On a sunny spring morning in south London, Walworth Square offers a freshly minted moment of respite from the clamorous main road. Around a peculiar new war memorial (to which war? The tracksuited boy perched on a branch is not enlightening) new trees shiver in the breeze, while, beneath them, a man, seemingly the worse for wear, stares vacantly at his scruffy shoes. Another man with enormous shoulders emerges from a gym and begins to take selfies. Across the square, steps rise to the grand Victorian jumble of Walworth Town Hall, which hasn’t been a town hall since the mid-1960s. Now, thanks to a fire and the near-bankruptcy of local government, the building houses offices, a café and a community centre. The architect of this transformation, Feix&Merlin, has had to negotiate a problematic inheritance – a (minor) landmark, catastrophic fire damage, impecunious owners and angry locals – and knead it into shape. In this they have succeeded, but the shape that it has assumed will, through no fault of the architects, prove indigestible to some.  The kernel of the extant structure was built as a church vestry in 1865. It later became Southwark Town Hall and was variously extended. Following the council’s evacuation to Camberwell in 1965, what remained was a public library, a local museum and municipal offices. In 2013 the roof caught fire and much of the Grade II-listed building was reduced to a shell; the remainder rotted behind hoardings until 2022, when work finally commenced on its restoration. Advertisement The protracted nature of this process can ultimately be attributed to chancellor George Osborne’s austerity budget of 2010. Although Southwark had at first intended to return the building to its original uses – and held a competition on this basis in 2015, which was won by Avanti Architects – it realised, on seeing the price tag, that this would be impossible. Avanti was dismissed and a new competition was held in 2018, with a revised brief. This emphasised the long-term commercial sustainability of the building, as well as an element of cultural use, taking into consideration the needs of the local community. The winners were developer General Projects working with Feix&Merlin. Their main gambit was to turn the building over to offices. However, on consulting the public while working up their proposal, they quickly realised how upset local residents were about the loss of public ownership. As a result, a community centre was added to the programme. It was the task of the designers to square this circle: how to retain the look and feel of a public building while optimising its new private function. They returned the exterior of the protected structure to its original form, including restoring the pattern to the roof tiles, which had been lost over the years. The ground floor houses the remaining public, or publicly accessible, spaces – the lobby café and community centre. The latter can be hired free of charge by local groups. The rest of the building is now offices. These also occupy its grandest rooms: the former main stair, debating chamber, library and museum. The last two functions have been transferred to a new building across the square, where they are housed in a new ‘heritage centre’. The architects have restored the historically significant interiors, more or less, removing the institutional accretions that had latterly defaced them, such as asphalt that had been laid on top of the masonry stairs and the false ceiling that hid the skylight above it. They also exposed the boxed-in balustrades on the mezzanine of the library and restored the parquet flooring throughout. All structural interventions have been achieved using cross-laminated timber. The roof has been reconstructed using it, creating a new storey with some intriguing windowless cubby holes inside its terminal turrets (handy for undistracted meetings). In the former debating chamber, the structure of the roof is exposed to view, a striking piece of engineering. On the ground floor, the ceiling of the space that now houses the lobby-cum-café, which had fallen in during the fire, is supported by hefty wooden arches. In some places, the architects have made looser interpretations of the original fabric. The public viewing gallery of the debating chamber has been extended to cover three sides of the room and a pattern derived from the lost balustrade has been cut into sheet steel to create a protective barrier for this new mezzanine. Certain elements, especially in the less important interiors, have been preserved as the fire left them. Where internal walls were removed, their footprint remains, breaking up the parquet, so that, as Julia Feix puts it, visitors can still read the original plan. Above a painted dado, the pitted and scorched surface of the old plaster, or the bricks exposed beneath it, have been preserved in their damaged state. Feix says this approach ‘lets the building talk about its history, rather than creating a pastiche of an era that’s long gone’.  This move has by now become an established procedure when dealing with rescue jobs, the obvious local example being Battersea Arts Centre, which Haworth Tompkins left similarly scarred following a 2015 fire. Its antecedents stretch back to Hans Döllgast’s post-war work on the Alte Pinakothek in Munich. In its more recent manifestations we could call this approach a fetishisation of decay, which raises questions as to what is being commemorated, and why. In Döllgast’s case, the answers were obvious: the Second World War, in order to prevent wilful amnesia. But in these two more recent examples, where the catastrophes in question were accidental fires, one might ask why a coat of plaster shouldn’t have been applied. Advertisement Walworth Town Hall helps to clarify the logic at work here, which is partly born of necessity. The building could not be restored to its previous condition or use, to the dismay of some locals, including the Walworth Society heritage group. The latter objected to the perceived loss of public access and was concerned that what remained could easily be revoked: for instance, if the café were unprofitable, it could be turned into more offices. They also disliked certain architectural aspects of the proposal, which they called ‘generic’: ‘neither bold and confident designs nor faithful restorations’. After protracted consultation, these concerns were taken into consideration by the architects in the restoration of the more significant rooms. Given the wrangling, it seems to me that, as in the case of Flores & Prats’ Sala Beckett in Barcelona, these patinated surfaces are intended to produce an impression of authenticity, without recourse to (prohibitively expensive) restoration, or ‘pastiche’, as the architects put it. It seems likely, however, that this code speaks more clearly to designers than to members of heritage groups.  But buildings are not made for heritage groups. Instead, this one is addressing two distinct publics. The community centre still opens to the Walworth Road, with its enduringly working-class character, and has already seen good use. However, the commercial part of the building has been reoriented to the new square to the north, from which it is accessed via the steps we traversed earlier. On the other side of the square rise the brick-slip-clad southern reaches of Elephant Park, the controversial development built by Lendlease on the rubble of the Heygate Estate. The Town Hall has turned its new face to these new Elephantines, the gym-dwellers who can afford to eat in the café and might choose to rent desk space here (if they have to work, that is). To return to my earlier question regarding the catastrophe being commemorated by these charred walls, perhaps the answer is: the conflagration of local government, which produced this double-headed building. Tom Wilkinson is a writer, editor and teacher specialising in the history of architecture and the visual culture of modern Germany Architect’s view As architects, we often aim to deliver transformational change, but at Walworth Town Hall, transformation came through restraint. Rather than imposing a vision, we allowed the building to speak, guiding us in knowing where to intervene and where to hold back. One key move was the reinvention of the former debating chamber into a light-filled triple-height space. Historical features were carefully restored, while a new mezzanine with a CNC-cut solid steel balustrade subtly echoes the original decorative railings of the former viewing gallery. The space is now crowned with a new exposed CLT timber roof with a bespoke light feature at its centre. All new structural and architectural elements were executed in timber, speaking to the sustainability agenda, aligning with modern environmental standards and enhancing user wellbeing. Timber’s biophilic properties connect occupants with nature, supporting physical and mental health while improving air quality. Crucial to our design language was an honest celebration of the building’s history, including the fire-damaged ‘scars’ that tell its story. While a handful of spaces were traditionally restored, most were approached with a light touch. New finishes were installed only up to the lower dado level, with the rest of the wall surfaces and ceilings left as found, retaining their battle-worn character (cleaned up and made safe, of course). Subtle material changes, such as microcement infills in the parquet, hint at the former wall layouts and structures. Striking a balance between restoration and contemporary intervention was essential. It has been a privilege to work on a building with such legacy and seeing the community return after more than a decade is deeply rewarding. Walworth Town Hall now honours its past while looking boldly to the future. Julia Feix, director, Feix&Merlin Architects   Client’s view We approached this project with a vision for developing a new blueprint for bringing at-risk municipal landmarks back to life. Now restored to its former glory and removed from Historic England’s Heritage at Risk register, Walworth Town Hall has been given back to a new generation with an exciting new purpose, made viable and fit for modern standards. In partnership with Southwark Council, and closely collaborating with Historic England and local community groups, we worked with Feix&Merlin to deliver a sensitive but impactful design approach. Our vision was that the building’s legacy should be revealed, rather than erased. The result strikes a balance between celebrating its inherited state and adapting it to modern use, combining elements of old and new by making sympathetic references to its beautiful 19th century architecture. Distinctly modern features, such as the use of cross-laminated timber to replace sections of the building damaged by the 2013 fire, are a reflective and contemporary interpretation of the original design. Elephant and Castle is undergoing a significant regeneration and Walworth Town Hall functions as a bridge between the area’s authentic heritage and its new future. Driven by a collaborative process, and tailor-made for small businesses to create, inspire and thrive, the reimagined Walworth Town Hall lays the groundwork for a new creative community to grow in this local destination.  Frederic Schwass, chief development officer, General Projects   Engineer’s view Heyne Tillett Steel was engaged as structural and civil engineer from competition stage to completion. It was both a challenging restoration of a listed building and an ambitious contemporary reconstruction, in exposed engineered timber, of its pre-fire form – at the same time creating better connectivity and adding floor area.   Built in various stages, the existing comprises nearly all methods of historic construction: timber, masonry, filler joist, clay pot, cast and wrought iron. The building had to be extensively investigated to understand its condition, fitness for reuse and, in some cases, capacity to extend.   Particular attention was paid to the impact of the fire and fire dousing in terms of movement, rot and corrosion. Repairs were carried out only where necessary after an extended period of drying and monitoring. The original council chamber roof was rebuilt as hybrid trusses (glulam and steel) to span the approximately 13 x 13m double-height volume below. The roof was prefabricated in just four pieces, built off the retained walls and installed in under two weeks.  A cross-laminated timber (CLT) covering creates the roof’s truncated pyramid shape. A new floor was added within the original massing of the west wing, utilising CLT slabs and a glulam ‘spine’ beam, creating unobstructed, exposed CLT ceilings across 7m bays at either side. The significant amount of retention and timber additions mean that the project scores very highly on benchmarks for embodied carbon, competitive beyond 2030 targets. Jonathan Flint, senior associate, Heyne Tillett Steel   Working detail The restoration presented a rare opportunity to reimagine a historic structure using sustainable, expressive materials. The original council chamber roof, destroyed by fire, was rebuilt as a hybrid CLT/glulam and steel ties structure, combining the aesthetic warmth of timber with the tensile strength of steel. The new roof had to clear-span approximately 13 x 13m over a double-height volume, and as the truncated pyramid structure was kept exposed, the increased volume of the space added a dramatic effect while introducing a contemporary character. Timber was selected not only for its sustainability credentials but also for its light  weight, crucial in minimising loads on the existing retained masonry. The trusses were prefabricated offsite in four large components, ensuring precision and reducing construction time and disruption on site. Once craned into position, they were set atop an existing concrete ring beam, a structural necessity installed after the fire to stabilise the perimeter walls in the absence of a roof. This ring beam now discreetly supports the new load paths. The combination of the timber structure in combination with the exposed brick and traditional plaster achieves a visually striking, materially honest reconstruction that honours the building’s historic proportions while firmly rooting it in contemporary sustainable practice. Julia Feix, director, Feix&Merlin Architects   Project data Location: Southwark, south London Start on site: February 2022 Completion: November 2024 Gross internal floor area: 5,000m2 Construction cost: £18.4 million Form of contract: Design and build Construction cost per m2: £4,500 Architect: Feix&Merlin Architects Client: General Projects Structural engineer: Heyne Tillett Steel M&E consultant: RED Engineering Quantity surveyor: Quartz Heritage architect: Donald Insall Associates (planning), Heritage Architecture (tender) Planning consultant: Rolfe Judd Landscape consultant: Town & Country Gardens Acoustic consultant: Sharps Redmore Transport consultant: Caneparo Associates Project manager: Quartz External lighting consultant: Atrium Specialist light feature: Barrisol Fit-out contractor: White Paper Art curation: Art Atelier Furniture, fixtures and equipment procurement: Hunter Community space operator: WTH Community Space Principal designer: ORSA CDM co-ordinator: ORSA Approved building inspector: Sweco Building Control Main contractor: Conamar Embodied carbon: 52 kgCO2/m2

Job Title: Procurement ManagerLocation: Edmonton, ABDepartment: PurchasingReports To: CEOJob Summary:We are looking for an experienced Procurement Manager to lead our purchasing department in a manufacturing environment. This role is responsible for supplier negotiations, cost optimization, procurement strategy, and logistics coordination to ensure a smooth supply chain process. The Procurement Manager will generate and analyze reports from NetSuite to monitor purchasing trends, identify discrepancies, and drive efficiency. They will also oversee returns and ensure compliance with procurement policies.This is a remote job which requires the applicant to work in the Mountain Standard Timezone. Timings are 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM from Monday to Friday. Salary range is $10,000 to $12,000 USD annually. Key Responsibilities:Supplier & Vendor ManagementSource, evaluate, and negotiate contracts with suppliers and vendors to secure optimal pricing and quality.Establish and maintain strong relationships with key suppliers and shipping companies.Review and analyze supplier quotes to make cost-effective purchasing decisions.Monitor supplier performance, ensuring compliance with quality and delivery standards.Procurement & Purchasing OperationsOversee end-to-end procurement processes, from purchase requisition to payment.Work closely with production, finance, and logistics teams to align purchasing with operational needs.Ensure timely procurement and inventory availability to support manufacturing schedules.Manage the process of product returns, claims, and replacements with suppliers.Data Analysis & ReportingUtilize NetSuite to generate procurement reports, analyze trends, and monitor discrepancies.Identify cost-saving opportunities and recommend procurement strategy improvements.Prepare regular reports on supplier performance, cost analysis, and procurement KPIs for the CEO.Logistics & Shipping CoordinationCollaborate with shipping companies and freight forwarders for cost-effective and timely delivery.Monitor import/export logistics, ensuring compliance with customs regulations and trade policies.Address and resolve shipping delays or issues with vendors and logistics providers.Compliance & Continuous ImprovementEnsure procurement processes adhere to company policies and industry best practices.Drive process improvements to enhance efficiency, reduce costs, and mitigate risks.Stay updated on market trends, industry developments, and supplier innovations.Qualifications & Requirements:Master’s degree (preferred) in Supply Chain Management, Business Administration, or a related field.Minimum 5 years of experience in procurement, purchasing, or supply chain management.Proven expertise in vendor negotiation, cost management, and purchasing strategy.Experience working with NetSuite or other ERP systems for procurement and reporting.Strong analytical and problem-solving skills to identify trends and optimize purchasing decisions.Excellent communication and leadership skills to manage vendor relationships and lead the purchasing team.Knowledge of manufacturing industry procurement, logistics, and supply chain regulations.Preferred Skills:Procurement certifications (e.g., CIPS, CPSM) are an asset.Experience in import/export compliance and supply chain risk management.Why Join Us?Lead the procurement function in a growing manufacturing company.Competitive salary and growth opportunities.Work directly with the CEO to shape procurement strategies.If you are a results-driven procurement professional with a strong background in manufacturing procurement, we encourage you to apply!Apply NowLet's start your dream job Apply now Meet JobCopilot: Your Personal AI Job HunterAutomatically Apply to Remote Management and Finance JobsJust set your preferences and Job Copilot will do the rest-finding, filtering, and applying while you focus on what matters. Activate JobCopilot

A welcome surprise Space Force official: Commercial satellites can do a lot more than we thought "They could shave off about a third of the time and over half the cost." Stephen Clark – May 19, 2025 5:12 pm | 5 Astranis, founded in 2015, has designed a satellite bus with electric propulsion that can fly in geosynchronous orbit. Credit: Astranis Astranis, founded in 2015, has designed a satellite bus with electric propulsion that can fly in geosynchronous orbit. Credit: Astranis Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more A generation ago, when former NASA administrator Dan Goldin promoted the mantra of a "faster, better, cheaper" approach to the agency's science missions, critics often joked that NASA could only pick two. That's no longer the case. NASA is finding success in its partnerships with commercial space companies, especially SpaceX, with lower costs, quicker results, and improved performance. The Space Force and the National Reconnaissance Office, the US government's spy satellite agency, are also capitalizing on new products and services from commercial industry. In many cases, these new capabilities come from venture-backed startups already developing and operating satellites for commercial use. The idea is to focus the Space Force and the NRO on missions that only they can do, according to Chris Scolese, director of the NRO. Military and intelligence agencies are already buying launch services, communications services, and satellite surveillance imagery on a commercial basis. These missions also have commercial applications, so the government is purchasing products and services with rockets and satellites that already exist. Now, the military is starting to use a commercial model for missions that, at least today, lack any meaningful commercial market. In these cases, the Space Force and the NRO must go out and pay a company to build an entire fleet of satellites that will exclusively serve the government. But rather than dictating stringent requirements and micromanaging every phase of the program, as the Space Force and NRO have typically done, they're going with a more hands-off approach. This change in procurement strategy is yielding results, officials said last week in a hearing convened by the House Armed Services Committee. Numerous companies are now manufacturing satellite buses, the basic chassis that hosts instruments, sensors, and payloads tailored for a range of missions. Most of them come from SpaceX, which mass-produces satellites for its Starlink broadband network. But there are others, and the market is richer than many US officials thought. "We're finding that commercial buses are not only available, but they're also capable of doing a lot of what our missions require, and they're available at a much lower cost than going off and developing a brand new bus," Scolese said. A case study in procurement The Space Force and the NRO kicked off several initiatives over the last few years to look at ways to exploit these commercial technologies. Some of these programs are already producing results. The Space Force's Space Development Agency has launched the first 27 prototypes for a future network of hundreds of satellites in low-Earth orbit (LEO) to detect and monitor missile launches, and relay tracking data to the ground. The National Reconnaissance Office, which owns the government's spy satellites, awarded contracts in 2022 worth $4 billion to buy commercial imagery from three companies—newcomers BlackSky, Planet, and incumbent provider Maxar—with their privately owned spacecraft. The NRO also started launching its own fleet of commercially built spy satellites last year to more rapidly gather imagery of places around the world. Nearly 200 of these satellites, based on SpaceX's Starlink design, have launched in the last year. Most recently, the Space Force rejigged how it plans to buy a series of new space surveillance satellites for the Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program, or GSSAP. These satellites are designed to fly near and inspect other objects near geosynchronous orbit, a ring around the equator more than 22,000 miles (nearly 36,000 kilometers) above Earth. In that orbit, a spacecraft moves in synchronicity with Earth's rotation, giving satellites a constant view of the same region of the planet. This makes geosynchronous orbit a popular location for satellites designed for communications, early-warning, and eavesdropping missions. This image shows what the Space Force's fleet of missile-warning and missile-tracking satellites might look like in 2030, with a mix of platforms in geosynchronous orbit, medium-Earth orbit, and low-Earth orbit. Credit: Space Systems Command The Space Force has launched six GSSAP satellites built by Northrop Grumman, one of America's largest traditional defense contractors. Five of them are still operational, and the military wants to buy more. But this time, the Space Force will procure the satellites through a commercial arrangement. Instead of dictating stringent requirements to contractors and purchasing the satellites outright, the Space Force will levy fewer requirements and select a commercial company to develop the next generation of GSSAP satellites. Last year, the Pentagon canvassed the commercial satellite industry to see what might be available. Military officials soon hit a roadblock. The Space Force—and particularly US Space Command—closely guards details of the GSSAP program. The program's most exquisite capabilities are classified, and the Space Force defined requirements for the next-generation GSSAP satellites that would be subject to similar levels of secrecy. Leaders at Space Command, which actually uses the GSSAP satellites, agreed to relax their requirements, according to Maj. Gen. Stephen Purdy, acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for space acquisition and integration.  The decision allowed the Space Force to move forward with a commercial procurement strategy that Purdy said will cut the cost of the system in half and reduce its development timeline by a third. "So, we're off working now with that program office to go start off a more commercial line," Purdy said. "And when I say commercial in this particular aspect, just to clarify, this is accomplishing the same GSSAP mission. Our operators will fly the GSSAP system using the same ground systems and data they do now, but these would be using faster, commercial build times... and cheaper, less expensive parts in order to bring that together in a faster sense." An artist's illustration of two of the Space Force's GSSAP surveillance satellites, built by Northrop Grumman. Credit: US Space Force The next-gen GSSAP spacecraft may not meet the same standards as the Space Force's existing inspector satellites, but the change comes with benefits beyond lower costs and faster timelines. It will be unclassified and will be open to multiple vendors to build and launch space surveillance satellites, injecting some level of competition into the program. It will also be eligible for sales to other countries. More for less with GPS There's another area where Purdy said the Space Force was surprised by what commercial satellite builders were offering. Last year, the Pentagon used a new "Quick Start" procurement model authorized by Congress to establish a program to bolster the GPS navigation network, which is run by the Space Force but relied upon by commercial users and private citizens around the world. The Space Force has more than 30 GPS satellites in medium-Earth orbit (MEO) at an altitude of roughly 12,550 miles (20,200 kilometers). Purdy said the network is "vulnerable" because the constellation has a relatively small number of satellites, at least relative to the Space Force's newest programs. In MEO, the satellites are within range of direct ascent anti-satellite weapons. Many of the GPS satellites are aging, and the newer ones, built by Lockheed Martin, cost about $250 million apiece. With the Resilient GPS program, the Space Force aims to reduce the cost to $50 million to $80 million per satellite. The satellites will be smaller than the GPS satellites flying today and will transmit a core set of signals. "We're looking to add more resiliency and more numbers," Purdy said. "We actually didn't think that we were going to get much, to be honest with you, and it was a surprise to us, and a major learning [opportunity] for us, learning last year that satellite prices had—they were low in LEO already, but they were lowering in MEO," Purdy said. "So, that convinced us that we should proceed with it. The results have actually been more surprising and encouraging than we thought. "The [satellite] buses actually bring a higher power level than our current program of record does, which allows us to punch through jamming in a better sense. We can achieve better results, we think, over time, going after these commercial buses," Purdy said. "So that's caused me to think, for our mainline GPS system, we’re actually looking at that for alternative ways to get after that." Maj. Gen. Stephen Purdy oversees the Space Force's acquisition programs at the Pentagon. Credit: Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post via Getty Images In September, the Space Force awarded four agreements to Astranis, Axient, L3Harris, and Sierra Space to produce design concepts for new Resilient GPS satellites. Astranis and Axient are relatively new to satellite manufacturing. Astranis is a pioneer in low-mass Internet satellites in geosynchronous orbit, and a non-traditional defense contractor. Axient, acquired by a company named Astrion last year, has focused on producing small CubeSats. The military will later select one or more of these companies to move forward with producing up to eight Resilient GPS satellites for launch as soon as 2028. Early planning is already underway for a follow-on set of Resilient GPS satellites with additional capabilities, according to the Space Force. The experience with the R-GPS program inspired the Space Force to look at other mission areas that might be well-served with a similar procurement approach. They settled on GSSAP as the next frontier. Scolese, director of the NRO, said his agency is examining how to use commercial satellite constellations for other purposes beyond Earth imaging. This might include a program to employ commercially procured satellites for signals intelligence (SIGINT) missions, he said. "It's not just the commercial imagery," Scolese said. "It's also commercial RF (Radio Frequency, or SIGINT) and newer phenomenologies as where we're working with that industry to go off and help advance those." Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet. 5 Comments

Bosch Ventures, the corporate investment arm of German technology supplier Robert Bosch GmbH, has announced a new €250 million venture capital fund to support startups developing breakthrough technologies. Introduced during Bosch’s 2024 annual financial presentation, the fund reinforces the company’s long-term strategy of supporting early-stage innovation, even amid global economic turbulence. Bosch CEO Stefan Hartung emphasized that such investments serve both societal and internal strategic goals: “Startups can boost innovation in a way that delivers important growth impetus for a country’s economy.” How does 3DPI content meet your needs and help you in your job? How can we improve? Take the reader survey now. The new fund will expand Bosch Ventures’ existing portfolio by focusing on areas with long-term technological and environmental impact. Since 2007, Bosch’s investment arm has prioritized companies developing solutions in artificial intelligence and energy efficiency, aligned with its broader objectives of sustainable mobility and climate-neutral technology. According to managing director Ingo Ramesohl, “We invest in particular in deep-tech startups, which are based on scientific breakthroughs or technological innovations.” Dr. Ingo Ramesohl, Managing Director and co-head of Robert Bosch Venture Capital GmbH. Photo via Bosch. Startup screening and selection takes place through Bosch Ventures’ global network, which includes offices in Boston, Sunnyvale, Tel Aviv, Shanghai, Stuttgart, and Frankfurt. Investment professionals at these locations assess more than 2,000 startups annually. From this pool, approximately 100 are shortlisted, with six to ten ultimately receiving financial support and operational guidance. Ramesohl stated that being embedded in local ecosystems enables the team to identify disruptive technologies with high-impact potential across diverse markets. Collaboration between startups and Bosch’s internal divisions is facilitated by Open Bosch, a program launched in 2018 to integrate early-stage technologies into corporate workflows. The initiative allows selected startups to act as suppliers, customers, or technology partners. In return, Bosch gains access to emerging tools and platforms that may enhance its innovation pipeline. Hundreds of partnerships have been formed through this program. “This win-win partnership enables Bosch to strengthen and secure its innovation efficiency and support the company’s long-term success,” said Ramesohl. The Open Bosch Award recognizes outstanding startup partnerships integrated through Bosch’s Open Bosch collaboration program. Photo via Bosch. More than 60 companies currently comprise the active Bosch Ventures portfolio. Notable investments include U.S.-based Xometry, a platform for on-demand industrial parts, and IonQ, a quantum computing firm that completed a public listing. Additional stakes include Quantum Motion in the United Kingdom, Aleph Alpha in Germany, Arduino in Italy, and battery recycling startup Jin Sheng in China. The firm also holds equity in TrunkTech, a developer of autonomous vehicle technologies, and Syntiant and Motive, which operate in the edge AI and fleet management sectors respectively. AI Investment Expands in Manufacturing Infrastructure and Software Platforms Siemens, the German industrial technology firm specializing in automation and electrification, has announced over $10 billion in investments to expand its presence in the United States. The initiative includes two new manufacturing facilities in Fort Worth, Texas, and Pomona, California, totaling $285 million and projected to generate more than 900 skilled jobs. These sites will produce electrical equipment for industrial and construction applications and supply hardware for AI data centers. Siemens also acquired a U.S. software firm as part of its broader strategy to support domestic production and expand AI-related capabilities across its operational footprint. Meanwhile, 3D Spark, a Hamburg-based B2B software startup focused on industrial manufacturing and procurement, secured €2 million in seed funding to expand its AI-powered decision-making platform. The round was led by Swedish investor Triplefair, alongside Fraunhofer Technologie-Transfer Fonds and Innovationsstarter Fonds Hamburg. 3D Spark’s platform provides manufacturability analysis, cost estimation, quoting features with market pricing, and CO₂ tracking. It supports over 15 manufacturing technologies, including 3D printing, casting, milling, and sheet metal fabrication. Customers using the platform include Alstom, Deutsche Bahn, ÖBB, and Siemens Mobility. Siemens’ new manufacturing site in Fort Worth, Texas. Photo via Siemens. Ready to discover who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to stay updated with the latest news and insights. Featured image shows the Open Bosch Award. Photo via Bosch. Anyer Tenorio Lara Anyer Tenorio Lara is an emerging tech journalist passionate about uncovering the latest advances in technology and innovation. With a sharp eye for detail and a talent for storytelling, Anyer has quickly made a name for himself in the tech community. Anyer's articles aim to make complex subjects accessible and engaging for a broad audience. In addition to his writing, Anyer enjoys participating in industry events and discussions, eager to learn and share knowledge in the dynamic world of technology.

Meta Platforms has decided to delay the public release of its most ambitious artificial intelligence model yet — Llama 4 Behemoth. Initially expected to debut at Meta’s first-ever AI developer conference in April, the model’s launch was pushed to June and is now delayed until fall or possibly even later. Engineers at Meta are grappling with whether Behemoth delivers enough of a leap in performance to justify a public rollout, The Wall Street Journal reported. Internally, the sentiment is split — some feel the improvements over earlier versions are incremental at best. The delay doesn’t just affect Meta’s timeline. It’s a reminder to the entire AI industry that building the most powerful model isn’t just about parameter count—it’s about usefulness, efficiency, and real-world performance. Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst and CEO at Greyhound Research, interprets this not as a standalone setback but as “a reflection of a broader shift: from brute-force scaling to controlled, adaptable AI models.” He said that while Meta has not officially disclosed a reason for the delay, the reported mention of “capacity constraints” points to larger pressures around infrastructure, usability, and practical deployment. What’s inside Llama 4 Behemoth? Behemoth was never intended to be just another model in Meta’s Llama family. It’s intended to be the crown jewel of the Llama 4 series, designed as a “teacher model” for training smaller, more nimble versions like Llama Scout and Maverick. Meta had previously touted it as “one of the smartest LLMs in the world.” Technically, Behemoth is built on a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture, designed to optimize both power and efficiency. It is said to have a total of 2 trillion parameters, with 288 billion active at any given inference — a staggering scale, even by today’s AI standards. What made Behemoth especially interesting was its use of iRoPE (interleaved Rotary Position Embedding), an architectural choice that allows the model to handle extremely long context windows—up to 10 million tokens. That means it could, in theory, retain far more contextual information during a conversation or data task than most current models can manage. But theory doesn’t always play out smoothly in practice. “Meta’s Behemoth delay aligns with a market that is actively shifting from scale-first strategies to deployment-first priorities,” Gogia added. “Controlled Open LLMs and SLMs are central to this reorientation — and to what we believe is the future of trustworthy enterprise AI.” How Behemoth stacks up against the competition When Behemoth was first previewed in April, it was positioned as Meta’s answer to the dominance of models like OpenAI’s GPT-4.5, Anthropic’s Claude 3.5/3.7, and Google’s Gemini 1.5/2.5 series. Each of those models has made strides in different areas. OpenAI’s GPT-4 Turbo remains strong in reasoning and code generation. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is gaining attention for its efficiency and balance between performance and cost. Gemini Pro 1.5, from Google, excels in multimodal tasks and integration with enterprise tools. Behemoth, in contrast, showed strong results in STEM benchmarks and long-context tasks but has yet to demonstrate a clear superiority across commercial and enterprise-grade benchmarks. That ambiguity is believed to have contributed to Meta’s hesitation in launching the model publicly. Gogia noted that the situation “reignites a vital industry dialogue: is bigger still better?” Increasingly, enterprise buyers are leaning toward SLMs (Small Language Models) and Controlled Open LLMs, which offer better governance, easier integration, and clearer ROI compared to gargantuan foundation models that demand complex infrastructure and longer implementation cycles. A telling sign for the AI industry This delay speaks volumes about where the AI industry is heading. For much of 2023 and 2024, the narrative was about who could build the largest model. But as model sizes ballooned, the return on added parameters began to flatten out. AI experts and practitioners now acknowledge that smarter architectural design, domain specificity, and deployment efficiency are fast becoming the new metrics of success. Meta’s experience with smaller models like Scout and Maverick reinforces this trend—many users have found them to be more practical and easier to fine-tune for specific use cases. There’s also a financial and sustainability angle. Training and running ultra-large models like Behemoth requires immense computing resources, energy, and fine-grained optimization. Even for Meta, this scale introduces operational trade-offs, including cost, latency, and reliability concerns. Why enterprises should pay attention For enterprise IT and innovation leaders, the delay isn’t just about Meta—it reflects a more fundamental decision point around AI adoption. Enterprises are moving away from chasing the biggest models in favor of those that offer tighter control, compliance readiness, and explainability. Gogia pointed out that “usability, governance, and real-world readiness” are becoming central filters in AI procurement, especially in regulated sectors like finance, healthcare, and government. The delay of Behemoth may accelerate the adoption of open-weight, deployment-friendly models such as Llama 4 Scout, or even third-party solutions that are optimized for enterprise workflows. The choice now isn’t about raw performance alone—it’s about aligning AI capabilities with specific business goals. What lies ahead Meta’s delay doesn’t suggest failure — it’s a strategic pause. If anything, it shows the company’s willingness to prioritize stability and impact over hype. Behemoth still has the potential to become a powerful tool, but only if it proves itself in the areas that matter most: performance consistency, scalability, and enterprise integration. “This doesn’t negate the value of scale, but it elevates a new set of criteria that enterprises now care about deeply,” Gogia stated. In the coming months, as Meta refines Behemoth and the industry moves deeper into deployment-era AI, one thing is clear: we are moving beyond the age of AI spectacle into an age of applied, responsible intelligence.

Part antiques dealer, part architect, this Belgian maverick is an unlikely source of lessons for contemporary material reuse Marcel Raymaekers (1933–) never qualified as an architect. This did not stop him from procuring the materials for, designing and building around 150 villas across Belgium. The exact number is unknown: Belgium’s architectural establishment mostly ignored and rejected Raymaekers just as he ignored and rejected them, and as a result his work has never been collated or taken seriously. Raymaekers himself never kept records of his work; he regarded the drawing board as a ‘torture device’, preferring sketches and improvisation on site, determined by the material batches he had to hand. The extent of Raymaekers’ oeuvre is also hard to fathom because he wanted to keep it under the radar of the tax authorities. They caught up with him eventually; he was bankrupted in 2014. Today, Raymaekers is a 92‑year‑old tenant living inside what was once his personal empire, Queen of the South, in the Limburg countryside in north‑western Belgium. This compound was – and to a limited extent, still is – a vast salvage yard packed with components scavenged from aggressive postwar demolition. This puzzling place, completed in 1972 but constantly expanded, is stuffed with billowing pitched roofs, impossible archways, numerous appendages and antechambers. In its heyday – the 1970s and ’80s – Queen of the South also had a nightclub, a restaurant, a jazz venue, Raymaekers’ own ultra‑luxe apartment, and an estaminet – a plush, wood‑panelled, banquet‑seated, mirror‑pillared café‑bar. Marcel Raymaekers was born in 1933 near Leuven in Belgium. In 1950, he enrolled to study architecture at the Sint-Lukas School in Brussels but left a year later without a degree. Though not officially an architect, Raymaekers proceeded to design around 150 projects, from suburban homes to hotels and music venues – in 1986, he completed the Orlando discotheque, which burned down in 2014 Credit: Roger Dyckmans It was here that Raymaekers would sit – when he was not criss‑crossing Belgium scouting for materials – scoping out clients as they stumbled giddily into his world, overwhelmed by the aspiration and status anxiety that Queen of the South was designed to induce. The project was also a cultural hub attracting misfits and eccentrics, wheelers and dealers, experts and charlatans. The novelist Hugo Claus had his 50th birthday at Queen of the South, honouring Raymaekers in his speech. Raymaekers and his wife Hilde did interviews for newspapers, magazines and TV, often while reclining on their bed. The media was not interested in him as an accomplished architect, but as a purveyor of kitsch, an absurdity.  What Raymaekers had to sell his clients was more than simply antiques or even houses composed of them (buy enough materials and he would design you a house for no charge: that was always the deal). What Raymaekers was really selling were dreams of nobility: the life of a lord and lady of the manor, set apart (and above) from an increasingly modernised, homogenised world. Sensuality and hedonism, expressed through haptic, resplendent materials, was a big part of the allure too – the promise of a new way of life. One of Raymaekers’ bigger projects was a love hotel, Rubensexclusief, near Diest, completed in 1979. Each chamber was bestowed with an excess of padded velvet upholstery, often creeping up the walls and curving onto the ceilings. In the lobby, a salvaged confession booth was intended as a hiding place for guilty parties. Raymaekers brought several clients here to celebrate a successful transaction or to introduce them to his material language before starting design negotiations. His clients were middle‑class professionals – teachers, dentists, entrepreneurs, doctors, engineers, florists, pharmacists. Wealthy, but not extraordinarily rich. Many of his houses allowed them to live and work – interfacing with the public – on the same property. House Kelchtermans from 1970, for example, designed with architect Jos Witters, is composed of three pyramids – a home, a doctor’s office and a garage – structured with reclaimed oak beams. The roof tiles were salvaged by the client himself, Dr Kelchtermans, who received tips on where to find them from his patients, many of whom were farmers whose buildings were undergoing modernisation or demolition. Inside, it is all split‑levels, enormous fireplaces and complex, spiralling spaces. But the house’s biggest flourish is the skylights: 23 cupolas from decommissioned Lockheed T‑33 fighter jet cockpits. Raymaekers had found them languishing in a salvage yard on the other side of Flanders, saw their architectural potential and persuaded the client to buy them. Client participation was everything. The Boncher family’s house, completed in 1984, is a mash‑up of components from a derelict slaughterhouse in the city of Tienen and an army barracks in Verviers. The Bonchers themselves spent weeks carefully dismantling the bricks, Gobertange white stone and fleur‑de‑lis roof tiles from the slaughterhouse. Raymaekers had the grand entrance and guardhouses from the barracks available in his stock at Queen of the South, probably at a time‑sensitive discount. Many of the construction and final design decisions for House Boncher were left to happenstance; as the contractors built the walls up row‑by‑row, whenever a hole was needed for a window, Raymaekers would decide the dimensions only at that moment, based on whatever blue limestone window frame he happened to have in stock. Occasionally, the masons had to deconstruct part of a wall if a larger‑than‑anticipated window became available.  ‘Raymaekers’ houses are intelligent, instinctive assemblages of unpredictable material streams’ The interior, too, required improvisation. A white stone staircase, salvaged from a church pulpit, was meant to spiral up to the main bedroom of House Boncher but turned out to be about 200mm too short. The solution? Raymaekers and the contractors decided to build a hefty bump into the floor, consisting of cobbles and decorative tiling. It gave the staircase the necessary boost to reach up to the bedroom. It was typical of how designing exclusively with old materials required Raymaekers to empower and trust his contractors. Their design contributions, extemporisation and management of materials and how they might fit together were intrinsic to the realisation of every project. Working with large batches helped simplify matters – or allowed further complexity. When the Antwerp townhouse of art nouveau architect Joseph Bascourt was demolished to make way for the extension of a car park, Raymaekers snapped up the facade. Without knowing or caring how the pieces were originally composed, Raymaekers shuffled them into a new configuration for the facade of a flower shop a client had commissioned in the Brussels hinterland, completed in 1987. Raymaekers moved Bascourt’s decorative entablature from the top of the facade down to eye level, the better to be enjoyed; that this meant the windows on the top floor would now poke strangely above the roofline was fine with both Raymaekers and the client. The shreds of Raymaekers’ reputation that survive today, and what can be retrieved and reconstructed of his private and professional habits, are complex at best. His charisma and determination enabled him to convince artisans, contractors, labourers and clients to stretch themselves beyond what they thought possible, adding their own talent to his difficult buildings. But Raymaekers could also be intimidating and domineering. Collaborators often stepped away from his all‑consuming process; clients who considered him too pushy and found themselves running out of money could cease working with him. But this was not the case for his spouses, sons, grandchildren and daughters‑in‑law. They were bound to him by more than his business practice and art, and some of them suffered enduring and even unbearable distress. Their suffering is the shadow behind Raymaekers’ work. When researchers from Belgian design practice Rotor and the University of Ghent – also the authors of this article – started showing up at Queen of the South in 2011, it was not because of Raymaekers’ reputation; it was merely to include Queen of the South on Opalis’s database, a roster of salvage dealers covering much of north‑western Europe. We only realised the extent and importance of his work after several years and at least three visits. Raymaekers had refused all interviews since his bankruptcy, but after some persuasion, a meeting was scheduled in the courtyard on a grey winter day. Triggered by newspaper cuttings, his own limited archive of photographs and strolls through the stock, a picture emerged of the rich reuse ecosystem in which he was active in his glory days. It is this ecosystem, along with the remarkable and necessary fluidity of Raymaekers’ practice with old building materials, that was critical to his success. Belgium was blessed in the postwar period with a remarkably robust network of demolition contractors who were also salvage dealers, antiques dealers who were also designers, industrial scrapyards willing to let architects pick through their mountains of waste. The landscape was ripe for reuse. So was the legislative field. Raymaekers’ oeuvre could be mistaken, at a cursory glance, for just more Ugly Belgian Houses (several of them have indeed appeared on Hannes Coudenys’ infamous blog). His houses appear to be kitsch, chaotic, brazen, overstuffed with mixed metaphors. But they are much more than that. They are intelligent, instinctive assemblages of unpredictable material streams. They are bracing, never boring. And though they are wildly out‑of‑step with today’s tastes, the houses – and moreover, the kind of innovative practice that built them – have a lot to teach spatial practitioners about reusing architectural materials and circularity in the construction industry. And as with any of those so‑called ‘ugly’ Belgian houses, the label is a trivialisation (and an elitist one) of something systemic and generative. What makes possible such expressionistic and characterful suburban houses in Belgium – whatever one thinks of their quality – is government policy since the postwar era. While other European countries went all in on standardised social housing, in Belgium, the 1948 De Taeye Law offered construction grants and a state guarantee on mortgages, triggering families to initiate, help design and sometimes even execute the construction of their own homes, tapping into a rural tradition of self‑reliance. Raymaekers worked at a time when modernisation – and the demolition it demanded – was churning out a constant flow of antique materials. It was also a time when the merger and exchange of roles in the architectural process – from material procurement, to design and collaboration live on site – was still possible. Material reuse today is much harder. It must work precisely against the linear flows of extraction, capital, efficiency and predictability – all supercharged by the digital and its requirement of an almost omniscient predictability, and by increasingly demanding rules around compliance and liability. But to explore the wild potential of material reuse – not just to reduce embodied carbon, but to unleash new design potential and a richer culture around material (heritage) and practice – it must be possible to imagine ways in which material procurement, construction sites and the architects’ role can change fundamentally again.  Illustration: Laslo Antal for The Architectural Review. Read more about the process of making this portrait here 2025-05-15 Justinien Tribillon Share AR May 2025CircularityBuy Now

Since founding Kadre Architects in 2022, Nerin Kadribegovic’s firm has garnered a reputation for doing a lot with a little. Case in point: standardized drawing sets for ADUs and an interim housing development wedged between highways. More recently, the Los Angeles practice transformed defunct storefront space in Compton into a social services hub. The Compton Community Center opened early this year. It offers case management services to individuals experiencing homelessness. Residents can go to the center for document procurement, connections to medical and behavioral health services, applications for vouchers, support for acclimating back to the job market, and other critical social services. A double-height vaulted space greets visitors upon entry. (Paul Vu) HOPICS is the service provider Kadre Architects worked with that now operates the 1,000-square-foot space. The space boasts vaulted ceilings, and bespoke wood creations that climb up the front facade, and hover above the backyard. The interiors are washed in natural light. The neo-postmodern architecture pulls from its context. To the community center’s left is a yellow apartment block and, to its right, a church with a pitched roof. The Compton Community Center was painted white and yellow, and the wooden lattice that’s attached to the front facade mimics the church’s slanted profile. The center is located between an apartment block and a church. (Paul Vu) The original storefront space had a modest 10-foot floor-to-ceiling height. After taking the commission, Kadre Architects uncovered concealed attics. The designers opened up the ceiling to create a double-height vaulted space with skylights. Asymmetric wooden desks staffed by HOPICS employees greet visitors upon entry. These bits were constructed out of laminated plywood, and mirror the geometric floor patterns. Custom shelving was also made of plywood. The interior palette makes generous use of bright white and yellow, a nod to the service provider’s brand colors, the adjoining buildings, and Kadre’s signature color-drenched spaces more broadly. The rear parking lot was converted into a courtyard garden and playground for visiting families. (Paul Vu) Aerial view of the rear courtyard, showing the heavy use of color. (Paul Vu) The lot Kadre Architects negotiated is long and narrow. The back was transformed into a vibrant, polychromatic courtyard employees and visitors can enjoy. Informal, outdoor meetings with case managers happen there. Playground equipment from a nearby housing project was installed in the courtyard garden for visiting families. Trees were planted, and slivers of existing asphalt were cut out and replaced with artificial turf, creating moments of green respite, the designers shared. This softens what was once a parking lot.

At 3DPI, our mission is to deliver high-quality journalism, technical insight, and industry intelligence to professionals across the additive manufacturing (AM) ecosystem. Whether you’re designing aerospace parts, building dental workflows, investing in next-generation materials, or shaping national AM strategy, you’re part of the reason we do this. But we want to go further. And that means hearing from you. 📋 Take the 3DPI Reader Survey We’re launching a short, focused reader survey to help us understand: What you value most in our content What’s missing How we can better serve your professional goals This is your chance to tell us: What kinds of stories or tools would help you do your job better Whether you want more technical explainers, market trend analysis, procurement tools, or vendor insights How 3DPI can improve your daily workflow—whether you’re in R&D, strategy, production, investment, or academia It takes less than 5 minutes. Your input directly informs editorial priorities and platform features. Why It Matters There’s a lot of noise in the AM space: press release churn, hype, and recycled headlines. At 3DPI, we aim to cut through that and bring you reporting, insight, and tools that actually move the needle. But to do that well, we need clarity on what you actually use, trust, and want more of. This survey helps us align what we publish with what you actually need; whether that’s: In-depth coverage of standards and regulations Real-world case studies that go beyond the brochure Technical deep dives Trend briefings or expert interviews Your voice shapes that roadmap. Thanks in advance for sharing your time and insight. We’re committed to keeping 3DPI the trusted source for professionals building the future of manufacturing. Michael Petch Michael Petch is the editor-in-chief at 3DPI and the author of several books on 3D printing. He is a regular keynote speaker at technology conferences where he has delivered presentations such as 3D printing with graphene and ceramics and the use of technology to enhance food security. Michael is most interested in the science behind emerging technology and the accompanying economic and social implications.

House Republicans have proposed banning states from regulating AI for the next ten years. The sweeping moratorium, quietly tucked into the Budget Reconciliation Bill last Sunday, would block most state and local governments from enforcing AI regulations until 2035 if passed. The proposed legislation stated that “no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems,” for 10 years. Industry experts warn that this potential regulatory vacuum would come precisely when AI systems are becoming more powerful and pervasive across the US society. Oversight gap raises concerns The moratorium would create an unprecedented situation: rapidly evolving AI technology would operate without state-level guardrails during what may be its most transformative decade. “The proposed decade-long moratorium on state-level AI regulations presents a double-edged sword,” said Abhivyakti Sengar, practice director at Everest Group. “On one hand, it aims to prevent a fragmented regulatory environment that could stifle innovation, on the other hand, it risks creating a regulatory vacuum, leaving critical decisions about AI governance in the hands of private entities without sufficient oversight.” The proposed legislation includes specific exceptions. According to the bill text, states would still be allowed to enforce laws that have “the primary purpose and effect of which is to remove legal impediments to, or facilitate the deployment or operation of, an artificial intelligence model, artificial intelligence system, or automated decision system.” States could also enforce laws that streamline “licensing, permitting, routing, zoning, procurement, or reporting procedures” for AI systems. However, the bill explicitly prohibits states from imposing “any substantive design, performance, data-handling, documentation, civil liability, taxation, fee, or other requirement” specifically on AI unless such requirements are applied equally to non-AI systems with similar functions. This limitation would prevent states from creating AI-specific oversight frameworks that address the technology’s unique capabilities and risks. State AI regulations threatened If enacted, the impact could be significant. Several states have been developing AI oversight frameworks that would likely become unenforceable under the federal provision. Various state-level efforts to regulate AI systems — from algorithmic transparency requirements to data privacy protections for AI training — could be effectively neutralized without public debate or input. The moratorium particularly threatens state data privacy protections. Without these state laws, consumers have few guarantees regarding how AI systems use their data, obtain consent, or make decisions affecting their lives. Global standards diverge The US approach now stands in stark contrast to the European Union’s comprehensive AI Act, which imposes strict requirements on high-risk AI systems. “As the US diverges from the EU’s stringent AI regulatory framework, multinational enterprises may face the challenge of navigating conflicting standards,” Sengar noted. This divergence potentially leads to “increased compliance costs and operational complexities.” Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst and CEO at Greyhound Research, sees a splintering global AI landscape ahead. “America’s moratorium will likely deepen the regulatory divergence with Europe,” said Gogia. “This will accelerate the fragmentation of global AI product design, where use-case eligibility and ethical thresholds vary dramatically by geography.” Enterprises face a new reality For businesses, the regulatory clarity comes with difficult strategic decisions. Companies must determine how aggressively to implement AI systems during this regulation-free decade. Many large companies aren’t waiting for government guidance. “Even before public oversight being put on hold, large enterprises have already launched internal AI governance councils,” Gogia explained. “These internal regimes — led by CISOs, legal, and risk teams — are becoming the primary referees for responsible AI use.” But Gogia cautioned against over-reliance on self-regulation: “While these structures are necessary, they are not a long-term substitute for statutory accountability.” Legal uncertainty remains Despite the moratorium on regulations, experts warn that companies still face significant liability risks. “The absence of clear legal guidelines could result in heightened legal uncertainty, as courts grapple with AI-related disputes without established precedents,” said Sengar. Gogia puts it more bluntly: “Even in a regulatory freeze, enterprises remain legally accountable. I believe the lack of specific laws does not eliminate legal exposure — it merely shifts the battleground from compliance desks to courtrooms.” While restricting state action, the legislation simultaneously expands the federal government’s AI footprint. The bill allocates $500 million to the Department of Commerce for AI modernization through 2035. The money targets legacy system replacement, operational efficiency improvements, and cybersecurity enhancements using AI technologies. This dual approach positions the federal government as both the primary AI regulator and a major AI customer, consolidating tremendous influence over the technology’s direction. Finding balance Industry observers emphasize the need for thoughtful governance despite the moratorium. “In this rapidly evolving landscape, a balanced approach that fosters innovation while ensuring accountability and public trust is paramount,” Sengar noted. Gogia offers a succinct assessment of the situation: “The 10-year moratorium on US state and local AI regulation removes complexity but not risk. I believe innovation does need room, but room without direction risks misalignment between corporate ethics and public interest.”

Hyper-converged infrastructure pioneer Nutanix is among a number of suppliers that smell blood in the water when it comes to VMware and its customers following the virtualisation giant’s acquisition by Broadcom. At Nutanix’s annual .Next bash in Washington DC last week, migration away from VMware and to – it hopes – its own Acropolis hypervisor (AHV) was a constant theme. As part of this, it gathered three customers to talk about their experiences of moving from VMware to Nutanix.  Of these, only one was directly attributable to Broadcom’s licensing changes, but Broadcom-Amazon Web Services (AWS) relations were key to another. We asked them about their journey to Nutanix and away from VMware, as well as the precise pain points that prompted their decisions. Here, we talk to: Dom Johnston, IT manager for Golding in Brisbane, Australia, which is a heavy civil and mining contracting company that has operated on the east coast of Australia for about 75 years.  Kee Yew Wei, associate vice-president for infrastructure and operations at MSIG, which is a Japan-headquartered insurance company that operates internationally.  Mike Taylor, hospital ship joint task director for Military Sealift Command and the US Navy, which operates two hospital ships, Mercy (pictured above) and Comfort. Dom Johnston: Golding had its infrastructure sitting in VMware on AWS. We had a three-year contract with VMware for that platform, which ended in February this year. About March of last year, there was a fairly public divorce between VMware and AWS. We weren’t sure where that left us.  To cut a long story short, with what we saw over the next two to three months from there, we considered the risk of leaving our infrastructure there beyond the end of that three-year contract was too great for us. Golding had its infrastructure sitting in VMware on AWS. [After the] fairly public divorce between VMware and AWS, we weren’t sure where that left us. With what we saw over the next two to three months, we considered the risk of leaving our infrastructure there beyond the end of that three-year contract was too great. Nutanix has kind of swung in to replace that Dom Johnston, Golding So we went out to market to look at alternatives. And Nutanix has kind of swung in to essentially replace that. We use NC2 [Nutanix Cloud Clusters] to run our production workloads in AWS, for our DR [disaster recovery] capability, and that’s essentially to directly replace the functionality that existed within AWS and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, which was the DR product that sat alongside that.  So essentially, our DR strategy is that if an event occurs, we immediately spin up the DR environment ready to accept a workload. In the event that is not required, it’s spun back down again, and we’ve lost, you know, a couple 100 bucks worth of compute usage.  Kee Yew Wei: Our journey with Nutanix is from 2017. We were looking for a hyper-converged system to simplify our environment, to do away with the traditional three-tier legacy system, to simplify our environment, and to reduce our datacentre footprint.  Nutanix is the system, but we didn’t have full confidence in Acropolis at that time, because it was quite new compared to VMware.  After a couple of years using Nutanix, we built confidence, so we have recently migrated all our VMware to Nutanix AHV. We completed the full migration last month.  All this came about after the acquisition by Broadcom, and we received a quotation with a 300% to 400% increase on our renewal pricing. So, then we made the decision to go for Nutanix.  We started planning somewhere around Q3 last year and were quite conservative, with completion planned for maybe somewhere in Q2 this year. My team migrated 1,000 to 2,000 VMs [virtual machines] from Q4 and completed that at the beginning of April. So today, we are a full Nutanix house. Mike Taylor: Our story with Nutanix started way back in 2017. We’d been Nutanix lookers for a long time.  On my ships, we had 1,000 blade servers and EMC tiered storage taking up multiple racks. But on the ships, there’s only a finite amount of power they generate, so I needed to find a way to bring everything down into a smaller footprint – but a smarter, smaller footprint, something that would allow me to very elegantly manage and have ease of use that my teams aboard the ships could deal with.  After a couple of years using Nutanix, we built confidence, so we have recently migrated all our VMware to Nutanix AHV Kee Yew Wei, MSIG So, we did a bake-off with Dell, Cisco and Nutanix, and we implemented Nutanix on Mercy in 2019 and Comfort in 2020. Now, we’re looking at generational refreshes of all of our equipment and probably expanding from there and getting some new features, with redundancy and disaster recovery. We do have an onboard continuity-of-operations rack, so we have mirrored failover clusters of Nutanix aboard the ships.  Now we’re all Nutanix. Everything moved over. That’s like, out of 80-something servers, we only had two or three servers that had hiccups.  Taylor: I remember standing in my main datacentre on the hospital ships. It’s very anticlimactic if you ever get to go; I just have five racks, but two of those five were purely just to run my server infrastructure. I remember standing there with one of my peers, and we were looking at it and we said, “Oh, hey, we’re still using SAN directors.” And SAN was going away, they were on their way out.  Dell had come out with stuff like FX, and other people were dabbling with hyper-converged, whereas Nutanix had already done it, and they had their own software, which was easy to understand for my engineers. So, I’m looking at these racks full of equipment, especially the VNX, which was power hungry. So, we said, “There has to be a better way to do this.” Energy was the problem. Energy was the driver to finding a solution.  We weren’t impacted by the Broadcom event. We got in before it. I do still run some VMware, so I am impacted by it there. The challenge we have incurred in continuing to operate that small part isn’t financial. It’s purely that I can’t get to updates. I can’t get to download them. It’s support aspects of the change that impact us the most, not the financial part of it.  If we hadn’t moved to Nutanix, if we were still purely ESXi, the financial part would certainly be a burden, like it is for other military commands.  Johnston: After AWS and VMware had their thing, we were notified by VMware that we were no longer able to spin up our on-demand DR cluster. They told us that, essentially, we could still use our DR plan if we powered down our production cluster before spinning up a DR cluster. We were testing quarterly, but we were no longer able to do that. In fact, we shifted to testing monthly because there was so much uncertainty in that space. We were left in a situation where, because we couldn’t test, we had zero confidence.  Kee Yew Wei: It was all about cost. We got a bill with a 300% to 400% increase on our last renewal. So, this is one of the key factors that drove us to migrate all our workloads to Nutanix. Taylor: The trade-offs are very, very light, if any. My people were very seasoned with ESXi VMware Tools and the orchestration that VMware had.  But the learning curve for Nutanix is very short. It’s very easy to pick up, but you have to learn it. There’s a different way to import an OVA, as opposed to the way you do it within the VMware ecosystem, for example. So, the trade-off is really just time to become a master at using the system with regard to functionality.  The learning curve for Nutanix is very short. It’s very easy to pick up Mike Taylor, US Navy In fact, I think I have enhanced capability using AHV as my hypervisor. When it comes to security, using VMware with the military, we have to submit vulnerability scans constantly. That’s just part of our regular drumbeat. I still run VMware on classified parts of my network, and it is very challenging to keep it secure and up to date. I don’t have that issue with Nutanix. Johnson: I second that. As far as trade-offs are concerned, or the functionality, it’s really just a question of semantics in relation to the differences between the two platforms. The way that Nutanix handles snapshots is different to the way that VMware handles snapshots. That was a learning curve for us. It’s like going from Windows 10 to Windows 11. Things are in a different spot, but it’s the same functionality.  You need to prepare your team, get them training, show them what to do. I don’t think there’s any loss of functionality. In fact, I think there are faster workflows, better availability of tools.  Kee Yew Wei: I don’t see trade-offs. Maybe 10 years ago, compatibility with other suppliers’ software might have been an issue, like backup solutions such as [Veritas] NetBackup. Maybe seven or eight years ago, they did not support Nutanix. But that’s not the case today. Read more about virtualisation and storage University will ‘pull the plug’ to test Nutanix disaster recovery: University of Reading set to save circa £500,000 and deploy Nutanix NC2 hybrid cloud that will allow failover from main datacentre.  NHS trust cloud plans hampered by Trump tariff uncertainty: Essex NHS wants to move some capacity to the Nutanix cloud, but can’t be certain prices will hold between product selection and when procurement plans gain approval.