Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Tech

12 Of The Worst Cars Ever Made (Judged Solely By Aerodynamics)

Published

on





Among the ways to judge a car, there are a few metrics we are used to seeing. For the average consumer, one must consider how a car performs in everyday tasks. How much do you spend at the gas station? How many kids, and dogs can fit in the rear seats? How much does it cost? Will it break down after 20,000 miles, or will the infotainment glitch and play one song on repeat? For the gearhead, performance is the question. How fast can it get to 60? What’s the braking distance like? Will I embarrass myself at a red light revving with a soft limiter? The concerns vary, as do the measurements in how people judge a car. One area of study, though, is germane to almost every consumer—aerodynamics.

For the consumer, aerodynamics means efficiency. The more harmoniously a car can pass through the air, the less energy it has to burn, which translates to less cash for the owner to spend. For the gearhead, aerodynamics means confidence. Well-designed aero elements help performance cars stay stuck to the tarmac at high speeds, allowing the driver to sling and yank the car in and out of turns without the fear of spinning out. This can be measured by the drag coefficient, where the lower the number, the more aerodynamically efficient the car is. Most cars are good at making themselves slippery, but what about the ones that aren’t?

Advertisement

Tesla Cybertruck

One look at Tesla’s futuristic four-wheeled polygon, and you can expect the Cybertruck doesn’t exactly finesse through the air. The front fascia is flat and stands completely upright against the air hitting it. The body is made almost entirely of stainless steel alloy that Tesla calls “Hard Freaking Stainless.” That steel body is also rather large, with the Cybertruck measuring up at 18.6 feet long, 6.7 feet wide, and 18.6 feet long. This enormous body translates to curb weight of over 6,000 pounds. That’s a lot of substance to push for the car’s electric motors, and while most of the car seems to scoff at the mention of aerodynamics, it does have some tricks up its sleeve to manage its colossal weight.

One strength of an electric vehicle is the simplicity of the drivetrain under the hood. On gas-powered cars, there are only so many moving parts you can cover up on the underbody, but for an EV the entire exterior floor can be made flat. The Cybertruck does exactly this, which helps pass air through the underside without fuss and turbulence. Another clever addition is the bed cover. The open bed is a pain for most pickups aerodynamically, but the Cybertruck features a sliding cover which, accentuated by its extremely simple downward slope, helps feed air over the bed smoothly. Still, the shape and weight prove difficult to defeat, as the Cybertruck has a drag coefficient of 0.38.

Advertisement

2019 Land Rover Defender

The Land Rover Defender is perhaps one of the most famous nameplates in the world. The original Land Rover has been around since 1948, but it wasn’t until 1990 that the brand introduced a customer version, the Defender, to the masses. By that time, even though the Defender was a new nameplate, the brand’s reputation as Britain’s best off-roader was solidified. In 2019, Land Rover refreshed the Defender and brought their signature rugged 4×4 into the 2020s. The new Defender brought with it all the new tech you’d expect for a car of today, but one aspect seems pulled straight from the past. The Defender’s styling is incredibly reminiscent of the original Land Rovers, and does everything it can under modern safety regulations to bring back memories of the original shape.

The original shape in question, while pretty, is quite boxy, and boxy means poor aerodynamics. The Defender measures up at 6.7 feet tall, 6.6 feet wide, and 16.5 feet long. These measurements all come together at angles that are nearly 90 degrees across the body, making for an undeniably retro shape, but one that feels awkward in the wind tunnel despite the smooth rounding of its historically sharp edges. The Defender does what it can for its shape, but retains a drag coefficient of 0.39.

Advertisement

Volkswagen Beetle RSi

Besides the Porsche 911’s ancestral connection to the Volkswagen Beetle, there’s really nothing about the Beetle’s essence that screams performance. However, in the early 2000’s, Volkswagen decided they wanted to see what the Beetle would look like if it did. The answer was the Volkswagen Beetle RSi. The RSi took the look of the early 2000’s Beetles and slapped a spoiler, fender flares, and new bumpers to make for something that was very clearly a performance car despite its foundation. Powered by a 3.2 liter V6, the RSi was no joke, with its 221 horsepower and a redline of 6,200 rpm.

The RSi somehow morphed into a performance car in many ways, but this did not come without sacrifice. Although not boxy like many of the other entries on this list, the Beetle’s ballooning roundness was not exactly desirable for aerodynamics either. The addition of new aero parts for the RSi helped in stability, but increased drag too. All said and done, the RSi came out with a drag coefficient of 0.40 — an impressively poor number for a car of its size.

Advertisement

Porsche 911 SC

Derived from the aforementioned Beetle, the Porsche 911 became one of the most iconic sports cars of all time. Today, they boast the best of the best in everything performance. Their engines are powerful, their transmissions, such as the PDK, are lightning quick, and their aerodynamic abilities bring racing technology to the streets, as with things like the GT3 RS‘s DRS button. However, things weren’t always like this. While Porsche has always tried to make the ultimate sports car, that doesn’t mean they’ve always succeeded.

Built only from 1978 to 1983, the 911 SC is the classic 911 of yesterday. SC stood for Super Carrera which was fitting, as the car was impressive for the time with its 188 horsepower. The car weighed just over 2,500 pounds, which, combined with its flat-six, made for a lovely sports car. However, the time of its creation had its limits. The 911 SC’s body was fantastic to look at, but not so much in a wind tunnel. Despite its identity as a sports car, the 911 SC produced a drag coefficient of 0.40.

Advertisement

Lamborghini Countach

The Porsche 911 might be one of the most iconic sports cars of all time, but the Lamborghini Countach might be the most iconic supercar of all time. First presented at the Geneva Motor Show in 1971, the Countach would go on to father the future generations of Lamborghini’s flagship V12 supercars, and it started the lineage with a bang. The name itself, Countach, translates to plague or contagion, but it is colloquially used in Italian as an exclamation of wonder, which could not be more fitting.

Powered by a monstrous V12, the Countach produces 348 horsepower and a 5.4-second 0-60. You could talk numbers all day, but the real magic of the car is the package those numbers come in. The Countach is the poster boy of the wedge supercar. Its slab-like lowness, sharp angles, and unembarrassed excess are what have earned it its place as one of the all-time greats. Elements like its huge rear wing make it recognizable even under a showroom cover, but they also make a lot of drag. In classic Italian fashion, the form besets function, as most of the aero elements were made to cater to the heart and not the wind. This philosophy is what led the supercar to its drag coefficient of 0.42. A high number, but one that is forgiven after one look at the thing.

Advertisement

Original Volkswagen Beetle

In the quest for poor aerodynamics, we return back to the Volkswagen Beetle and its colorful history. Before the second world war, Ferdinand Porsche proposed a design for what he called a “people’s car.” This economic and ergonomic little thing was the Beetle, and just before the factory building them could ramp up production, the war began. Once concluded, production began again, and the Beetle would go on to become one of Volkswagen’s longest-standing nameplates.

The Beetle’s mission was to be the best car it could be at a low cost to both the customer and the manufacturer. It was small, underpowered, and lacking in anything unnecessary. The Beetle became loved, though, for exactly that Spartan attitude, and for its cuteness. Its shape is rounded and compressed, again in line with its utilitarian mission. However, its charming shape was not without issues, though, as the Beetle was poorly sculpted for aerodynamics. The curving roofline looks nice, but it does nothing to smooth airflow over the end of the body as its shape might suggest. The windshield is nearly upright, which allows for good visibility but makes for an uncalculated wall for oncoming air. Even so, you can’t blame it. The Beetle never promised to be some kind of aerodynamic whizz, which is apparent in its 0.48 drag coefficient.

Advertisement

Hummer H2

The Hummer H2 is a product of its time. Think back to its release in 2002 America. Halo, Mountain Dew, Tom Brady, Nickelback and Britney Spears. While the airwaves were full of bubblegum pop music and grating nu metal, the roads were full of many now archaic cars, such as the Hummer H2. The Hummer’s origins go back to 1983, when the Pentagon contracted AM General Corporation to build the Humvee. The Humvee was an enormous armored personnel carrier meant to be tough enough to take on any terrain. Later, in 1999, GM bought the rights to the Humvee, and somehow turned it into a civilian vehicle.

It was a civilian vehicle in name only, as the Hummer H2 looked like it had not been picked up from the lot, but from a C130 cargo plane. It was a gas guzzler if there ever was one, and its trademark personality trait was its size. The H2 was huge, almost obscenely large, and weighed just over 8,000 pounds. It wasn’t particularly concerned with efficiency, as evidenced by its 10 mpg rating, which was a good thing, because this hulking brick was anything but aerodynamic. Its huge surfaces and boxy angles were concerned only with presence. There was no effort to make it agree with the air, and it instead muscled through it. At the end of the day, the H2 had a drag coefficient of 0.52, which should come as no surprise after one look at the thing.

Advertisement

W463 G-Wagen

Although it predates the Hummer, the G-Wagen seems like Germany’s spiritual answer to the American colossus. Similar to the Hummer, the G-Wagen was derived from a German military 4×4, and was made into a civilian car in 1979. But, it wasn’t until the second generation, called the W463, that the G-Wagen became the off-roading luxury box that it is known as today.

The W463 premiered at the Frankfurt Motor Show in 1989. The W463 took everything its predecessor did well in the off-roading department, and souped up the creature comforts, further driving the G-Wagen into its place as the civilians’ favorite off-roader. It introduced things like interior wooden trims and bench seats while retaining its capabilities in the wilderness with things like standard four-wheel drive and electronic locking diffs. It also refreshed the exterior, but only slightly. The G-Wagen remained a very upright box on wheels, and this led to a predictably poor effect in aerodynamics. The wide-open underbody and nearly vertical windshield and front bumper made the W463 the antithesis of aerodynamic. The brash and upright edges and surfaces of the W463 means it has a drag coefficient of 0.54, but hey, beauty is pain.

Advertisement

Dodge Viper ACR Extreme

What happens when a brand known for muscle cars tries to make a supercar? The answer is the Dodge Viper. The Viper is truly the American idea of a supercar. In true American fashion, the Viper’s engine was a V10 that was originally intended for a Ram pickup truck. After some advice from Lamborghini, certified experts in the matters of 10 cylinders, Dodge altered the engine to make it more adept for performance on the track and not on the farm, and the original Viper was born. Since the first model in 1992, the Viper has gotten a lot faster.

At the end of its lifespan, Dodge decided to go all-out and see just how insane they could make the already insane Viper. The result was the Viper ACR Extreme. Some quick numbers help you get a sense of the car’s character. 8.4-liter V10 with 645 horsepower, 0-60 in 3.2 seconds, and a six-speed manual. The outside however, is where things get really crazy. If you opt for the Extreme package, your Viper ACR will come off the line with growths in the splitter, rear wing, and diffuser. These bits are enormous, and while they help keep the angry snake planted to the asphalt, they do a number on its aerodynamic efficiency. With the Extreme package, the Viper’s drag coefficient is 0.54, but remember, here, downforce is the name of the game.

Advertisement

Ford Bronco V

Before the Bronco returned in 2021, the 5th-generation Bronco was the last consumers ever saw of Ford’s iconic SUV. The Bronco 5 was effortlessly pretty, which was an impressive feat for its hulking bodystyle and the time it came from. The 5th generation brought an array of new technologies and features to the nameplate, such as new seating configurations with an optional front bench seat, a digital odometer, three-point safety belts, and more. Outside, the Bronco refreshed its face and cleaned up the lines and proportions of its predecessors, making for a sleeker look.

However, you can only be so sleek as an American SUV. Even as a two-door, the Bronco was still a huge car, and its size and heavy weight tipping the scales at 4,519 pounds meant that the Bronco was doomed to be another poor-performing subject in the wind tunnel. The Bronco 5 had all the hallmarks of an aerodynamically challenged SUV, with big, flat surfaces, tall panels and windows, and a wide-open underbody. All said and done, the Bronco had a drag coefficient of 0.60.

Advertisement

1993 Caterham Super Seven

The Lotus Seven is one of the most iconic sports cars of all time. The car is so well respected and loved, that today, even 54 years after Lotus stopped producing the Seven in 1972. Just one year after Lotus ended production of the Seven, Caterham acquired the rights to produce the car from Lotus’s lead man Colin Chapman. Since then, Caterham has produced the Seven the way it was intended by Chapman, all while keeping it up to date with the modern motoring world.

Although the Caterham Seven is a sports car, it ranks particularly low for its aerodynamic finesse. The upright windshield doesn’t help, but the real culprit is the open-wheel design, which has become so iconic for the Seven. The problem is a classic one for race cars, and one that can only be solved by covering the wheels, which eliminates drag but fundamentally changes the car’s character. Open-wheel designs offer no protection for the spinning wheels, creating a chaotic, turbulent airflow zone. A fender covering would be the quick fix for this issue, but then the Seven would no longer be a Seven. The Caterham Seven’s signature look means it has a drag coefficient of 0.62.

Advertisement

Ford Model T

The one that started it all, the Ford Model T is the grandfather of the modern automotive industry. Born in 1908, the Model T did not compete with other cars, but did compete with horse-drawn carriages. Henry Ford’s creation set the blueprint for the skeletal basics of the consumer car, with things like steering wheel placement, a tool kit, and a gas tank. The Model T had the barest of bones, and much of its look came from the Horse-pulled buggies before it, such as its tiny, bicycle-like wheels and its leather bench seats. The Model T was powered by a four-cylinder engine that had to be started via crank, and which produced a modest 22 horsepower. Those 22 horses could push the Model T up to 40 miles per hour, almost neighborhood speeds today, but vastly impressive for its time.

Given that Henry Ford’s goal was quite simply to make a car and nothing more, it feels unfair to critique his landmark creation for its aerodynamic capabilities. Still, Ford was extremely limited by his time, and by today’s standards, the Model T suffers from abhorrently poor aerodynamics. The upright windshield, open-wheel design, and exposed cabin make for a nightmare of chaotic air channels and haphazard flows, all of which give the Model T a drag coefficient of 0.79.

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Tech

Electric Wind-Up Plane Uses Supercapacitors For Free Flight Fun

Published

on

There’s something to be said for a simple wind-up, free flight model airplane. With no controls, it must be built very well to fly well, and with only the limited power of a rubber band, it needs a good, high-lift design without much superfluous drag to maximize flight time. There’s also something to be said for modernity though, and prolific hacker [Tom Stanton] puts them together with this supercapacitor plane.

If that sounds familiar, it’s because [Tom] did this before back in 2023. But for that first attempt he converted a commercial R/C toy rather than a plane optimized for low-power free flight. Just like with the best rubber-band machines, his goal for the new production is more flight time than winding time. Plus lots of views on YouTube, but that goes without saying.

Thus this machine is smaller and lighter than the previous iteration. Rather than balsa and tissue like the free-flight aircraft of our youths, [Tom] is using 3D printed plastic for the structure. But he’s got a neat hack built in: he’s printing the wings and control surfaces directly onto tissue paper, eliminating the bonding step. Of course that means his wings are printed flat, but a bit of heat and some bending and he has a single-surface airfoil. Single-surface airfoils are normal in this application, anyway: closed wings add too much weight for too little gain. If you want to try the technique, he’s got files on Printables.

Another interesting factoid [Tom] discovered is that the energy density of supercapacitors decreases sharply below 10 F. As you might imagine by the square-cubed law, bigger is better, but the sharp drop-off dictated he use a single 10 F cap for this build, along with a micro motor. Using the wind-up generator from his previous build, he’s able to get 45 seconds of flight out of just 4 seconds of cranking, a good ratio indeed.

Advertisement

[Tom] seems to like playing with different ways to power his toys; aside from supercapacitors, we’ve also seen him finessing aircraft air motors — including an attempt at a turbine for a model helicopter.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answer and Help for April 18 #776

Published

on

Looking for the most recent Strands answer? Click here for our daily Strands hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections and Connections: Sports Edition puzzles.


Today’s NYT Strands puzzle has a fun topic, but get ready to do some serious unscrambling of lengthy answers. If you need hints and answers, read on.

I go into depth about the rules for Strands in this story

Advertisement

If you’re looking for today’s Wordle, Connections and Mini Crossword answers, you can visit CNET’s NYT puzzle hints page.

Read more: NYT Connections Turns 1: These Are the 5 Toughest Puzzles So Far

Hint for today’s Strands puzzle

Today’s Strands theme is: Not too much.

Advertisement

If that doesn’t help you, here’s a clue: Is it on sale?

Clue words to unlock in-game hints

Your goal is to find hidden words that fit the puzzle’s theme. If you’re stuck, find any words you can. Every time you find three words of four letters or more, Strands will reveal one of the theme words. These are the words I used to get those hints but any words of four or more letters that you find will work:

  • VICE, VICES, SHEER, FOLD, FOLDER, FOLDERS, BALD, CHEAP, HEAP

Answers for today’s Strands puzzle

These are the answers that tie into the theme. The goal of the puzzle is to find them all, including the spangram, a theme word that reaches from one side of the puzzle to the other. When you have all of them (I originally thought there were always eight but learned that the number can vary), every letter on the board will be used. Here are the nonspangram answers:

  • SALE, BUDGET, BARGAIN, INEXPENSIVE, AFFORDABLE

Today’s Strands spangram

completed NYT Strands puzzle for April 18, 2026

The completed NYT Strands puzzle for April 18, 2026.

NYT/Screenshot by CNET

Today’s Strands spangram is ONTHECHEAP. To find it, start with the O that’s three letters to the right on the top row, and wind down.

Advertisement

Toughest Strands puzzles

Here are some of the Strands topics I’ve found to be the toughest.

#1: Dated slang. Maybe you didn’t even use this lingo when it was cool. Toughest word: PHAT.

#2: Thar she blows! I guess marine biologists might ace this one. Toughest word: BALEEN or RIGHT. 

#3: Off the hook. Again, it helps to know a lot about sea creatures. Sorry, Charlie. Toughest word: BIGEYE or SKIPJACK.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Apple Watch chief posts loving farewell to Apple Park on his retirement

Published

on

Stan Ng, known for presenting about the Apple Watch on Apple’s keynotes, has retired after 31 years at the company, and spent his last day ticking off bucket list items.

Man in an orange jacket standing in a sunny park, smiling, with tall trees and greenery in the background under a clear blue sky
Stan Ng in a video presentation for the Apple Watch Ultra – image credit: Apple

Stan Ng was Apple’s vice president, Apple Watch and Health Product Marketing, where he was involved with the whole design philosophy of the smart watch. But his three decades at the company extend back to the original iPod, and to before the return of Steve Jobs.
Now Ng has retired and in a post on LinkedIn, has described his final day at Apple Park working for the company. It includes watching the sunrise while listening to his original iPod, and then taking that iPod with him for a last workout in the gym.
Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Former NSA director Keith Alexander stepping down from Amazon’s board

Published

on

Retired Gen. Keith Alexander. (Amazon Photo)

Keith Alexander, a retired four-star Army general and former director of the National Security Agency, is leaving Amazon’s board of directors after more than five years.

Alexander, 74, informed the company April 7 that he wouldn’t stand for re-election at its annual meeting next month, according to the company’s proxy statement

“We’re grateful to General Alexander for his service on our Board since 2020 and for the many contributions he’s made to our company, and we wish him every success in the future,” a spokesperson said in a statement, responding to GeekWire’s inquiry.

No reason was given for his departure. Amazon’s board, which has fluctuated by one or two directors over time, will consist of 11 people after his departure.

Alexander joined Amazon’s board in September 2020, when Jeff Bezos was still CEO and the company was navigating a massive surge in demand during the early days of the pandemic. He previously chaired the board’s Security Committee, which oversees Amazon’s cybersecurity policies, data protection compliance, and response to significant cyber incidents.

Advertisement

Alexander served as commander of U.S. Cyber Command and led the NSA from 2005 to 2014, a tenure that included the surveillance disclosures of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

After retiring from the military, Alexander founded IronNet, a cybersecurity company, serving as CEO and president from 2014 to July 2023 and as board chair until February 2024. 

With his departure, eleven members of the board are up for re-election.

  • Jeff Bezos, founder and executive chair
  • Andy Jassy, president and CEO
  • Edith W. Cooper, co-founder of Medley Living and former EVP of Goldman Sachs
  • Jamie S. Gorelick, lead independent director; senior counsel at WilmerHale
  • Daniel P. Huttenlocher, dean of MIT Schwarzman College of Computing
  • Andrew Y. Ng, managing general partner of AI Fund; founder of DeepLearning.AI
  • Indra K. Nooyi, former chair and CEO of PepsiCo
  • Jonathan J. Rubinstein, former co-CEO of Bridgewater Associates
  • Brad D. Smith, president of Marshall University; former CEO of Intuit
  • Patricia Q. Stonesifer, former president and CEO of Martha’s Table
  • Wendell P. Weeks, chairman, CEO, and president of Corning

Amazon’s annual shareholder meeting will be held virtually May 20.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

OpenAI to rival Google’s AlphaFold with new AI model for life sciences research

Published

on

The model is the first release in OpenAI’s Life Science model series.

OpenAI has announced plans to roll out an early version of GPT-Rosalind, its AI reasoning model designed to support research across biology, drug discovery and translational medicine. 

In a statement on Thursday (16 April), OpenAI explained that on average, it can take up 15 years to move from target discovery to regulatory approval for a new drug in the US, with progress impacted by the difficulty of the underlying science, as well as the complexity of the research workflows.

The organisation said: “Scientists must work across large volumes of literature, specialised databases, experimental data and evolving hypotheses in order to generate and evaluate new ideas. These workflows are often time-intensive, fragmented and difficult to scale.”

Advertisement

Named after Rosalind Franklin, a pioneering figure in the field of DNA, GPT‑Rosalind is now available as a research preview in ChatGPT, Codex and the API for qualified customers through OpenAI’s access programme such as Amgen, Moderna, the Allen Institute and Thermo Fisher Scientific.

GPT-Rosalind is the latest in a series of AI models focused on life sciences applications, with the space becoming increasingly competitive. Last year, France’s Sorbonne University and Qubit Pharmaceuticals announced the “world’s most powerful” AI model for molecular simulation in pharmaceutical chemistry, FeNNix-Biol.

At the time, the research team claimed that FeNNix-Biol’s capabilities are beyond that of Google DeepMind’s AlphaFold, the Nobel Prize-winning deep-learning machine designed to transform our understanding of the molecular biology that underpins health and disease.

OpenAI said: “This is the first release in our life sciences model series and we view it as the beginning of a long-term commitment to building AI that can accelerate scientific discovery in areas that matter deeply to society, from human health to broader biological research. 

Advertisement

“Over time, we expect these systems to become increasingly capable partners in discovery – helping scientists move faster from question to evidence, from evidence to insight and from insight to new treatments for patients.”

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.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

The ‘Lonely Runner’ Problem Only Appears Simple

Published

on

The original version of this story appeared in Quanta Magazine.

Picture a bizarre training exercise: A group of runners starts jogging around a circular track, with each runner maintaining a unique, constant pace. Will every runner end up “lonely,” or relatively far from everyone else, at least once, no matter their speeds?

Mathematicians conjecture that the answer is yes.

The “lonely runner” problem might seem simple and inconsequential, but it crops up in many guises throughout math. It’s equivalent to questions in number theory, geometry, graph theory, and more—about when it’s possible to get a clear line of sight in a field of obstacles, or where billiard balls might move on a table, or how to organize a network. “It has so many facets. It touches so many different mathematical fields,” said Matthias Beck of San Francisco State University.

Advertisement

For just two or three runners, the conjecture’s proof is elementary. Mathematicians proved it for four runners in the 1970s, and by 2007, they’d gotten as far as seven. But for the past two decades, no one has been able to advance any further.

Then last year, Matthieu Rosenfeld, a mathematician at the Laboratory of Computer Science, Robotics, and Microelectronics of Montpellier, settled the conjecture for eight runners. And within a few weeks, a second-year undergraduate at the University of Oxford named Tanupat (Paul) Trakulthongchai built on Rosenfeld’s ideas to prove it for nine and 10 runners.

The sudden progress has renewed interest in the problem. “It’s really a quantum leap,” said Beck, who was not involved in the work. Adding just one runner makes the task of proving the conjecture “exponentially harder,” he said. “Going from seven runners to now 10 runners is amazing.”

The Starting Dash

At first, the lonely runner problem had nothing to do with running.

Advertisement

Instead, mathematicians were interested in a seemingly unrelated problem: how to use fractions to approximate irrational numbers such as pi, a task that has a vast number of applications. In the 1960s, a graduate student named Jörg M. Wills conjectured that a century-old method for doing so is optimal—that there’s no way to improve it.

In 1998, a group of mathematicians rewrote that conjecture in the language of running. Say N runners start from the same spot on a circular track that’s 1 unit in length, and each runs at a different constant speed. Wills’ conjecture is equivalent to saying that each runner will always end up lonely at some point, no matter what the other runners’ speeds are. More precisely, each runner will at some point find themselves at a distance of at least 1/N from any other runner.

When Wills saw the lonely runner paper, he emailed one of the authors, Luis Goddyn of Simon Fraser University, to congratulate him on “this wonderful and poetic name.” (Goddyn’s reply: “Oh, you are still alive.”)

Image may contain Dave Hunt Face Head Person Photography Portrait Book Indoors Library Publication and Adult

Jörg Wills made a conjecture in number theory that, decades later, would come to be known as the lonely runner problem.

Advertisement

Courtesy of Jörg Wills/Quanta Magazine

Mathematicians also showed that the lonely runner problem is equivalent to yet another question. Imagine an infinite sheet of graph paper. In the center of every grid, place a small square. Then start at one of the grid corners and draw a straight line. (The line can point in any direction other than perfectly vertical or horizontal.) How big can the smaller squares get before the line must hit one?

As versions of the lonely runner problem proliferated throughout mathematics, interest in the question grew. Mathematicians proved different cases of the conjecture using completely different techniques. Sometimes they relied on tools from number theory; at other times they turned to geometry or graph theory.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Once close enough for an acquisition, Stripe and Airwallex are now going after each other

Published

on

Jack Zhang was 34 years old, three and a half years into running a startup, and sitting across from one of the most powerful investors in Silicon Valley. Michael Moritz of Sequoia had invited him to his home — a place with, Zhang recalls, a couple of floors and a view straight to the Golden Gate Bridge — to make the case for selling.

Stripe wanted to buy Airwallex for $1.2 billion. At the time, the Melbourne company had around $2 million in annualized revenue. The math was almost pretty irresistable: a revenue multiple somewhere near 600 times. Patrick Collison, Moritz argued, was a generational founder. The deal would “compound” into something extraordinary. Zhang listened. He walked around San Francisco for two weeks, restless, unable to think straight. At one point, he said yes.

Then he flew nearly 8,000 miles back home.

“I really went deep on what motivates me to build Airwallex,” he said early this week, speaking to this editor from overseas. “I was three and a half years into the business. The business was growing 100 times in 2018. And I only just sort of tasted what it [was like] to be an entrepreneur. And that’s what I’d been dreaming about.”

Advertisement

Two of his three co-founders had voted against the deal, which helped. But he says the clearest signal came from looking at the whiteboard back in his office. The vision was still there, unfinished: to build the financial infrastructure that lets any business operate anywhere in the world as if it were a local company.

That decision is looking increasingly prescient. Airwallex now claims more than $1.3 billion in annualized revenue and is growing at 85% year-over-year. It processes approaching $300 billion in annualized transaction volume. None of it has come easily — and Zhang argues that’s precisely the point.

It’s a conviction that runs a lot deeper than business strategy. Zhang grew up in Qingdao, a port city in northeastern China, and moved to Melbourne at 15 without his parents, barely speaking English, living with a host family. When his family’s finances collapsed, he took on four jobs to get through a computer science degree at the University of Melbourne, according to the Australian Financial Review — bartending, washing dishes, working graveyard shifts at a petrol station, picking lemons on a farm in the school holidays, which he has called the hardest job he ever had. He went on to spend years writing trading code in the front office of an Australian investment bank, a job that paid well and never felt “deeply fulfilling.”

Techcrunch event

Advertisement

San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026

Before Airwallex, he started roughly 10 businesses: a magazine at age 14, a real estate development company, import-export operations running wine and olive oil from Australia to Asia, textiles going the other direction, a burger chain.

Advertisement

He was running a Melbourne coffee shop when the idea for Airwallex took shape. While trying to pay coffee bean suppliers in Brazil, Indonesia, and Guatemala, his co-founder Max Li kept watching payments disappear into correspondent banking systems — flagged and frozen by American intermediary banks enforcing OFAC sanctions rules, sometimes bouncing back weeks after they were sent. “That pushed me to really look at how correspondent banking works,” Zhang said, “how SWIFT works, and how we could build our own global money movement network.”

That’s still the idea, just scaled up considerably. Airwallex now holds close to 90 financial licenses across 50 markets. Zhang estimates Stripe has roughly half that number at best. Getting those licenses has been immensely time consuming — in Japan alone, the process took seven years. In some emerging markets, the company had to acquire shell companies whose licenses were no longer being issued by central banks, then rebuild the technology underneath them entirely.

“You can’t really vibe-code an integration with Mexico’s central bank,” Zhang said. “We have to have a secure room — you have to do a biometric scan just to walk in to access the central bank integration.”

The point of holding these licenses isn’t regulatory window dressing. In Japan, for instance, Stripe and Square can process payments, but they’re required to immediately transfer funds out to the merchant’s bank account. Airwallex, with its fund transfer operator license, can hold those funds inside its ecosystem. That means a customer can issue bank accounts, issue cards, and spend money without it ever leaving the platform.

Advertisement

The foreign exchange economics alone are substantial: a U.S. merchant settling transactions in Australian dollars avoids the 2% to 3% conversion fee that processors like Stripe typically charge to move money back into U.S. dollars — and can use those local balances to pay local vendors, run payroll, and cover digital marketing expenses, all at interbank rates.

“You don’t really operate like a U.S. company anymore,” Zhang said. “You operate like a company with entities around the world, but without needing to physically set up those entities.”

The slow build was intentional, and Zhang has a framework for it that he returns to often: the “path of maximum resistance.” Every license, every bank integration, every local payment rail that Airwallex painstakingly assembled created a layer that makes it harder to compete against. “It took us six and a half years to get to $100 million in annual recurring revenue,” Zhang said. “But after that, it took just over three years to get to a billion.”

The competitive logic, in his telling, comes down to something basic about what it means to own infrastructure versus riding someone else’s. If you don’t control the end-to-end payment workflow and something goes wrong, you can’t access the underlying data to explain it to your customer. You can’t extend new products cleanly on top of someone else’s stack. “Building on top of other infrastructure,” he said, “is simply not scalable.”

Advertisement

For most of its life, Airwallex and Stripe have mostly operated in different geographies, selling to different buyers. That’s changing. As Stripe pushes deeper into international markets, and Airwallex makes its first serious moves into the United States, the overlap is growing.

The buyer for Airwallex has historically been the CFO’s office in Australia and Southeast Asia, where the company is already well-established — finance directors, treasury teams — which puts it in a different sales motion than Stripe, whose customer acquisition has been driven largely by U.S. developers choosing a default starting point for a new company. More than 90% of Airwallex customers land first on a business account product, and payments and spend management follow from there. Over half are using multiple products, says Zhang.

Still, there are challenges that Zhang doesn’t try to downplay. The biggest may be that Stripe is Silicon Valley’s golden child, its privately held shares having minted millionaires across the tech industry. Another is the accompanying brand gap. Airwallex needs to embed itself in the thinking of engineers and developers — not just finance teams — so that founders reach for it instinctively. “Our brand is just not there yet,” he said. “That’s a harder competition to win.”

It’s a competition being watched closely from a variety of vantage points. Sequoia backed Airwallex early — though the deal was sourced through Sequoia Capital China, which has since spun out and rebranded as Hongshan — and remains one of the company’s largest shareholders. The investment firm Greenoaks Capital holds stakes in both companies, too. Zhang shrugged off any suggestion of awkwardness around those overlapping cap tables. The investors, he noted, are betting on a large market.

Advertisement

Still, it brings up the valuation question. Stripe was valued at $159 billion in a February tender offer — up 74% from a year earlier — after processing $1.9 trillion in total payment volume in 2025. Airwallex, assigned an $8 billion valuation in December, is valued at roughly a twentieth of that. But according to Zhang, Stripe’s payment volume is only about six times Airwallex’s, not 20 times. At 85% annual growth and projecting $2 billion in revenue within the next year, Airwallex is closing the revenue gap faster than the valuation gap would suggest.

Whether the market eventually notices is a different question — one that an IPO, which Zhang says is at least three to five years away, would force into the open.

In the meantime, Zhang says he’s focused on longer-horizon targets: a million customers by 2030, $20 billion in annual revenue, average revenue per customer growing from around $12,000 to $13,000 today to roughly $20,000. A suite of AI-powered autonomous finance products — agents that don’t just surface data but actually execute transactions — is rolling out now. The thesis is that a decade of financial data across the entire corporate finance stack, from revenue collection to treasury management to vendor payments and expenses, has created a training set that no competitor can replicate overnight, he suggests.

Now to see if all that hard work is enough to eat into Stripe’s market share. For now, the competition seems to be playing out at a distance. Zhang and Collison were never friends, but they were friendly while merger talks were ongoing years ago. Last year, Zhang and Collison were both at Greenoaks Capital’s annual gathering. They didn’t speak.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Some Windows servers enter reboot loops after April patches

Published

on

Windows Server

Microsoft has confirmed that some Windows domain controllers are entering restart loops due to Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS) crashes after installing the April 2026 security updates.

The company also warned that Windows admins may encounter this issue when setting up new domain controllers, or even on existing ones, if the server processes authentication requests very early in the startup process.

“After installing the April 2026 Windows security update (KB5082063) and rebooting, non‑Global Catalog (non‑GC) domain controllers (DCs) in environments that use Privileged Access Management (PAM), might experience LSASS crashes during startup,” Microsoft said in a release health dashboard update.

Wiz

“As a result, affected DCs may restart repeatedly, preventing authentication and directory services from functioning, and potentially rendering the domain unavailable.”

This known issue only impacts organizations using Privileged Access Management (PAM) and is unlikely to affect personal devices that aren’t managed by an IT department. The list of affected platforms includes systems running Windows Server 2025, Windows Server 2022, Windows Server 23H2, Windows Server 2019, and Windows Server 2016.

Advertisement

While Microsoft is still working on a fix, it advised IT administrators to contact Microsoft Support for Business for mitigation measures that can be applied even after deploying the April 2026 update.

Microsoft has addressed multiple domain controller issues caused by security updates in recent years, most recently resolving Windows Server authentication problems in June 2025, which were caused by the April 2025 security updates.

Almost a year earlier, in May 2024, it fixed another known issue that triggered NTLM authentication failures and domain controller reboots after deploying the April 2024 Windows Server security updates.

In March 2024, it released emergency out-of-band (OOB) updates to fix Windows domain controller crashes after installing the March 2024 Windows Server security patches.

Advertisement

Microsoft is now also investigating a separate issue causing this month’s KB5082063 Windows security update to fail to install on some Windows Server 2025 systems.

​On Wednesday, it also warned admins that some Windows Server 2025 devices may also prompt users to enter a BitLocker key after deploying the KB5082063 update.

AI chained four zero-days into one exploit that bypassed both renderer and OS sandboxes. A wave of new exploits is coming.

At the Autonomous Validation Summit (May 12 & 14), see how autonomous, context-rich validation finds what’s exploitable, proves controls hold, and closes the remediation loop.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Programming a Robotic Golf Club to Sink Shots on Impossible Mini-Golf Holes

Published

on

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
Shane Wighton of StuffMadeHere spent months poring over his robotic golf club’s algorithms, fine-tuning the improvement to truly understand ball physics. It now allows the thing to completely comprehend the complexities of ball movement and plot paths to overcome notoriously difficult mini golf holes designed to confound even the best players. The cameras installed around the course monitor the club, ball, and cup with laser-like precision at all times, feeding into the raw data that the system utilizes to make choices.



To complete the initial scan of each hole, someone must sit there and carefully drag a ball covered in reflective markings along each wall, ramp, and floor, while another person activates the optical sensor to only focus on the portions he actually needs. This keeps the captured geometry from becoming disorganized and full of errors. All scan data is then sent into a physics engine named MuJoCo. This program does forward simulations of the ball after impact, accounting for each bounce, skid, and roll that the ball makes, all of which is influenced by surface friction and bounciness levels.

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
However, matching the simulation to reality has proven to be a challenge. To ensure accuracy, he conducted a series of repeated tests, using motion capture recordings of real balls as a benchmark. An automatic solution attempted to get the numbers correct, but Wighton had to go in and manually change things until the virtual bounces matched exactly what the cameras observed in the real world.

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
Speed became the next issue he had to address. As it stands, a full simulation would take too long to complete while a player swings the club, so Wighton ended up running thousands of possible club angles and swing speeds ahead of time, for every possible ball starting position, and then each successful sequence that ended up in the cup was added to a large database of stored sequences.

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
When a real person swings the club, the cameras record the motion from the moment they begin the backswing, and the program takes action. It instantly compares the observed path of the club to a database of stored sequences, selects the winning one, and sends a signal to the motor on the club shaft. The motor whips the club head round in less than a second to the exact angle required for that sequence, and because the club head can swivel around a vertical axis without digging into the ground, the adjustment is seamless even during a quick swing.

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
Bounces on the ball, however, provide a whole new level of complexity. Following a collision with a wall, the ball’s spin might cause it to fly off at an angle or curve. The simulation accounts for this by considering the whole contact dynamics, rather than simply treating it as mirror reflections. Wighton devised a grid of measured points to capture slight slopes and abnormalities on the ground surfaces he dealt with, as they were not always perfectly level. This means that the physics engine may treat the landscape precisely as it is, rather than assuming everything is smooth as silk.

StuffMadeHere Robotic Golf Club Sink Shots
The heat from the lights and bodies in the room causes the camera tripods to expand somewhat, which would otherwise throw the camera’s precision off. To counteract this, he placed certain fixed reference markers in view, allowing the program to detect these little shifts and correct the entire coordinate system on the fly, ensuring that positions remain accurate even in difficult scenarios. Players simply push a button on the grip, swing the club as usual, and see the club head rotate in midair. The ball follows the predetermined course, soars past obstructions, and lands in the cup, even on holes that appear to be engineered to end your winning streak.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 leak teases the future of the best Android phones

Published

on

Qualcomm’s next flagship chip is starting to take shape as early leaks suggest the standard Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 might be far less of a compromise than expected.

According to regular tipster Digital Chat Station, Qualcomm is preparing both a standard and Pro version of the chipset. But based on the latest details, the gap between the two may not be as wide as in previous generations.

The biggest takeaway is that the standard model is tipped to use a new-generation Oryon CPU, which could be shared with the Pro variant. That’s a notable shift. It hints that both chips will be built on the same core architecture. They will not split performance tiers as aggressively. The main difference, at least so far, comes down to cache, with the standard chip said to feature 6MB of system-level cache. Meanwhile, the Pro model is expected to push higher.

On the graphics side, things get more interesting. The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 is rumoured to pack an Adreno 845 GPU with a six-slice architecture, alongside 12MB of dedicated graphics cache. That’s a step up from earlier Elite chips, which used fewer slices. Consequently, it could translate to better scaling performance and efficiency. This will depend on workload.

Advertisement

This sliced GPU design, first introduced with the original Snapdragon 8 Elite, essentially splits the GPU into multiple sections. Each with its own clock speeds and processing resources. In theory, that allows for more flexible performance tuning. This helps especially in demanding tasks like gaming.

Advertisement

Earlier leaks have also pointed to a 2nm TSMC manufacturing process, along with updated support for next-gen RAM and storage. However, those higher-end specs may still be reserved for the Pro version. That model is also expected to carry more graphics memory, reportedly around 18MB, further widening the gap for power users.

Even so, the standard Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 6 is shaping up to be a serious flagship chip in its own right. If these leaks hold, it could offer most of the performance gains people actually care about. You may not need to stretch to the Pro tier to get the best phone.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025