The 2026 Loki Prevost H3-45, a 45-foot diesel coach, arrives on the scene and completely upends all we thought we understood about what a motorhome should be. Built on the Prevost H3-45 VIP chassis, this beast boasts a 550 horsepower Volvo D13 engine mated with a huge 1,850 pound-feet of torque, resulting in a seriously smooth and confident drive that doesn’t go all dramatic. That chassis, of course, includes all of the bells and whistles, such as self-leveling suspension, electronic stability systems, and driving aids that make long trips a breeze rather than a grind.

Loki Coach approaches the conversion with a perfectly rational perspective, which is more than a bit refreshing. The lines are sleek and minimalist, all black with a hint of a glow from the continuous LED lighting that runs up the edge of the device; no flash, no bother. The quad slides significantly increase the living area, but you’d never know it by looking at it, as it still appears sleek and purposeful, with none of the bulbous overhang seen on some other rigs.

EF ECOFLOW Portable Power Station DELTA 2, 1024Wh LiFePO4 (LFP) Battery, 1800W AC/100W USB-C Output,…

• 7 X Faster Charging. 0-80% in just 50 mins and 0-100% in 80 mins with AC input. That’s ideal when you need home backup power and a quick charge using…
• Expandable Capacity from 1-3kWh. With the standalone portable power station sporting 1kWh, you can add on extra batteries to reach up to 3kWh. Ideal…
• Power Almost Anything. Portable batteries have come a long way. Power all your appliances with 1800W output, that’s on par with outdoor generators…

Stepping inside, the area unfolds with great care and attention to detail. You’ve got hardwood cabinetry with nice soft-close hinges, all dovetail joinery, and stone surfaces everywhere, on the counters, the farmhouse sink, the dining table, as all the kitchen stuff is top-shelf GE Cafe appliances, such as a convection microwave, double-door fridge, drawer dishwasher, and it all just fits right into this super simple layout. You have two pantries and plenty of storage to keep everything organized, but it still feels wide and open.

Living areas, on the other hand, are all about getting it just right; a pull-out sofa anchors the lounge, and the bar setup near the driver’s seat is exactly what you need, and then there’s the workstation, which includes a 27″ monitor on a hydraulic lift, allowing you to simply start working without disrupting the entire flow. The chairs are really comfortable, and the Sonos audio system fills the space with sound, which even reaches outdoors under the power awnings. Of course, you have keyless access, a Ring doorbell camera, and a Garmin command center with all of the settings right at your fingertips.

Bedrooms are all about the king bed, which is flanked by dual wardrobes and a rising elevator TV, with padded ceilings throughout to help with acoustics. The back ensuite bathroom features a large tiled shower, a stone vanity, a cosmetics station, and even its own toilet with drawer. You also have a separate half bath up front with a porcelain macerating toilet and mirrored cupboards, a washing and dryer hidden behind retractable doors, a coffee station, and a second pantry.

This thing is all about energy independence, with 400 watts of solar on the roof, giant lithium batteries, a commercial onan generator, and hydronic heating that warms up the entire area. The water capacities of 172 gallons fresh, 115 gray, and 60 black are adequate for some extended off-grid living. It all works effortlessly, with the screens rising and falling without your notice, the lighting adjusting without any obvious switches, and everything humming silently in the background.

All of this refinement costs around $2.2 million, which is a reasonable sum for all of the artistry and attention to detail that has gone into this project.
[Source]

Amid a push toward AI agents, with both Anthropic and OpenAI shipping multi-agent tools this week, Anthropic is more than ready to show off some of its more daring AI coding experiments. But as usual with claims of AI-related achievement, you’ll find some key caveats ahead.

On Thursday, Anthropic researcher Nicholas Carlini published a blog post describing how he set 16 instances of the company’s Claude Opus 4.6 AI model loose on a shared codebase with minimal supervision, tasking them with building a C compiler from scratch.

Over two weeks and nearly 2,000 Claude Code sessions costing about $20,000 in API fees, the AI model agents reportedly produced a 100,000-line Rust-based compiler capable of building a bootable Linux 6.9 kernel on x86, ARM, and RISC-V architectures.

Carlini, a research scientist on Anthropic’s Safeguards team who previously spent seven years at Google Brain and DeepMind, used a new feature launched with Claude Opus 4.6 called “agent teams.” In practice, each Claude instance ran inside its own Docker container, cloning a shared Git repository, claiming tasks by writing lock files, then pushing completed code back upstream. No orchestration agent directed traffic. Each instance independently identified whatever problem seemed most obvious to work on next and started solving it. When merge conflicts arose, the AI model instances resolved them on their own.

The resulting compiler, which Anthropic has released on GitHub, can compile a range of major open source projects, including PostgreSQL, SQLite, Redis, FFmpeg, and QEMU. It achieved a 99 percent pass rate on the GCC torture test suite and, in what Carlini called “the developer’s ultimate litmus test,” compiled and ran Doom.

It’s worth noting that a C compiler is a near-ideal task for semi-autonomous AI model coding: The specification is decades old and well-defined, comprehensive test suites already exist, and there’s a known-good reference compiler to check against. Most real-world software projects have none of these advantages. The hard part of most development isn’t writing code that passes tests; it’s figuring out what the tests should be in the first place.

Alpine skiing live streams at the 2026 Winter Olympics will see Austria attempt to continue their historic dominance of this event, with challenges expected from Switzerland and France.

Austria have claimed 40 golds and 128 medals in total since alpine skiing was introduced to the winter games back in 1936. Switzerland came out on top in 2022, though, and they are expected to be strong again when the action gets under way on Saturday, February 7 (full schedule below).

Ski jumping at the Winter Olympics should deliver plenty of drama and entertainment at Milano Cortina 2026.

Ski jumping has been part of the Winter Olympics since the inaugural edition of the event in 1924. Norway lead the way for golds (12) and total medals (36), but the likes of Finland, Austria, Germany and Japan have enjoyed success over the years. Meanwhile, Slovenia topped the medal charts in 2022 and will hope to be contenders again this year.

Big Tech capital expenditure for this year is predicted to rise 60pc from $410bn in 2025.

Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft are signalling a collective 2026 capital expenditure package of around $650bn, with AI, cloud and data centres as unsurprising high-ticket items. Wary investors, however, seem unhappy, and the Financial Times reported that Amazon, Google and Microsoft are set to lose $900bn in market cap altogether.

Big Tech capital expenditure predictions would mark a rise of 60pc from the $410bn spent in 2025 and 165pc from the $245bn spent the year before.

The four competitors see the race to provide AI compute as “the next winner-take-all or winner-takes-most market”, Gil Luria, an analyst at DA Davidson told Bloomberg. None of the companies are “willing to lose”, he added.

Amazon shares fell by 11pc after the company’s earnings call yesterday (5 February) in which company president and CEO Andy Jassy announced a $200bn capital expenditure (capex) plan for the year, growing more than 50pc since last year.

He reasoned that a 24pc revenue growth in Amazon’s cloud offerings and a 22pc growth in advertising is evidence that the heavy spending is paying off. This year’s spending will be focused on AI, chips, robotics and low-Earth orbit satellites, Jassy said.

Meanwhile, Microsoft announced a $37.5bn quarterly capital expenditure bill on 28 January, just slightly more than analyst estimates. But the company was the worst hit among the four for a while, dropping 18pc since the announcement.

The company had also, for the first time, disclosed the true nature of its close economic relationship with OpenAI. It reported that roughly 45pc of its $625bn expected in future cloud contracts was from the start-up, leading to investor wariness on its over-reliance on one customer.

Google parent Alphabet initially dropped 4pc in share price after it reported its earnings on Wednesday (4 February), but climbed back up to being just below 0.5pc since yesterday. Sales and earnings per share grew by 18pc and 31pc respectively during Q4, beating analyst expectations, while Alphabet’s cloud backlog grew by 55pc quarter-over-quarter to $240bn.

The company announced capex for the year between $175bn and $185bn, doubling expenses to meet customer demand and capitalise on the growth of the company’s AI offerings. Though despite fears of heavy spending, Gemini Enterprise is selling 8m seats and the Gemini App now has more than 750m monthly active users, which, Motley Fool reported, is keeping investors relatively content.

Lastly, Meta has announced its total expenses for 2026 to be in the range $115bn to $135bn. The growth, it said, is driven by an increased investment to support its Meta Superintelligence Labs efforts as well as its core business.

While the stocks rose 10pc after the earnings announcement, the Financial Times reports that it lost those gains after overall investor fear has pushed the tech-heavy Nasdaq down 4pc over the week.

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.

I’ve been teaching long enough to recognize when something fundamental is shifting in the classroom. Lately, that shift sounds like a single word echoing through my courses: why.

Why are we doing this? Why does it matter? Why should I care?

At first, it can sound like pushback, the kind of challenge that might once have been mistaken for defiance. But I don’t see it that way. When Gen Z students ask “why,” they’re not questioning authority; they’re questioning meaning. They’re trying to understand whether what they’re being asked to learn aligns with a world that already feels crowded with information, competition and contradiction.

And they’re right to ask.

Gen Z has grown up surrounded by constant messaging — some genuine, some hollow. They’ve seen companies preach purpose while chasing profit, influencers claim authenticity while filtering reality, and institutions talk about mental health while rewarding burnout. So when they step into a classroom, they’re not looking for performance. They’re looking for proof.

In many ways, “why” has replaced the old-fashioned raise of the hand. It’s the new signal for engagement, not disengagement. These students aren’t rebellious for sport; they’re searching for relevance. When they ask “why,” they’re asking us to show them the thread between knowledge and purpose.

For educators, that’s both thrilling and challenging. The old classroom contract may no longer be enough. Gen Z expects transparency in exchange for trust. They want to know not only what they’re learning but how it connects to who they’re becoming. That expectation is reshaping how many of us teach.

I’ve noticed that when I take the time to explain why we’re doing something — even briefly — engagement rises. It doesn’t need to be a speech or a slide titled “Why It Matters.” It can be a few sentences woven into the moment: “You’ll use this when you’re leading a team someday,” or “This will help you understand how strategy actually plays out in a business setting.” Framing purpose in passing often lands more effectively than any formal statement could. It tells students that there’s intention behind what they’re being asked to do.

And when the connection isn’t obvious, I try to make the learning process itself transparent. I’ll tell them why I’ve designed a particular project or changed an assignment from last semester. I explain my reasoning the way I’d want a mentor to explain theirs — not to justify, but to include. Once they see the care that goes into the design, their tone shifts from skeptical to curious.

New Perspective

That shift has changed my own mindset as an instructor. I’ve started to see my role less as delivering content and more as modeling thoughtfulness — the same kind I’m asking of them. I don’t have to declare that an assignment matters; I can show that it does by connecting it to a broader purpose, by caring about it visibly.

When things don’t go perfectly, I’ve learned to acknowledge that too. I used to think admitting uncertainty would weaken credibility. It turns out it does the opposite. When I tell students, “I’m still experimenting with how to teach this,” they don’t lose confidence — they lean in. They respect honesty because it mirrors their own experience of figuring things out.

That’s the real undercurrent here: authenticity has replaced authority as the key driver of credibility. Gen Z doesn’t automatically trust titles or experience; they trust consistency between what we say and what we do. They’ve been burned too many times by institutions that preached one set of values and practiced another. In the classroom, they want something simpler — teachers who mean what they say.

This doesn’t mean lowering standards or catering to comfort. If anything, it’s raised expectations. When students believe something has meaning, they work harder. I’ve seen it when my students analyze real company challenges instead of hypothetical ones, or when they present their findings to local business leaders rather than just to me. They’re sharper, more invested, and more willing to push themselves when the stakes feel real.

Even small acts of transparency build trust. Explaining why feedback is framed a certain way, or why participation matters, helps students see that the structure exists for a reason. They might not always agree, but they rarely tune out.

Overcoming Defensiveness

Of course, this approach can be draining. There are days when the “whys” feel relentless — when every question seems to demand another explanation, and you wonder if they’ll ever just take your word for it. But over time, I’ve come to see their skepticism not as defiance but as discernment. They’re not trying to tear down the system; they’re trying to make it make sense.

When a student asks, “Why are we doing this?” they’re really saying, “Help me to see the point.” That’s not cynicism. You might call it curiosity with higher benchmarks. And if we can meet that question with openness instead of defensiveness, the classroom becomes a space of shared inquiry rather than guarded authority.

There’s an irony in all this. The very generation accused of being distracted is, in many ways, the most focused — just not on what older models of education assumed mattered. They’re focused on meaning. They want clarity, fairness and consistency, but they also want a sense of humanity behind it all. They crave professors who teach like people, not policies.

Maybe that’s the lesson for us, too. If Gen Z is asking “why,” perhaps we should start asking it of ourselves — not as a challenge, but as reflection. Why do we teach the way we do? Why do we grade like this? Why do we define learning in these terms?

Teaching a generation that questions everything isn’t easy. But it’s not resistance, it’s renewal. Their “why” invites us to rediscover our own.