Assistive technology is expensive, and many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes. Disabled assistive tech users also must contend with equipment that was often designed without any capacity to be repaired or modified. But assistive tech users ultimately need the functionality they need—a wheelchair that isn’t constantly needing to be charged, perhaps, or a hearing aid that doesn’t amplify all background noise equally. Assistive tech “makers,“ who can hack and modify existing assistive tech, have always been in high demand.
Therese Willkomm, emeritus professor of occupational therapy at the University of New Hampshire, has written three books cataloging her more than 2,000 assistive technology hacks. Wilkomm says she aims to keep her assistive tech hacks costing less than five dollars.
She’s come to be known internationally as the “MacGyver of Assistive Technology” and has presented more than 600 workshops and assistive tech maker days across 42 states and 14 countries.
IEEE Spectrum sat down with Willkomm ahead of her latest assistive tech Maker Day workshop, on Saturday, 31 Jan., at the Assistive Technology Industry Association (ATIA) conference in Orlando. Over the course of the conversation, she discussed the evolution of assistive technology over 40 years, the urgent need for affordable communication devices, and why the DIY movement matters now more than ever.
Advertisement
IEEE Spectrum: What got you started in assistive technology?
Therese Wilkomm: I grew up in Wisconsin where my father had a machine shop and worked on dairy and hog farms. At age ten, I started building and making things. A cousin was in a farm accident and needed modifications to his tractor, which introduced me to welding. In college, I enrolled in vocational rehabilitation and learned about rehab engineering—assistive technology wasn’t coined until 1988 with the Technology-Related Assistance Act. In 1979, Gregg Vanderheiden came to the University of Wisconsin-Stout and demonstrated creative things with garage door openers and communication devices. I thought, wow, this would be an awesome career path—designing and fabricating devices and worksite adaptations for people with disabilities to go back to work and live independently. I haven’t looked back.
You’ve created over 2,000 assistive technology solutions. What’s your most memorable one?
Wilkomm: A device for castrating pigs with one hand. We figured out a way to design a device that fit on the end of the hog crate that was foot-operated to hold the hind legs of the pig back so the procedure could be done with one hand.
Advertisement
Assistive Technology’s Changing Landscape
How has assistive technology evolved over the decades?
The early 1990s was all about mobile rehab engineering. Senator Bob Dole gave me a $50,000 grant to fund my first mobile unit. That mobile unit had all my welding equipment, all my fabrication equipment, and I could drive farm to farm, set up outside right in front of the tractor, and fabricate whatever needed to be fabricated. Then around 1997, there were cuts in the school systems. Mobile units became really expensive to operate. We started to look at more efficient ways of providing assistive technology services. With the Tech Act, we had demonstration sites where people would come and try out different devices. But people had to get in a car, drive to a center, get out, find parking, come into the building—a lot of time was being lost.
In the 2000s, more challenges with decreased funding. I discovered that with a Honda Accord and those crates you get from Staples, you could have your whole mobile unit in the trunk of your car because of advances in materials. We could make battery interrupters and momentary switches without ever having to solder. We can make switches in 28 seconds, battery interrupters in 18 seconds. When COVID happened, we had to pivot—do more virtual, ship stuff out to people. We were able to serve more individuals during COVID than prior to COVID because nobody had to travel.
Advertisement
How do you keep costs under five dollars?
Wilkomm: I aim for five dollars or less. I get tons of corrugated plastic donated for free, so we spend no money on that. Then there’s Scapa Tape—a very aggressive double-sided foam tape that costs five cents a foot. If you fabricate something, and it doesn’t work out, and you have to reposition, you’re out a nickel’s worth of material. Buying Velcro in bulk helps too. Then Instamorph—it is non-toxic, biodegradable. You can reheat it, reform it, in five minutes or less up to six times. I’ve created about 132 different devices just using Instamorph. A lot of things I make out of Instamorph don’t necessarily work. I have a bucket and I reuse that Instamorph. We can get six, seven devices out of reusable Instamorph. That’s how we keep it under five dollars.
What key legislation impacts assistive technology?
Wilkomm: Definitely the Technology-Related Assistance Act. In the school system, however, it only says “did you consider assistive technology?” So that legislation really needs to be beefed up. The third piece of legislation I worked on was the AgrAbility legislation to fund assistive technology consultations and technical assistance for farmers and ranchers. The latest Technology-Related Assistance Act was reauthorized in 2022. Not a whole lot of changes—it’s still assistive technology device demonstrations and loans, device reuse, training, technical assistance, information and awareness. The other thing is NIDILRR—National Institute on Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research, funded under [the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a.k.a. HHS]. Funding the rehab engineering centers was pretty significant in advancing the field because these were huge, multimillion-dollar centers dedicated to core areas like communication and employment. Now there’s a new one out on artificial intelligence.
Advertisement
A Vision for a Better Assistive Tech Future
Over more than 2,000 hacks to improve usability of assistive technologies, veteran DIY maker Therese Wilkomm has earned the moniker “the MacGyver of assistive tech.” Therese Willkomm
What deserves more focus in your field?
Wilkomm: The supply-and-demand problem. It all comes down to time and money. We have an elderly population that continues to grow, and a disability population that continues to grow—high demand, high need for assistive technology, yet the resources available to meet that need are limited. A few years back, the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation had a competition. I submitted a proposal similar to the Blue Apron approach. People don’t have supplies at their house. They can’t buy two inches of tape—they have to buy a whole roll. They can’t buy one foot of corrugated plastic—they’ve got to buy an 18-by-24 sheet or wait till it gets donated.
With my third book, I created solutions with QR codes showing videos on how to make them. I used Christopher Reeve Foundation funding to purchase supplies. With Blue Apron, somebody wants to make dinner and a box arrives with a chicken breast, potato, vegetables, and recipe. I thought, what if we could apply that to assistive technology? Somebody needs something, there’s a solution out there, but they don’t have the money or the time—how can we quickly put it in a box and send it to them? People who attended my workshops didn’t have to spend money on materials or waste time at the store. They’d watch the video and assemble it.
But then there were people who said, “I do not have even five minutes in the school day to stop what I’m doing to make something.” So we found volunteers who said, “Hey, I can make slant boards. I can make switches. I can adapt toys.” You have people who want to build stuff and people who need stuff. If you can deal with the time and money issue, anything’s possible to serve more people and provide more devices.
Advertisement
What’s your biggest vision for the future?
Wilkomm: I’m very passionate about communication. December 15th was the passage in 1791 of our First Amendment, freedom of speech. Yet people with communication impairments are denied their basic right of freedom of speech because they don’t have an affordable communication device, or it takes too long to program or learn. I just wish we could get better at designing and fabricating affordable communication devices, so everybody is awarded their First Amendment right. It shouldn’t be something that’s nice to have—it’s something that’s needed to have. When you lose your leg, you’re fitted with a prosthetic device, and insurance covers that. Insurance should also cover communication devices and all the support services needed. With voice recognition and computer-generated voices, there are tremendous opportunities in assistive technology for communication impairments that need to be addressed.
What should IEEE Spectrum readers take away from this conversation?
Wilkomm: There’s tremendous need for this skill set—working in conjunction with AI and material sciences and the field of assistive technology and rehab engineering. I’d like people to look at opportunities to volunteer their time and also to pursue careers in the field of specialized rehab engineering.
Advertisement
How are DIY approaches evolving with new technologies?
Wilkomm: What we’re seeing at maker fairs is more people doing 3D printing, switch-access controls, and these five-minute approaches. There has to be a healthy balance between what we can do with or without electronics. If we need something programmed with electronics, absolutely—but is there a faster way?
The other thing that’s interesting is skill development. You used to have to go to college for four, six, eight years. With YouTube, you can learn so much on the internet. You can develop skills in things you never thought were possible without a four-year degree. There’s basic electronic stuff you can absolutely learn without taking a course. I think we’re going to have more people out there doing hacks, asking “What if I change it this way?” We don’t need to have a switch.
We need to look at the person’s body and how that body interacts with the electronic device interface so it requires minimal effort—whether it be eye control or motion control. Having devices that predict what you’re going to want next, that are constantly listening, knowing the way you talk. I love the fact that AI looks at all my emails and creates this whole thing like “here’s how I’d respond.” I’m like, yeah, that’s exactly it. I just hit select and I don’t have to type it all out. It speeds up communication. We’re living in exciting times right now.
The 2026 Apple shareholders meeting has again predictably gone the board’s way, with shareholders agreeing to re-elect the existing board, pay them well, and ignore a proposal about China.
Apple Park
The 2026 Apple Annual Meeting of Shareholders occurred on Tuesday, giving stock owners the opportunity to have their say on corporate matters. As usual, the shareholders are allowing Apple to continue operating how it wants, with no unexpected decisions being made. Announced in early January, the February 24 meeting dealt with a total of five proposals for voting. Four are typical corporate governance topics, including elections and compensation matters, while the fifth was about China. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums
YouTube is aiming to sweeten the package for its Premium Lite plan by adding two features that are already included in the ad-free Premium subscription. Background Play and Downloads are rolling out to YouTube Premium Lite, the company announced in a blog post on Tuesday. The subscription tier was introduced in the US in March 2025 at $8 a month, offering “most videos” ad-free — with music videos excluded from being free of commercials.
Premium Lite lets you stream YouTube Kids and YouTube videos for gaming, beauty, podcasts and other non-music content without ads. YouTube Shorts and music content are among the videos where you will still see ad breaks. Upgrading to the Premium subscription brings you everything on YouTube ad-free, with access to YouTube Music Premium included at no extra cost.
Beginning today and extending into the coming weeks, Lite subscribers around the world can watch videos offline or let them play in the background. The Google-owned media giant said it listened to user feedback on these two features and granted the popular request.
Advertisement
If you’d been using a workaround to play YouTube in the background while doing other tasks or with your screen locked, but your usual methods have stopped working, it’s because Google recently cracked down on workarounds, such as ad blocking and playing YouTube videos on other browsers. As the feature is available only to YouTube Premium members, it no longer works in some browsers or on Android and iOS devices. Adding Background Play to Premium Lite may tempt some people to sign up for a paid subscription.
The “Block AI Enhancements” toggle was originally introduced in Firefox 148 Nightly in January following significant community backlash after Mozilla’s new CEO, Anthony Enzor-DeMeo, announced plans to add AI features to Firefox. With Firefox 148 now rolling out to the stable channel, the feature is available to users across all release channels. Read Entire Article Source link
An anonymous reader shares a report: Microsoft Azure CTO Mark Russinovich and VP of Developer Community Scott Hanselman have written a paper arguing that senior software engineers must mentor junior developers to prevent AI coding agents from hollowing out the profession’s future skills base.
The paper, Redefining the Engineering Profession for AI, is based on several assumptions, the first of which is that agentic coding assistants “give senior engineers an AI boost… while imposing an AI drag on early-in-career (EiC) developers to steer, verify and integrate AI output.”
In an earlier podcast on the subject, Russinovich said this basic premise — that AI is increasing productivity only for senior developers while reducing it for juniors — is a “hot topic in all our customer engagements… they all say they see it at their companies.” […] The logical outcome is that “if organizations focus only on short-term efficiency — hiring those who can already direct AI — they risk hollowing out the next generation of technical leaders,” Russinovich and Hanselman state in the paper.
Frontier is an infrastructure layer that connects company data and systems to agentic AI
Four of the world’s biggest consultancy firms have been enlisted to help enterprises
They’ll help across AI strategies, cloud and infrastructure
OpenAI has confirmed major partnerships with four of the world’s biggest consultancy firms – Accenture, Boston Consulting Group (BCG), Capgemini and McKinsey & Company – as part of its ongoing rollout of agentic AI systems.
The project, badged Frontier Alliance, will help them to build, deploy and manage AI agents by connecting their systems and data.
In its official announcement, OpenAI explained model intelligence isn’t the limiting factor to how enterprises maximize AI – it’s how they deploy and integrate agents.
OpenAI signs up consultancy giants to Frontier Alliance
Where the consultancy firms fit is in that they will OpenAI’s Forward Deployed Engineering team to drive enterprise AI adoption.
Speaking about each of the four partners, OpenAI explained that McKinsey & BCG can help leaders define AI strategies and embed AI into day-to-day workflows, while Accenture and Capgemini will help on the cloud and infrastructure deployment side.
“AI alone does not drive transformation,” BCG CEO Christoph Schweizer wrote. “It must be linked to strategy, built into redesigned processes, and adopted at scale with aligned incentives and culture to deliver sustained outcomes.”
Advertisement
Pitched as an infrastructure layer to link enterprise data, tools and processes, and designed for agentic AI management, OpenAI’s Frontier page shows Evaluation and Optimization, Agent Execution and Business Context covered by Frontier, with agents and interfaces like Atlas and ChatGPT running on top.
Sign up to the TechRadar Pro newsletter to get all the top news, opinion, features and guidance your business needs to succeed!
The four are now working to get Frontier into the hands of some early adopters. It’s available to a “limited set of customers,” but broader availability is queued for the next few months.
There is a corner of Antarctica that looks like something out of a David Cronenberg movie. It’s located in the dry valleys of McMurdo, an immense frozen desert where, periodically, a jet of crimson liquid suddenly gushes from the dazzling white of the Taylor Glacier. They’re called the Blood Falls, and since their discovery in 1911 by geologist Thomas Griffith Taylor, they’ve fueled a century of scientific speculation.
Recently, a series of observations conducted since 2018 have clarified several mysteries, such as the nature of their reddish color and what keeps them liquid at almost –20 degrees Celsius. New research published this week in the journal Antarctic Science adds the final piece to the puzzle, clarifying what phenomena drive the falls to gush from underground.
The Science Behind the Blood Falls
At the time of their discovery, Taylor attributed the color to the presence of red microalgae. More than a century later, scientists have determined that the red is due to iron particles trapped in nanospheres along with other elements such as silicon, calcium, aluminum, and sodium. These were likely produced by ancient bacteria trapped underground in the area: Once in contact with air, the iron oxidizes, giving the mixture its characteristic rust color.
As for the presence of liquid water, it is actually a hypersaline brine, formed about 2 million years ago when the waters of the Antarctic Ocean receded from the valleys. The very high salinity of this brine prevents the water from freezing, thus allowing it to gush out periodically.
Advertisement
The New Discovery
With the temperature puzzle solved, the question remained as to what physically drove the fluid to erupt. The answer came from cross-referencing GPS data, thermal sensors, and high-resolution images collected in 2018 during an eruption. The analysis demonstrated that the Blood Falls are the result of pressure variations affecting the brine deposits beneath the glacier.
As Taylor Glacier slides downstream, the overlying ice mass compresses the subglacial channels, building up tremendous pressure. When the strain becomes unbearable, the ice gives way: Pressurized brine seeps into the crevices and is shot out in short bursts. Curiously, this release acts as a hydraulic brake, temporarily slowing the glacier’s march. With this discovery, the mysteries of the Blood Falls should finally have been solved, at least for now. The impact of global warming on this complex system in the coming decades remains unknown.
This story originally appeared on WIRED Italia and has been translated from Italian.
Your smartwatch can track a lot of things, but at least for now, it can’t keep an accurate eye on your blood pressure. Last week researchers from University of Texas at Austin showed a way you smartwatch someday could. They were able to discern blood pressure by reflecting radio signals off a person’s wrist, and they plan to integrate the electronics that did it into a smartwatch in a couple of years.
Beside the tried-and-true blood pressure cuff, researchers in general have found several new ways to monitor blood pressure using pasted-on ultrasound transducers, electrocardiogram sensors, bioimpedance measurements, photoplethysmography, and combinations of these measurements.
The University of Texas team sought a non-contact solution that was immune to skin-tone bias and could be integrated into a small device.
Advertisement
Continuous Blood Pressure Monitoring
Blood pressure measurements consist of two readings—systole, the peak pressure when the heart contracts and forces blood into arteries, and diastole, the phase in between heart contractions when pressure drops. During systole, blood vessels expand and stiffen and blood velocity increases. The opposite occurs in diastole.
All these changes alter conductivity, dielectric properties, and other tissue properties, so they should show up in reflected near-field radio waves, Jia’s colleague Deji Akinwande reasoned. Near-field waves are radiation impacting a surface that is less than one wavelength from the radiation’s source.
The researchers were able to test this idea using a common laboratory instrument called a vector network analyzer. Among its abilities, the analyzer can sense RF reflection, and the team was able to quickly correlate the radio response to blood pressure measured using standard medical equipment.
What Akinwande and Jia’s team saw was this: During systole, reflected near-field waves were more strongly out of phase with the transmitted radiation, while in diastole the reflections were weaker and closer to being in phase with the transmission.
Advertisement
You obviously can’t lug around a US $50,000 analyzer just to keep track of your blood pressure, so the team created a wearable system to do the job. It consists of a patch antenna strapped to a person’s wrist. The antenna connects to a device called a circulator—a kind of traffic roundabout for radio signals that steers outgoing signals to the antenna and signals coming in from the antenna to a separate circuit. A custom-designed integrated circuit feeds a 2.4 gigahertz microwave signal into one of the circulator’s on-ramps and receives, amplifies, and digitizes the much weaker reflection coming in from another branch. The whole system consumes just 3.4 milliwatts.
“Our work is the only one to provide no skin contact and no skin-tone bias,” Han said.
The next version of the device will use multiple radio frequencies to increase accuracy, says Jia, “because different people’s tissue conditions are different” and some might respond better to one or another. Like the 2.4 gigahertz used in the prototype these other frequencies will be of the sort already in common use such as 5 GHz (a Wi-Fi frequency) and 915 megahertz (a cellular frequency).
Following those experiments, Jia’s team will turn to building the device into a smartwatch form factor and testing them more broadly for possible commercialization.
In science fiction, the use of gunpowder-based weapons is generally portrayed as something from a savage past, with technology having long since moved on to more civilized types of destructive weaponry, involving lasers, microwaves, and electromagnetism. Instead of messy detonating powder, energy-weapons are used to near-instantly deposit significant amounts of energy into the target, and railguns enable the delivery of projectiles at many times the speed of sound using nothing but the raw power of electricity and some creative physics.
Of course, the reason that we don’t see sci-fi weapons deployed everywhere has arguably less to do with today’s levels of savagery in geopolitics and more with the fact that physical reality is a very harsh mistress, who strongly frowns upon such flights of fancy.
Similarly, the Lorentz force that underlies railguns is extremely simple and effective, but scaled up to weapons-grade dimensions results in highly destructive forces that demolish the metal rails and other components of the railgun after only a few firings. Will we ever be able to fix these problems, or are railguns and similar sci-fi weapons forever beyond our grasp?
The Lorentz Force
A very simple homopolar motor. Here the neodymium magnet and screw spin whenever the wire conducts current. (Credit: Windell H. Oskay, Wikimedia)
The simplest way to think about a railgun is as a linear motor. At its core it consists of two parallel conductors — the rails — with an armature that slides across these rails as it conducts the power between the two rails. This also makes it the equivalent of a homopolar motor, which was the first type of electric motor to be demonstrated.
In the photo on the right you can see a basic example of such a motor, with the neodymium magnet providing the magnetic field and the singular wire the current that interacts with the magnetic field. Using the right-hand rule that was hammered into our heads during high school physics classes we can thus deduce that we get a net force.
Advertisement
With this hand-held demonstration the screw will rotate when current is passed through the wire. For stand-alone homopolar motors with the magnet on the battery’s negative terminal and a conductor loosely placed on the positive terminal while touching the magnet, the Lorentz force will cause the wire to rotate around the battery.
Right-hand rule. (Credit: Jfmelero, Wikimedia)
We can visualize this interaction between the current-carrying wire (I), the magnetic field (B) and resulting force vector (F) in such a homopolar motor fairly easy, but how does this work with a railgun?
Railgun forces. (Source: Wikimedia)
Rather than a permanent magnet or a complex electromagnet on each rail using many windings, a single current loop is used in a railgun. This means that massive amounts of currents are pumped through one rail, which induces a sufficient strong magnetic field. The projectile, playing the role of the armature, is located inside the generated magnetic field B, with the current I coursing through the armature, resulting in a net force F that will push it along the rails at a velocity that’s proportional to the strength of B.
Crudely put, the effective speed of a project launched by a railgun is thus determined by the applied current, so unlike it’s close cousin, the coilgun, there is no tricky timing requirement in energizing coils in a sequence.
This also provides some hints as to what major obstacles with railguns are, starting with the immense currents that have to be immediately available for a railgun shot of any significant size. If this is somehow engineered around using massive capacitor banks, then you run into the much more significant issues that have so far prevented railguns from being widely deployed.
Most of this comes down to wear and tear, because going fast comes with certain tradeoffs.
Advertisement
Making Big Stuff Go Fast
Electromagnetic railgun (EMRG) at the Dahlgren testing grounds in 2017. (Credit: US Office of Naval Research)
Theoretically you can just scale everything up: creating railguns with larger rails and larger armatures that can launch larger projectiles with increasingly faster speeds. This has been the impetus behind various railgun projects across the world, with notable examples being the railguns developed and tested by the US and Japan.
Railguns were invented all the way back in 1917 by French inventor André Louis Octave Fauchon-Villeplée, when the issue of the massive electricity consumption kept further research on a fairly low level. Even the tantalizing prospect of a weapon system capable of firing at velocities of more than 2,000 m/s couldn’t get into deployment during the time that Nazi Germany was working on their own version.
Ultimately it would take until the 1980s for railgun designs to become practical enough to start testing them for potential deployment at some point in the future, seeing a surge of R&D investment for it and other new weapon systems that could provide an edge during the Cold War and beyond.
Yet despite decades of research by the US military, no viable design has so far appeared, and research has wound down over the past years. Although both China and India are testing their own railgun designs, there are no signs at this point that they haven’t run into the same issues that caused the US to mostly cease research on this topic.
Only Japan’s railgun research seems to so far offer a viable design for deployment, but their focus is purely defensive, for countering ballistic and hypersonic missiles in a close-in role. The size is also limited to the current 40 mm prototype by Japan’s Ministry of Defense ATLA agency.
Advertisement
Physical Reality
In a perfect world with zero friction and spherical cows, railguns would be very simple and straightforward, but as we live in messy reality we have to deal with the implications of sending immense amounts of currents through a railgun barrel. A good primer here can be found in a June 1983 report (archived) by O. Fitch and M. F. Rose at the Dahlgren Naval Surface Weapons Center in Virginia.
Mass driver efficiency formula. (From: O. Fitch et al., 1983)
Much of this comes down to efficiency as you scale up a basic railgun design. The two main factors are basic ohmic resistance (ER) and system inductance (ES). These two factors limit the kinetic energy (EK) and set the losses (EL) of the system, with the losses being in the form of thermal and other energies.
Reducing these losses is one of the primary points of research, and factors like the rail design and alloys as well as the switching of the current pulses play a role in affecting final efficiency, and with it durability of the railgun’s ‘barrel’.
Naturally, that was all the way back in 1983, and since then a few decades of technical and material science progress having occurred. Or so one might be led to believe, if it wasn’t for current research papers striking a rather similar tone. For example Hong-bin Xie et al. in a 2021 paper as published in Defence Technology.
Solid vs arc contact in a railgun. (From: Hong-bin Xie, et al., 2021)
This review article covers the common issues of rail gouging, grooving, arc ablation, and other problems, as well as the current rail materials in use today and their performance characteristics.
Many of these issues are somewhat related, as the moving armature rarely maintains a perfect contact with the rails. This results in arcing, localized heating, ablation, and grooving due to thermal softening. All of these effects result in a rapidly degrading rail surface, and higher currents result in more rapid degradation and even worse contact with subsequent shots.
Advertisement
Various rail metal alloys have been or are being tested, including Cu-Cr, Cu-Cr-Zr and Cu/Al2O3, replacing the pure copper rails of the past. None of these alloys can resist the pitting and other wear effects from repeated railgun firings, however. This has pivoted research towards various coatings that could limit wear instead, such as molybdenum (Mo) or tungsten (W).
Fields of research involve electroplating, cold spraying, supersonic plasma spraying and laser cladding, using a wide variety of coatings. The authors note however that these rail coatings have only begun to be investigated, with success anything but assured.
Defensive Benefits
USS Iowa (BB-61) Fires a full broadside of nine 16/50 and six 5/38 guns during a target exercise near Vieques Island, Puerto Rico, 1 July 1984. (Source: US Navy)
Quite recently railguns have surged to the forefront in the news cycle courtesy of certain ill-informed fantasies that also involve destroyers which identify as battleships. In these feverish battleship dreams, railguns would act as a kind of super-charged version of the 16″ main guns of the Iowa-class, the last active battleships in history.
Instead of 16″ shells that ponderously arc towards their decidedly doomed target, these railguns would instead send a projectile at a zippy 2-3 km/s towards a target. As tempting as this seems, the big issue is as we have seen of repeatability. The Iowas originally had a barrel life of a few hundred shots before their liner had to be replaced, but this got bumped up to basically ‘infinite’ shots after some changes to their chemical propellant.
A single Mark 7 16″ naval gun fires twice per minute, and this is multiplied by nine if all three turrets are used. The range of projectiles launched included high-explosive, armor-penetrating, and even nuclear shell options, with a range of 39 km (21 nmi) at a leisurely ~800 m/s. To compete with this, a naval railgun would need to be able to keep up a similar firing rate, feature a similar barrel or at least acceptable barrel life, and have a longer range for a similar payload effect.
Advertisement
At this point railguns score pretty poorly on all these counts. Although range of a projectile falls between that of a missile and a Mark 7 naval gun’s projectile, barrel life is still poor, power usage remains very high and the available projectiles at this point in time are basically just relying on their kinetic energy to cause harm, limiting their functionality.
Taking all of this into account, it would seem that the Japanese approach using railguns as a very responsive, close-in weapon is extremely sensible. By keeping the design as small-caliber as possible, reducing rail current, and not caring about range as long as you can hit that hypersonic anti-ship missile, they seem to be keeping rail erosion to a minimum.
Since the average missile tends to perform rather poorly after a 40 mm hole appears through it, courtesy of it briefly sharing the same physical space with a tungsten projectile, this might just be the defensive weapon niche that rail guns can fill.
This Belfast-based company uses machine learning and hyperlocal rainfall forecasting to predict sewer levels, detect blockages and optimise the performance of wastewater networks.
Brian Moloney has spent many years working in the area of environmental engineering.
After obtaining a degree in civil, structural and environmental engineering from Trinity College Dublin, Moloney spent more than 15 years working in drainage and flood prevention, having led major civil engineering projects in Ireland, the UK and Australia.
This civil engineering experience allowed him to see an opportunity for a data-driven approach to tackle pollution and flooding, leading him to co-found our latest Start-up of the Week – StormHarvester.
Advertisement
StormHarvester is a Belfast-based start-up that uses AI to help wastewater utilities better manage their networks and prevent serious flooding and pollution. The start-up achieves this by using AI to monitor rainfall and wastewater networks, providing real-time insights.
“Urbanisation, climate change and population growth are putting huge strain on our water supply systems,” says Moloney. “This is resulting in increased threats of flooding and pollution.
“At StormHarvester, we use machine learning and hyperlocal rainfall forecasting to predict sewer levels, detect blockages and inflow, and optimise the performance of wastewater networks.”
How it works
As Moloney – who is also CEO of the company – tells SiliconRepublic.com, StormHarvester’s initial work focused on understanding the relationship between rainfall and drainage networks.
Advertisement
“Once this was understood, we focused on predicting the future network performance using rainfall datasets,” he says. “After investing time and effort into machine learning, our CTO Stevie Gallagher and I created a quality blockage and anomaly detection product which helped us win our first major competition, winning Wessex Water and beating many established industry analytics providers.”
Today, Moloney says the start-up works with 11 UK wastewater utilities and has onboarded “tens of thousands” of sensors globally.
StormHarvester has released a number of products since its establishment, encompassing a range of areas including inflow and infiltration detection, blockage detection, pump station alerting, rising main alerting and spill verification.
“Our advanced anomaly detection system analyses data from thousands of sensors, turning it into precise, actionable insights that drive smarter decisions,” says Moloney. “Proactive real-time monitoring allows utilities to have visibility over their network, prevent issues before they escalate and move from lagging indicators to live insights.”
Advertisement
How it’s going
To date, StormHarvester has hit a number of milestones.
“In the last year alone, we have doubled our headcount, fueling our expansion and growth strategy further to create exciting opportunities globally,” says Moloney.
According to Moloney, the company has deployed more than 270,000 sensors worldwide, and in January 2025, StormHarvester announced plans to double its workforce over three years and expand into new countries after raising £8.4m in Series A funding.
Meanwhile, in December, StormHarvester was named as Ireland’s fastest-growing technology company at the annual Deloitte Technology Fast 50 awards, which ranks Ireland’s 50 fastest-growing tech companies based on revenue growth over a four-year period.
Advertisement
But while the company experienced rapid scaling, Moloney says this introduced a challenge for the team.
“As we grew, we hired quickly, introduced more structure and refined processes while trying to keep culture and communication consistent,” he explains. “Balancing fast growth with maintaining alignment was a challenge.”
Currently, Moloney says the company is planning further expansion. He says the start-up’s successful move into Australia and New Zealand has shown that StormHarvester can “scale sustainably while keeping our culture and quality intact” – adding that the company is now preparing for entry into the US market.
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.
Discord is attempting to distance itself from the age verification provider Persona following a steady stream of user backlash. From a report: In an emailed statement to The Verge, Discord’s head of product policy, Savannah Badalich, confirms the company “ran a limited test of Persona in the UK where age assurance had previously launched and that test has since concluded.”
After Discord announced plans to implement age verification globally starting next month, users across social media accused Discord of “lying” about how it plans on handling face scans and ID uploads. Much of the criticism was directed toward Discord’s partnership with Persona, an age verification provider also used by Reddit and Roblox.