broke, Stanford’s then-president Marc Tessier-Lavigne stepped down after 12 papers he authored were found to contain manipulated data. A few weeks ago, MIT announced a data falsification scandal with a terse announcement that the university no longer had confidence in a widely distributed paper “by a former second-year PhD student.” It’s reasonable to assume the student was expelled from the program.I hope that these high-profile cases are a sign we are moving in the right direction on scientific fraud because its persistence is enormously damaging to science. Other researchers waste time and energy following false lines of research substantiated by fake data; in medicine, falsification can outright kill people. But even more than that, research fraud damages the reputation of science at exactly the moment when it is most under attack.We should tighten standards to make fraud much harder to commit in the first place, and when it is identified, the consequences should be immediate and serious. Let’s hope Harvard sets a trend.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!See More:
    #harvard #just #fired #tenured #professor
    Harvard just fired a tenured professor for the first time in 80 years. Good.
    In the summer of 2023, I wrote about a shocking scandal at Harvard Business School: Star professor Francesca Gino had been accused of falsifying data in four of her published papers, with whispers there was falsification in others, too. A series of posts on Data Colada, a blog that focuses on research integrity, documented Gino’s apparent brazen data manipulation, which involved clearly changing study data to better support her hypotheses. This was a major accusation against a researcher at the top of her field, but Gino’s denials were unconvincing. She didn’t have a good explanation for what had gone wrong, asserting that maybe a research assistant had done it, even though she was the only author listed across all four of the falsified studies. Harvard put her on unpaid administrative leave and barred her from campus.The cherry on top? Gino’s main academic area of study was honesty in business.As I wrote at the time, my read of the evidence was that Gino had most likely committed fraud. That impression was only reinforced by her subsequent lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada authors. Gino complained that she’d been defamed and that Harvard hadn’t followed the right investigation process, but she didn’t offer any convincing explanation of how she’d ended up putting her name to paper after paper with fake data.This week, almost two years after the news first broke, the process has reached its resolution: Gino was stripped of tenure, the first time Harvard has essentially fired a tenured professor in at least 80 years.What we do right and wrong when it comes to scientific fraudHarvard is in the news right now for its war with the Trump administration, which has sent a series of escalating demands to the university, canceled billions of dollars in federal grants and contracts, and is now blocking the university from enrolling international students, all in an apparent attempt to force the university to conform to MAGA’s ideological demands. Stripping a celebrity professor of tenure might not seem like the best look at a moment when Harvard is in an existential struggle for its right to exist as an independent academic institution. But the Gino situation, which long predates the conflict with Trump, shouldn’t be interpreted solely through the lens of that fight. Scientific fraud is a real problem, one that is chillingly common across academia. But far from putting the university in a bad light, Harvard’s handling of the Gino case has actually been unusually good, even though it still underscores just how much further academia has to go to ensure scientific fraud becomes rare and is reliably caught and punished.There are two parts to fraud response: catching it and punishing it. Academia clearly isn’t very good at the first part. The peer-review process that all meaningful research undergoes tends to start from the default assumption that data in a reviewed paper is real, and instead focuses on whether the paper represents a meaningful advance and is correctly positioned with respect to other research. Almost no reviewer is going back to check to see if what is described in a paper actually happened.Fraud, therefore, is often caught only when other researchers actively try to replicate a result or take a close look at the data. Science watchdogs who find these fraud cases tell me that we need a strong expectation that data be made public — which makes it much harder to fake — as well as a scientific culture that embraces replications.. It is these watchdogs, not anyone at Harvard or in the peer-review process, who caught the discrepancies that ultimately sunk Gino.Crime and no punishmentEven when fraud is caught, academia too often fails to properly punish it. When third-party investigators bring a concern to the attention of a university, it’s been unusual for the responsible party to actually face consequences. One of Gino’s co-authors on one of the retracted papers was Dan Ariely, a star professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. He, too, has been credibly accused of falsifying data: For example, he published one study that he claimed took place at UCLA with the assistance of researcher Aimee Drolet Rossi. But UCLA says the study didn’t happen there, and Rossi says she did not participate in it. In a past case, he claimed on a podcast to have gotten data from the insurance company Delta Dental, which the company says it did not collect. In another case, an investigation by Duke reportedly found that data from a paper he co-authored with Gino had been falsified, but that there was no evidence Ariely had used fake data knowingly.Frankly, I don’t buy this. Maybe an unlucky professor might once end up using data that was faked without their knowledge. But if it happens again, I’m not willing to credit bad luck, and at some point, a professor who keeps “accidentally” using falsified or nonexistent data should be out of a job even if we can’t prove it was no accident. But Ariely, who has maintained his innocence, is still at Duke. Or take Olivier Voinnet, a plant biologist who had multiple papers conclusively demonstrated to contain image manipulation. He was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for two years. It’s hard to imagine a higher scientific sin than faking and manipulating data. If you can’t lose your job for that, the message to young scientists is inevitably that fraud isn’t really that serious. What it means to take fraud seriouslyGino’s loss of tenure, which is one of a few recent cases where misconduct has had major career consequences, might be a sign that the tides are changing. In 2023, around when the Gino scandal broke, Stanford’s then-president Marc Tessier-Lavigne stepped down after 12 papers he authored were found to contain manipulated data. A few weeks ago, MIT announced a data falsification scandal with a terse announcement that the university no longer had confidence in a widely distributed paper “by a former second-year PhD student.” It’s reasonable to assume the student was expelled from the program.I hope that these high-profile cases are a sign we are moving in the right direction on scientific fraud because its persistence is enormously damaging to science. Other researchers waste time and energy following false lines of research substantiated by fake data; in medicine, falsification can outright kill people. But even more than that, research fraud damages the reputation of science at exactly the moment when it is most under attack.We should tighten standards to make fraud much harder to commit in the first place, and when it is identified, the consequences should be immediate and serious. Let’s hope Harvard sets a trend.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!See More: #harvard #just #fired #tenured #professor
    WWW.VOX.COM
    Harvard just fired a tenured professor for the first time in 80 years. Good.
    In the summer of 2023, I wrote about a shocking scandal at Harvard Business School: Star professor Francesca Gino had been accused of falsifying data in four of her published papers, with whispers there was falsification in others, too. A series of posts on Data Colada, a blog that focuses on research integrity, documented Gino’s apparent brazen data manipulation, which involved clearly changing study data to better support her hypotheses. This was a major accusation against a researcher at the top of her field, but Gino’s denials were unconvincing. She didn’t have a good explanation for what had gone wrong, asserting that maybe a research assistant had done it, even though she was the only author listed across all four of the falsified studies. Harvard put her on unpaid administrative leave and barred her from campus.The cherry on top? Gino’s main academic area of study was honesty in business.As I wrote at the time, my read of the evidence was that Gino had most likely committed fraud. That impression was only reinforced by her subsequent lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada authors. Gino complained that she’d been defamed and that Harvard hadn’t followed the right investigation process, but she didn’t offer any convincing explanation of how she’d ended up putting her name to paper after paper with fake data.This week, almost two years after the news first broke, the process has reached its resolution: Gino was stripped of tenure, the first time Harvard has essentially fired a tenured professor in at least 80 years. (Her defamation lawsuit against the bloggers who found the data manipulation was dismissed last year.)What we do right and wrong when it comes to scientific fraudHarvard is in the news right now for its war with the Trump administration, which has sent a series of escalating demands to the university, canceled billions of dollars in federal grants and contracts, and is now blocking the university from enrolling international students, all in an apparent attempt to force the university to conform to MAGA’s ideological demands. Stripping a celebrity professor of tenure might not seem like the best look at a moment when Harvard is in an existential struggle for its right to exist as an independent academic institution. But the Gino situation, which long predates the conflict with Trump, shouldn’t be interpreted solely through the lens of that fight. Scientific fraud is a real problem, one that is chillingly common across academia. But far from putting the university in a bad light, Harvard’s handling of the Gino case has actually been unusually good, even though it still underscores just how much further academia has to go to ensure scientific fraud becomes rare and is reliably caught and punished.There are two parts to fraud response: catching it and punishing it. Academia clearly isn’t very good at the first part. The peer-review process that all meaningful research undergoes tends to start from the default assumption that data in a reviewed paper is real, and instead focuses on whether the paper represents a meaningful advance and is correctly positioned with respect to other research. Almost no reviewer is going back to check to see if what is described in a paper actually happened.Fraud, therefore, is often caught only when other researchers actively try to replicate a result or take a close look at the data. Science watchdogs who find these fraud cases tell me that we need a strong expectation that data be made public — which makes it much harder to fake — as well as a scientific culture that embraces replications. (Given the premiums journals put on novelty in research and the supreme importance of publishing for academic careers, there’s been little motivation for scientists to pursue replication.). It is these watchdogs, not anyone at Harvard or in the peer-review process, who caught the discrepancies that ultimately sunk Gino.Crime and no punishmentEven when fraud is caught, academia too often fails to properly punish it. When third-party investigators bring a concern to the attention of a university, it’s been unusual for the responsible party to actually face consequences. One of Gino’s co-authors on one of the retracted papers was Dan Ariely, a star professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. He, too, has been credibly accused of falsifying data: For example, he published one study that he claimed took place at UCLA with the assistance of researcher Aimee Drolet Rossi. But UCLA says the study didn’t happen there, and Rossi says she did not participate in it. In a past case, he claimed on a podcast to have gotten data from the insurance company Delta Dental, which the company says it did not collect. In another case, an investigation by Duke reportedly found that data from a paper he co-authored with Gino had been falsified, but that there was no evidence Ariely had used fake data knowingly.Frankly, I don’t buy this. Maybe an unlucky professor might once end up using data that was faked without their knowledge. But if it happens again, I’m not willing to credit bad luck, and at some point, a professor who keeps “accidentally” using falsified or nonexistent data should be out of a job even if we can’t prove it was no accident. But Ariely, who has maintained his innocence, is still at Duke. Or take Olivier Voinnet, a plant biologist who had multiple papers conclusively demonstrated to contain image manipulation. He was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for two years. It’s hard to imagine a higher scientific sin than faking and manipulating data. If you can’t lose your job for that, the message to young scientists is inevitably that fraud isn’t really that serious. What it means to take fraud seriouslyGino’s loss of tenure, which is one of a few recent cases where misconduct has had major career consequences, might be a sign that the tides are changing. In 2023, around when the Gino scandal broke, Stanford’s then-president Marc Tessier-Lavigne stepped down after 12 papers he authored were found to contain manipulated data. A few weeks ago, MIT announced a data falsification scandal with a terse announcement that the university no longer had confidence in a widely distributed paper “by a former second-year PhD student.” It’s reasonable to assume the student was expelled from the program.I hope that these high-profile cases are a sign we are moving in the right direction on scientific fraud because its persistence is enormously damaging to science. Other researchers waste time and energy following false lines of research substantiated by fake data; in medicine, falsification can outright kill people. But even more than that, research fraud damages the reputation of science at exactly the moment when it is most under attack.We should tighten standards to make fraud much harder to commit in the first place, and when it is identified, the consequences should be immediate and serious. Let’s hope Harvard sets a trend.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!See More:
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
CGShares https://cgshares.com