That’s not to say the Prologue was a bad car, not by any means. It just wasn’t the result of the maximum amount of effort Honda could have put towards making an entirely original EV. Still, with a maximum range of 308 miles and a starting MSRP of $39,900, the Prologue was (and still is) a competent EV.
Advertisement
But that did not translate to sales, or anyone really wanting to buy one, which is often an unfortunate reality of the automotive world. Last year, Honda sold 39,194 Prologues, making it the worst selling vehicle for the automaker (apart from the Prelude which had only been on sale for a small portion of 2025).
Advertisement
One reason to care
So with that departure, Honda only offers hybrids in the electrified field for the vast majority of the North American market (hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles are a different conversation entirely). No one particularly wants to see a car model get pulled from the shelves with no replacement, but given the low sales and general waning of EV interest (even with fickle gas prices), do we, the automotive public have any tangible reason to care?
Well, if you were hunting for a good lease deal, then maybe. At the time of writing this, July 16th, 2026, you can lease a Prologue for as low as $279 a month for 36 months. That’s less than the current price to lease a CR-V and even an Accord Hybrid, for an electric SUV that’s still plenty competent. Despite its rapidly oncoming demise, that’s really not too bad of a deal. Even a Civic Hatchback Hybrid is more expensive per month.
Advertisement
Middle of the pack
Unfortunately, if all we or John Cena (the voice of Honda’s commercials) can say about the Prologue is that it doesn’t cost that much to lease, then it may have been doomed from the start. It’s much less expensive per month to lease than other Hondas. But then again, it’s not really a Honda. 308 miles of range is competitive, but doesn’t put it on the top of any list. And it looks good, but it’s not a standout EV like something from Hyundai or something sporty like the Mach-E.
The Civic, Accord, and CR-V are world standard commuting or family cars with various superlatives that make each model a perennial success. But the Prologue just didn’t have the juice to keep up with the rest of the automaker’s lineup. Even Honda seemed to be aware of the Prologue’s limits: the GM collaboration was really only meant to act as a stopgap, until Honda’s in-house electric platform arrived. That was to underpin the striking Honda 0 SUV and Honda 0 Saloon, only for those two planned vehicles to be unceremoniously ditched earlier this year.
As with every car, there was probably a small fan base that will mourn the loss of the Prologue, and everyone who currently owns or leases one will be left without an option to upgrade to a newer model if they want to stay with an electric car. For everyone else, we can wait and hope that Honda picks up the EV slack soon, maybe with a vehicle that has more Honda DNA.
The Samsung Galaxy XR isn’t perfect, with so-so passthrough, limited gaming appeal and disappointing battery life, but its comfortable design, gorgeous displays and genuinely useful Android XR experience make it a very strong first swing from Samsung and Google.
Comfortable floating headset design
Gorgeous 4K OLED displays
Android XR feels familiar
Wide range of 2D and 3D apps
Passthrough could be sharper and clearer
Disappointing battery life
Need more XR-ready apps
Key Features
Advertisement
Review Price:
£1699
Android XR debut
Advertisement
Samsung’s headset is the first to run Google’s new mixed-reality platform.
4K Micro-OLED displays
Advertisement
Sharp, vibrant screens make films, apps and text look impressively crisp.
Built-in Gemini
Advertisement
Google’s AI assistant helps with questions, app controls and Circle to Search.
Introduction
The Samsung Galaxy XR has a lot riding on it. Not only is it Samsung’s first proper crack at a mixed-reality headset, but it’s also the debut device for Android XR, Google’s long-awaited answer to the likes of Apple’s visionOS and Meta’s Quest platform.
And on paper, it’s got all the right ingredients: a slim, comfortable design, high-resolution OLED displays, hand- and eye-tracking, Gemini integration and access to the wider Google Play ecosystem. It’s also clearly not trying to be a straight Vision Pro clone, with Samsung taking a slightly different approach to both hardware and software.
Advertisement
The question is whether that’s enough to make the Galaxy XR feel like a genuinely useful new computing platform, or just another expensive headset for early adopters. After spending the past few weeks with it ahead of the UK release, I think Samsung and Google might be onto something – even if there’s still plenty of work to do.
Advertisement
Design and screens
Comfortable floating headset design
Gorgeous 4K OLED displays
Pass-through could be sharper
It’s easy to say that Samsung has copied Apple’s Vision Pro design, but there’s way more nuance to it than that. Where Apple’s headset sits on the face like a pair of ski goggles, the Galaxy XR hovers in front of my face, sitting on my forehead rather than making direct contact.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
That does mean there’s a gap between the headset and my face, where I can see the real-world environment around me, but given the headset’s mixed-reality nature, I think it works in Samsung’s favour here.
It means that I can still look down at my keyboard to orient myself or check a quick notification on my phone without taking the whole unit off. There are accessories on the box that snap onto the headset for a more immersive experience akin to VR headsets, but I never really felt like I needed to use them.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
In that vein, at least, the Galaxy XR is closer in design to the ill-fated Meta Quest Pro than Apple’s headset. Though the Quest Pro was canned pretty quickly after launch, I think that had more to do with the prospect of a work-focused Meta headset than the hardware, which I thought was actually quite comfortable at the time.
And like Meta’s headset, the Galaxy XR uses a hard headband with a back-mounted crank system to tighten the headset into place. It’s much easier than faffing around with strap systems, though the caveat is that you won’t be able to properly lie back and use the headset if that’s how you tend to relax.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
That said, the headset itself is impressively slim, given the high-end tech packed inside.
Part of the reason why is that it doesn’t actually have a built-in battery. Instead, a braided cable on the left strap connects to a specially designed Samsung power bank that I can slip into my pocket or put on a nearby table.
Advertisement
It’s not as clean as Apple’s Vision Pro in use, then, and I was initially disappointed to have to carry around a power bank, but the cable is just the right length – not so short that it feels taut, but also not long enough to get tangled.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
It’s just the right size to reach my trouser pockets, where the power bank tends to live when I’m using the headset. It doesn’t seem to get as warm as other power banks in use too, which is nice for something living in my pocket.
Still, all of that combines into a headset that’s really comfortable to wear, even for a couple of hours at a time. Samsung’s decision not to mimic Apple’s metal-clad headset might mean it doesn’t feel as premium in the hand, but ultimately it was the right decision.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Between that and the lack of a built-in battery, the headset is light on the head, with the pressure mainly balanced between the forehead and back of the head, rather than the cheeks and nose as with Apple’s option. It’s still far from a feather-light pair of specs, weighing in at 545g, but it’s much lighter than Apple’s 800g alternative.
Advertisement
It also accommodates glasses wearers well, with a forehead spacer included in the box that adds a little space between my eyes and the lenses so my (fairly large) specs fit – though custom prescription lenses are also an option at an additional cost if that’s something you’re interested in.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
I think where you’re really going to notice a difference between the Galaxy XR and more entry-level mixed-reality headsets like the Meta Quest 3 is in the lens department.
While the Galaxy XR uses the same pancake lens tech as Meta’s option, the displays underneath are way better here. First up, the switch to OLED means that colours are vibrant, blacks are deep and everything just looks gorgeous – especially when watching 360-degree content on YouTube.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
But the bigger difference is the resolution; the headset manages to pack a full 4K (3,552 × 3,840) resolution in each of its two lenses, and that translates to much crisper visuals, be it graphical fidelity in VR-style games or, importantly for a headset with a focus on productivity, crisp text that makes using Google Docs in XR a doddle. I should know; I’m writing this review in Docs on the Galaxy XR right now.
Advertisement
That’s combined with two 6.5MP front-facing cameras to try and deliver a high-quality mixed-reality experience – something that’s mostly achieved. I will say, though, the pass-through from the cameras isn’t quite as detailed as I was expecting.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
It’s more than enough to walk around in my physical environment without bumping into anything, but in the same vein, it’s not quite high-res enough to render elements like on-screen text on phones and traditional PC screens. I think Apple has the upper hand there.
Software and performance
Android XR feels familiar
Google apps shine brightest
Gaming appeal is limited
If you’re familiar with the Android operating system in general, there’s a good chance you’ll hit the floor running with Android XR. The home menu looks a lot like a tablet home screen, except floating in your physical space.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Advertisement
There’s the time and date, along with connection information and battery life, with pages of apps that I can scroll through and open. It also supports notifications for installed apps, offers a Quick Settings menu to toggle features on and off, and pretty much anything else I can do on Android. It really is what it says on the tin; Android, but in mixed reality form.
You might notice that I didn’t mention controllers earlier, and that’s for good reason: the headset is designed primarily for hand- and eye-tracking. And as you might expect, it works exceptionally well; we’ve come a long way from the janky early days of hand-tracking, with Samsung’s option on par with Apple’s Vision Pro.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
With a total of 12 cameras tracking positioning, I can reach out and grab windows, push buttons, and the like, or I can use my hands as pointers, tapping with my forefinger and thumb to select. It’s nothing that new, but as the standard for XR/VR interaction, it works about as well as you’d expect – without the need to hold bulky, cumbersome controllers.
You can get some if you really want them, but they’ll set you back an additional £/$249 – they don’t come in the box.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Advertisement
The headset also offers eye-tracking tech that lets you essentially aim the cursor with your eyes and tap your fingers to select. It’s easily the fastest, lowest-effort method of browsing the interface, and while it does take some getting used to, it works well most of the time. There are times when it doesn’t quite get what I’m looking at, which can be frustrating in the moment, but I suppose it’s still relatively early technology.
What I do like is that, with the headset’s cameras pointing down at my lap, I don’t need to raise my hand to tap – I usually just put my hand on my knee, and that’s usually enough for the headset.
The app situation is an interesting one; while there’s technically access to any app available on Google Play, not every app is XR-ready – those are much rarer right now. The main XR experiences instead come directly from Google, with apps like YouTube, Google Maps and Google Photos really showcasing what the mixed-reality platform can do.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Google Maps is a fun one to start with, even if it’s exceptionally niche – I’m not exactly going to get directions while using an XR headset. But with a new immersive mode that blends Google Earth and Google Street View, you get a new way to fly around (even from orbit) and see towns, cities, and other locations before actually going there, either from above or street level.
YouTube is the app I find myself using most often. The default interface is much like the tablet app, though once you tap a video to start playing and enable immersive mode, the player expands and other elements – like the description, comments, and related videos – shift to new floating panels on either side of the player.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
You can also watch the vast collection of 360-degree videos on the platform in an immersive 3D view – something you can’t do on the competing Vision Pro. Cheeky move there, Google.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
And if I wanted to go and make a cup of tea in the kitchen mid-watch, I could shrink the screen back down and ‘carry’ it with me, positioning it just to the right of the kettle so I could watch while I waited. You know what they say – watch a kettle, and it’ll never boil. It also makes following video tutorials an absolute doddle, with a floating video to glance at for guidance.
The Google Photos experience is enjoyable, too. Though the default interface, much like YouTube, closely resembles the tablet variant, there’s a new menu to view my images in a more immersive 3D view – similar to that of the Vision Pro. It uses Google’s AI tech to add depth to my snaps and will also react to slight head movements, making them feel a tad more realistic than viewing on a flat screen.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Advertisement
I also like the way I can swipe through my images in a big, immersive side-scrolling gallery – it’s proper Minority Report-style.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
I do think Google Chrome could’ve done with an XR-specific overlay though. It works fine as-is, again mirroring the experience of Chrome on a tablet, but with such large windows available in XR, I’d like something closer to the desktop browser with more buttons and functionality – not necessarily tacked onto the browser itself, but maybe on floating windows on the side like the YouTube app.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Google’s apps get quite a lot of attention, but that’s not to say there aren’t any non-Google XR-ready apps available on Google Play. There are options like Calm, Inside Job and NFL Pro Era that I’ve tried over the past few weeks, along with Adobe’s Project Pulsar, which let me edit spatial reality videos designed for XR headsets in spatial reality.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
Advertisement
There’s also a healthy selection of more physically involved apps like Djay, which gave me virtual decks and a selection of vinyls to mix with, all overlaid onto my real-world environment, and there are a few full VR titles available too – though a lot of those require the controllers that, unfortunately, don’t come in the box.
Regardless, a gaming machine this isn’t; it doesn’t have anywhere near the sheer number of big-brand games that Meta has on its Quest platform, making the cheaper VR headset the better option for pure immersive gaming.
Still, I was more than happy to work with 2D-style Android apps on the headset. They display in tablet form by default, and I can resize and reshape the windows to fit wherever I’d like simply by reaching out and grabbing the corners with my hands.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
It meant that I could run Google Docs on a big central window to write when paired with a Bluetooth keyboard, with apps like Slack, Notion, Chrome or Spotify flanking it to the left, right (or even on the ceiling if I’d like). All the apps stay anchored exactly where I put them, even if I walk away and come back, which really helps break down the barrier between the real and the virtual.
The only frustration is that there’s no way to save that layout for easy access later. I’d love for the headset to recognise that I’m sat at my desk and display the apps in the layout I use when I’m working. Even if not for work, the ability to sit in my favourite place on the sofa and instantly get access to a layout I’ve saved would massively streamline the overall process.
Advertisement
Advertisement
For the most part, the headset’s XR-tailored Snapdragon XR2+ Gen 2, paired with 16GB of RAM, was more than enough to power my multi-app usage and deliver smooth frame rates where needed. It may not be in the same league as Apple’s desktop-class M5 chipset in the latest Vision Pro, but I’d argue that much of that power is wasted anyway.
AI
Gemini works well enough
Circle to Search included
Could be more useful
Of course, it wouldn’t be Android software without Google’s virtual assistant, and Gemini is here in full swing.
It works exactly like on an Android smartphone, able to answer general knowledge queries, open apps on your behalf and, in some cases, perform actions in apps on my behalf. It meant I could summon Gemini in Google Maps’ immersive view, have it take me somewhere, and then ask questions about that location. When it works like this, it’s very cool.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
There’s also Circle to Search, activated by holding my thumb and forefinger together for a few seconds, at which point I can circle whatever I want to find out more about. This can be something in an app, or if I’ve got the pass-through mode on, something about my environment.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Now none of this is really that new if you’ve used an Android phone in the past few years, but Gemini can certainly come in handy when it comes to the productivity side of things.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
The execution of Gemini in Galaxy XR is largely a success then, but I can’t help but feel it could be more useful. There are in-app functions that Gemini can handle, like those in Google Maps, but those are very niche and rather rare right now. With a smarter Gemini rolling out to phones in Android 17 capable of interacting with first- and third-party apps on your behalf, I’d love to see something similar on the headset.
That said, at least Samsung is sweetening the experience with long-term access to the more powerful Gemini – and more – with 12-month subscriptions to Google’s AI Pro 2TB Plan, YouTube Premium, Google Play Pass (to try out some new XR apps), Calm and StatusPro NFL PRO ERA as part of the Explorer Pack, bundled with every purchase. That alone is worth over £665, around a third of the price of the headset itself.
Battery life
Around two hours maximum
Immersive use drains faster
Standby time disappoints
Without the size and weight constraints of a built-in battery to worry about, you’d assume the accompanying power bank has enough capacity to deliver long battery life. It is a fairly chunky brick, after all, even if it can still fit in a pocket.
Advertisement
Sadly, that’s not really the case here. During my time with the Galaxy XR, the headset would last around two hours at best – though even that would depend on what I was doing.
Advertisement
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
If I were simply using 2D apps like TikTok and Instagram or streaming a movie on Netflix, it’d be fine, but jumping into more immersive, power-hungry situations – like the immersive mode in Google Maps and when gaming – you can expect that number to drop further, usually to around an hour and a half.
Either way, that’s not really long enough for a headset that’s equally positioned as both an entertainment and a productivity device. Longer movies like Oppenheimer, which runs three hours, are practically out of the question, and anyone using apps like Virtual Desktop to work on large, immersive XR screens will have to take a break every few hours.
Image Credit (Trusted Reviews)
You can, of course, plug the power bank into a USB-C charger and charge it while you’ve got the headset on, but it’s not the perfect fix. You’d not only be tethered to a wall, limiting the range of movement, but you could also damage your charger or power bank if you accidentally go too far away.
Advertisement
The standby time isn’t great either; I left the headset on standby with a near-full charge, went back a few days later, and it was completely dead.
Should you buy it?
Advertisement
You want a comfortable Android XR headset
The Galaxy XR’s lighter floating design, sharp 4K OLED displays and familiar Android XR interface make it a more practical mixed-reality headset for work, media and everyday apps.
Advertisement
You want the best headset for gaming
The Galaxy XR doesn’t come with controllers in the box and lacks Meta’s huge library of big-name VR titles, making the cheaper Quest 3 the better pick for pure immersive gaming.
Advertisement
Final Thoughts
The Samsung Galaxy XR is a very impressive first swing at an Android-powered mixed-reality headset, and in some ways, it already feels more practical than Apple’s Vision Pro.
It’s lighter, more comfortable and more open by design, with gorgeous OLED displays, sharp visuals and genuinely useful mixed-reality touches. Android XR also feels immediately familiar, and Google’s own apps – especially YouTube, Maps and Photos – do a great job of showing what the platform can do when it’s properly tailored for XR.
But it’s not quite the finished article. The pass-through isn’t as sharp as I’d like, the lack of bundled controllers limits its gaming appeal, Gemini could be doing more, and the battery life simply isn’t good enough for something pitched as both a productivity device and an entertainment hub.
Advertisement
Still, there’s a lot to like here. The Galaxy XR is more comfortable than Apple’s headset, more flexible than Meta’s in day-to-day use, and a genuinely exciting glimpse at where Android XR could go next. It’s still one for well-heeled early adopters, but as a foundation for Google and Samsung’s mixed-reality future, it’s a strong one.
How We Test
When testing a VR/AR headset, we make sure to try out a variety of games and apps. We evaluate various aspects, such as the design, fit, screen quality, battery life and the feature set.
Tested a variety of AR and VR titles
Used for both work and play
Used for over two weeks
FAQs
How long does the Samsung Galaxy XR battery last?
In my testing, the Galaxy XR lasted around two hours at best, though that dropped closer to an hour and a half when using more demanding mixed-reality apps or games.
Advertisement
Does the Samsung Galaxy XR come with controllers?
No, the Galaxy XR is designed primarily around hand- and eye-tracking. You can buy controllers separately, but they don’t come bundled in the box.
In the eastern Indian Ocean, south of Java in the vast sea stretching toward Australia, a fishing vessel slightly alters its course while operating near the boundary of its authorized fishing ground. Nothing appears unusual on deck. Nets remain in the water. Engines maintain a steady speed. To the crew, it is an ordinary day at sea.
Yet hundreds of kilometers above, satellites continuously record the vessel’s position. At Indonesia’s Marine and Fisheries Resources Surveillance Station in Cilacap, where I work, a monitoring platform receives the signal and automatically compares it against fishing permits, designated fishing grounds, vessel characteristics, and historical movement patterns. Within minutes, the system identifies a potential violation. Before any patrol vessel leaves port, before any inspector boards a vessel, and before any warning is issued, we have begun enforcement.
This transformation reflects a profound shift in maritime governance. The ocean has historically been opaque to regulators. States could only enforce laws where patrol vessels happened to be present. Today, however, integrated systems combining data from Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS), satellite remote sensing, geospatial analytics, and increasingly sophisticated data-processing tools are making marine activity visible at an unprecedented scale. Global Fishing Watch alone tracks hundreds of thousands of vessels worldwide, generating a near real-time picture of fishing activity across the world’s oceans.
Indonesia has emerged as one of the most ambitious examples of this transition. As the world’s largest archipelagic state, managing more than six million square kilometers of maritime space, Indonesia faces a challenge familiar to many coastal nations: there are never enough patrol vessels. Digital surveillance is a practical necessity that makes my job possible, even as it creates new challenges.
Advertisement
The Law of the Sea Meets Digital Reality
The international legal framework governing the oceans was designed in an era when maritime enforcement depended almost entirely on physical presence. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982, assumes that states exercise authority through patrols, inspections, vessel boardings, and direct observation.
For countries with extensive coastlines and limited enforcement resources, this model has always faced practical constraints. Indonesia’s Fisheries Management Areas (WPP-NRI) span waters ranging from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific and from the Strait of Malacca to the maritime boundaries adjacent to Australia and Papua New Guinea. Monitoring such a vast domain solely through patrol operations is both expensive and operationally impossible.
Beginning in the late 2010s, Indonesia accelerated the integration of satellite-based monitoring into fisheries enforcement. Vessel Monitoring Systems became a cornerstone of this strategy. By early 2026, a total of 9,394 Indonesian fishing vessels were actively transmitting through the national Vessel Monitoring System (VMS), representing an increase of 2,880 vessels during the 2021–2025 period. As part of Indonesia’s broader maritime surveillance architecture, VMS data are complemented by satellite remote sensing and other monitoring tools to help identify suspicious activities involving vessels operating without active transponders or outside the national VMS network.
Indonesian fisheries officials plan fishery patrols using data from tracking devices, satellites, and their understanding of the patterns of illegal fishing.Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries
The implications extend far beyond vessel tracking. Continuous digital monitoring enables authorities to reconstruct vessel movements, identify suspicious behavioral patterns, detect unauthorized fishing activity, and verify compliance with licensing conditions. Rather than waiting to discover violations during patrol operations, regulators can increasingly prioritize inspections based on data-derived risk assessments.
Advertisement
Maritime governance is shifting from reactive enforcement toward predictive oversight.
The Surprising Geography of Digital Enforcement
The expansion of surveillance infrastructure has already generated measurable enforcement outcomes.
The Ministry of Marine and Fisheries Affairs Indonesia imposed 2,550 administrative sanctions during 2025, many involving violations detected through the Vessel Monitoring System, including fishing outside authorized fishing grounds and deliberate deactivation of monitoring transmitters.
This statistic is significant because many of these violations would have been extremely difficult to detect under traditional patrol-based enforcement. A vessel that briefly crosses into a prohibited fishing zone may never encounter an enforcement vessel. Likewise, a captain who temporarily disables a transmitter may escape detection if oversight depends solely on physical inspections.
Advertisement
Digital monitoring fundamentally changes this equation. Every vessel movement creates a data trail. Authorities can reconstruct routes, identify anomalous behavior, and compare activities against permit conditions long after the event itself has occurred.
The first quarter of 2026 demonstrates the scale of this surveillance capability. During just three months, Indonesia’s fisheries monitoring system tracked 14,571 fishing vessels, 182 fishing gear units, and 208 registered home ports while identifying 491 suspected violations across the country’s fisheries management areas. These violations included unauthorized fishing grounds, illegal high-seas operations, transshipment-related offenses, port-base discrepancies, licensing irregularities, and indications of poaching.
Such numbers reveal a fundamental transformation. Enforcement is no longer limited by the number of patrol vessels available at sea. Instead, surveillance capacity increasingly depends on the ability to collect, process, and interpret big data.
Illegal Operators Are Learning Too
Yet greater visibility does not eliminate illegal fishing. But it does change how poachers operate.
Advertisement
Indonesia’s expanding digital surveillance network, and a 2023 requirement that even small vessels use VMS when 12 nautical miles offshore, appears to have improved compliance among licensed fishing vessels. However, as enforcement capabilities become more sophisticated, some actors engaged in illegal fishing have also become more adept at exploiting technological and operational gaps.
Deliberately disabling VMS transmitters remains one of the most common enforcement concerns. While temporary signal losses, whether intentional or caused by technical failures—can complicate the reconstruction of vessel movements, they do not necessarily prevent authorities from detecting potentially illegal activity. Indonesia increasingly combines VMS with satellite-based observations, other maritime surveillance systems, intelligence-led analysis, and reports from community-based surveillance groups (Pokmaswas) to corroborate suspicious behavior and direct patrol resources where they are most needed. This layered approach—integrating digital technologies with local knowledge from coastal communities—helps reduce opportunities for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing even when a single monitoring system is compromised.
A compromised surveillance network could potentially disrupt enforcement operations just as effectively as a vessel evading patrol detection.
As digital surveillance expands, one lesson from Indonesia’s experience is that stronger monitoring does not eliminate illegal fishing—it changes how illegal operators behave. Improved compliance across much of the fishing fleet has been accompanied by increasingly sophisticated attempts by a smaller group of offenders to avoid detection. This reflects a broader reality of technology-enabled enforcement: as monitoring capabilities evolve, so do the strategies used to circumvent them.
Advertisement
The result is a technological arms race. Every improvement in surveillance capability encourages new methods of avoidance, whether through disabling tracking devices, manipulating vessel identities, or exploiting gaps between different monitoring systems. Enforcement agencies must therefore continuously refine their analytical methods, integrate multiple sources of maritime information, and adapt their operational strategies to keep pace with evolving behavior at sea. Effective digital fisheries governance is not defined by a single technology, but by the ability to combine data, human expertise, and operational intelligence into a resilient and adaptive enforcement system.
The Next Battle May Be Over Data Integrity
The future of fisheries enforcement may ultimately depend less on detecting vessels and more on ensuring confidence in the digital systems that generate enforcement decisions.
As surveillance networks become increasingly integrated, questions surrounding cybersecurity, algorithmic accountability, and data integrity become more important. What happens if vessel tracking data are manipulated? How should authorities verify automated risk assessments? What safeguards exist when enforcement actions increasingly originate from algorithmic analysis rather than direct human observation?
These questions are no longer theoretical.
Advertisement
Modern fisheries governance increasingly depends on interconnected networks of satellites, communication systems, databases, cloud infrastructure, and analytical platforms. While these technologies dramatically improve visibility, they also create new vulnerabilities. A compromised surveillance network could potentially disrupt enforcement operations just as effectively as a vessel evading patrol detection.
For Indonesia, this means that investment in digital surveillance must be accompanied by investment in digital resilience. The effectiveness of a monitoring system ultimately depends not only on the volume of data collected but also on the credibility, security, and reliability of the information produced.
Governing Oceans Through Data
Indonesia’s experience illustrates a broader global transformation in maritime governance. The ocean is becoming increasingly transparent to regulators. Activities that once occurred beyond the reach of enforcement agencies can now be observed, analyzed, and investigated through interconnected digital systems.
The benefits are substantial. Expanded VMS adoption, improved monitoring coverage, and thousands of administrative enforcement actions demonstrate that digital surveillance can significantly enhance fisheries governance. Yet the transition also introduces new challenges involving data quality, cybersecurity, algorithmic accountability, and adaptive criminal behavior.
Advertisement
The central question facing maritime regulators is how governments can ensure that increasingly powerful monitoring systems remain transparent, secure, and accountable while preserving public trust and legal legitimacy. The most important lesson may be that digital surveillance does not replace traditional enforcement. It changes where enforcement begins. For generations, maritime law enforcement started when a patrol vessel encountered a suspected violator. Today, it often starts when an algorithm detects a pattern.
That shift may prove as significant for ocean governance as the invention of radar was for maritime navigation.
Extinction Rebellion claims responsibility for chemical-filled balloon attack targeting concrete and steel
In the United States, we usually protest datacenters peacefully – picket signs, council meeting comments, and all that – with mixed results. In the Netherlands, activists throw water balloons filled with an acidic mixture at datacenter foundations, also with questionable effectiveness.
The Dutch arm of international climate activist group Extinction Rebellion claimed responsibility for an attempt to sabotage a datacenter project in Amsterdam on Thursday. The group said that they threw water balloons filled with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, salt, and acrylic paint at the under-construction facility. Extinction Rebellion said the mixture is designed to degrade the concrete and accelerate corrosion of its steel reinforcement.
Advertisement
Extinction Rebellion spokesperson Martijn Dekker justified the attack by saying datacenters and the AI they power are exacerbating the climate crisis, as well as playing a role in the killing of Palestinians by Israel.
“We must join forces and resist the anti-democratic power of this small group of the very wealthiest,” Dekker said in Extinction Rebellion’s press release. “Stopping the construction of this data center is a necessary step in that regard.”
The facility in question is being built by UK-based Pure Data Centres Group. If and when it is eventually completed, the facility will consist of three 85-meter (279-foot) towers, each containing 26 MW of data halls, for 78 MW of total site capacity. The site has its own power substation, which is already operational, and development of the data halls started in January 2026.
Pure DC says the facility is already fully leased, and while it doesn’t mention the lessee by name, local media have reported in a story about a prior protest at the site that Microsoft is the sole occupant. Amsterdam restricts new hyperscale datacenters, but Dutch media said the project’s three-tower design allowed it to fall below the threshold for a single hyperscale facility.
Advertisement
“Such data centers are superfluous,” Extinction Rebellion said. “They are mostly deployed for AI purposes, and although AI has some meaningful applications, the majority of them are undesirable: jobs are lost and the work of artists and others is shamelessly stolen to generate AI content.”
With all that said, it’s still not clear what impact, if any, the attack may have had. Media in the Netherlands said that Pure DC and emergency responders had both confirmed balloons were thrown at the site, but neither said what they contained. Pure DC did tell Dutch newspaper NRC that the attack had no impact on construction, and that it intended to pursue legal action against those responsible. NRC spoke to Extinction Rebellion, which the paper said plans to carry out similar attacks on other datacenter projects.
“The world is on fire, and we are building yet another data center,” an Extinction Rebellion spokesperson told NRC. “It has to stop.”
We reached out to Microsoft, Pure DC, and Extinction Rebellion for comment, but didn’t hear back from anyone. ®
Moonshot AI, the Beijing-based artificial intelligence startup backed by Alibaba, on Thursday released Kimi K3 — a 2.8-trillion-parameter model that the company says is now the largest open-source AI model in the world, and one that benchmarks show performs neck-and-neck with the most powerful proprietary systems from Anthropic and OpenAI.
The release, timed to land just ahead of the 2026 World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, is a dramatic escalation in the global AI arms race and a watershed moment for the open-source AI movement. It also marks a remarkable comeback for a company whose market position had eroded significantly over the past 18 months following DeepSeek’s meteoric rise.
Full model weights are scheduled to be released on July 27, according to details shared by researchers who reviewed the company’s technical documentation. If you want to take Kimi K3 for a spin right now, you can — just head to kimi.com, sign up with a Google account or phone number (no credit card required), and start chatting with what may be the most powerful open-source model ever built.
Inside the architecture that powers the world’s largest open-source AI model
Kimi K3 is a frontier-class large language model with 2.8 trillion total parameters — roughly 75 percent larger than DeepSeek’s V4 Pro, which the company’s own timeline chart shows at approximately 1.6 trillion parameters. The model features a 1-million-token context window, native visual understanding capabilities, and an always-on reasoning mode that the company calls “thinking mode.”
Advertisement
The model is built on two key architectural innovations developed internally at Moonshot AI: Kimi Delta Attention, a hybrid linear attention mechanism, and Attention Residuals, which the company describes as a drop-in replacement for residual connections that delivers consistent scaling gains. Both techniques were previously published as open research by the Moonshot team on GitHub.
On the API side, Kimi K3 is compatible with the OpenAI SDK, lowering the integration barrier for developers already building on OpenAI or Anthropic toolchains. The model is priced at $3 per million input tokens and $15 per million output tokens, with cached input tokens dropping to just $0.30 per million — pricing that positions it roughly in line with mid-tier offerings from Western labs, but at a performance level the company claims approaches the top of the market. A promotional top-up rebate running through August 12 offers up to 30 percent back in vouchers for API credits of $1,000 or more.
As Xinhua reported, a Moonshot AI executive explained the significance of the parameter count in simple terms: parameters are like neural connections in the human brain, and nearly 3 trillion of them means the model can “store more knowledge and patterns in its brain, understand more, think deeper, and answer more accurately.”
Benchmark results show Kimi K3 trading blows with Claude and GPT at the top of the leaderboard
The benchmark results, drawn from public leaderboard data and a private evaluation by analytics firm Artificial Analysis, tell a striking story.
Advertisement
On GDPval-AA v2, a benchmark measuring real-world tasks across 44 occupations and 9 major industries, Kimi K3 scored 1,687 — placing it third overall, behind only Claude Fable 5 Max (1,815) and GPT-5.6 Sol Max (1,747.8), and ahead of Claude Opus 4.8 (1,600).
On AA-Briefcase, a private agentic benchmark from Artificial Analysis designed to test long-horizon knowledge work, K3 climbed to second place with a score of 1,527 — beating GPT-5.6 Sol Max (1,495) and trailing only Fable 5 Max (1,587).
Perhaps most impressively, K3 achieved a state-of-the-art score of 91.2 out of 100 on BrowseComp, a benchmark for long-horizon, high-difficulty information seeking.
In tests of real-world task automation, Kimi K3 ranked first in four out of eight benchmarks — including Automation Bench, SpreadsheetBench 2 and BrowseComp — while finishing second to Fable 5 in most others. Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol were its closest competitors overall. (Source: Moonshot AI)
Advertisement
The company says it accomplished this in a single-agent setup using its 1-million-token context window, without any context compression or additional context management techniques — a feat that suggests raw context length, when paired with strong retrieval capabilities, may be more powerful than elaborate multi-agent workarounds.
As one widely followed AI commentator put it on social media: “Open source is no longer lagging six months behind Western closed-source models. Read that again, and think about what it all means.”
That observation captures the significance of the moment. For much of the past three years, open-source models have typically trailed their proprietary counterparts by a meaningful margin. Kimi K3 appears to have closed that gap almost entirely.
Kimi K3 claimed the No. 1 spot on Arena.AI’s Frontend Code Arena with a score of 1,679, outpacing Claude Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol by a significant margin. The leaderboard ranks models by human preference in head-to-head frontend coding comparisons. (Source: arena.ai)
Advertisement
How a 48-hour autonomous chip design demo reveals Moonshot’s real ambitions
Beyond raw benchmarks, Moonshot AI showcased a proof-of-concept that may be even more revealing of K3’s capabilities and the company’s strategic direction.
In a demonstration documented in the company’s technical materials, Kimi K3 was tasked with designing a physical chip to run a nano-scale version of itself. Over 48 hours of continuous autonomous agent operation, K3 independently completed the chip’s full construction pipeline — from architectural design through optimization and verification — using open-source electronic design automation tools. The result was a tiny but functional chip design, just 4 square millimeters, that achieved timing convergence at 100 MHz and could decode more than 8,700 tokens per second in simulation.
This is not a production chip. It is a demonstration of what Moonshot AI clearly views as the next competitive frontier: long-range autonomous agent capabilities. The ability to sustain coherent, multi-step technical work over a 48-hour window — reading documentation, making design decisions, running verification loops, and iterating on failures — represents a qualitative leap beyond the kind of single-turn question-answering that defined the first generation of large language models.
The company also highlighted a case in computational astrophysics, where K3 reportedly reproduced the universal I-Love-Q relation — a complex calculation that typically takes a senior researcher one to two weeks — in approximately two hours, reading and cross-validating more than 20 papers and implementing a complete numerical pipeline along the way.
Advertisement
Moonshot AI’s fall and rise tells the story of China’s brutal AI market
To understand why Kimi K3 matters, you need to understand where Moonshot AI was 18 months ago — and how far it fell.
Founded in 2023 by Yang Zhilin, a Tsinghua University graduate who previously conducted research at Google and Meta, Moonshot AI quickly became one of China’s most prominent AI startups. The company gained early traction in 2024 when users flocked to its Kimi platform for its long-text analysis capabilities and AI search functions. By early 2026, it had raised roughly $1.5 billion across multiple rounds, with its valuation climbing from $2.5 billion to $4.3 billion and the company reportedly seeking a new round at $5 billion.
Then DeepSeek happened. The release of DeepSeek’s low-cost R1 model in January 2025 disrupted the entire Chinese AI landscape, and Moonshot AI was among the hardest hit. Kimi, which had ranked third in monthly active users in China, slid to seventh. The company’s strategic pivot to open-source models — beginning with Kimi K2 in July 2025 and accelerating with K2.5 in January 2026 — was in large part an effort to reclaim relevance.
Kimi K3 is the culmination of that effort — and the sheer scale of the model suggests that Moonshot AI has been planning this move for some time. Training a 2.8-trillion-parameter model requires enormous computational resources and months of preparation, which means the architectural and infrastructure decisions behind K3 were likely locked in well before the model reached the public.
Advertisement
Why open-sourcing the world’s biggest model is a geopolitical chess move
The decision to release K3’s full weights on July 27 is strategically significant and worth parsing carefully.
The company’s own timeline chart of open-source frontier model scale positions K3 as a dramatic outlier, towering above competitors like DeepSeek (1.6T), Xiaomi (1.02T), and Alibaba (397B). By releasing the world’s largest open-source model, Moonshot AI is making a bid to become the center of gravity for the global open-source AI developer community.
This follows a broader trend among Chinese AI companies. As Reuters noted, open-sourcing allows companies to “showcase their technological capabilities and expand developer communities as well as their global influence, a strategy likely to help China counter U.S. efforts to limit Beijing’s tech progress.” DeepSeek, Alibaba, Tencent, and Baidu have all released open-source models. But none have released anything at this parameter count.
For enterprise technology leaders, the implications are concrete. A 2.8-trillion-parameter open-source model that performs at near-frontier levels creates new options for companies that want to fine-tune, self-host, or build proprietary systems on top of a capable base model — without being locked into API contracts with OpenAI or Anthropic. The trade-off, of course, is that running a model of this size requires substantial GPU infrastructure. Inference at 2.8 trillion parameters is not something that runs on a single server rack.
Advertisement
That said, Moonshot AI has signaled awareness of this challenge. Its Mooncake project, which won the Best Paper award at FAST 2025, pioneered KV-cache-centric disaggregated serving for large language models — an architecture designed specifically to make inference at extreme scale more practical and cost-efficient.
Kimi Code and a three-tier model lineup form the foundation of Moonshot’s enterprise play
Alongside K3, Moonshot AI continues to invest heavily in its coding agent ecosystem. Kimi Code, the company’s open-source coding tool that competes with Anthropic’s Claude Code and Google’s Gemini CLI, received two major updates on the same day as K3’s launch — versions 0.25.0 and 0.26.0 — adding features like expanded subagent tooling, background task management, and security fixes.
Kimi K3 consistently placed among the top three models across six coding benchmarks, leading all competitors in SWE Marathon and Program Bench, and trailing only GPT-5.6 Sol in Terminal Bench 2.1 by half a point. All models were tested at maximum thinking effort. (Credit: Moonshot AI)
The Kimi Code CLI has accumulated over 3,100 stars on GitHub and features integration with VSCode, Cursor, and Zed. The latest release expanded the “coder subagent” tool set to include background tasks, todo lists, plan mode, skill invocation, and nested agents — effectively turning the coding agent into a multi-layered autonomous system capable of managing complex software engineering projects with minimal human intervention.
Advertisement
This is not incidental. Coding tools have become a critical revenue driver for AI labs. As Anthropic disclosed in January, Claude Code reached $1 billion in annualized recurring revenue. By building Kimi Code as an open-source alternative that defaults to Kimi’s own models — but supports other providers — Moonshot AI is positioning itself to capture developer workflows and, eventually, enterprise contracts.
The company’s model lineup now includes three tiers: K3 as the flagship ($3/$15 per million tokens for input/output), K2.7 Code as a specialized coding model ($0.95/$4), and K2.6 as a general-purpose option ($0.95/$4). All three support context windows of 256,000 tokens or above, with K3 offering the full 1-million-token window. Context caching is automatic — no cache ID, TTL, or extra parameter is required — a small but meaningful developer-experience advantage over competitors that require explicit cache management.
What Kimi K3 means for the future of enterprise AI and the global model landscape
Kimi K3’s release forces a recalibration of several assumptions that have guided enterprise AI strategy.
The performance gap between open-source and proprietary models has functionally closed at the frontier. If K3’s benchmark numbers hold up under independent evaluation — and particularly once the open weights are available for community testing on July 27 — it will be difficult for closed-source providers to justify premium pricing purely on the basis of capability.
Advertisement
The locus of AI innovation, meanwhile, continues to shift. China’s AI ecosystem, which many Western observers questioned after early struggles with chip export restrictions, has now produced a model that competes with the best systems from companies with direct access to Nvidia’s most advanced hardware. The architectural innovations behind K3 — particularly the hybrid linear attention mechanism — suggest that algorithmic efficiency may matter as much as raw compute.
And the agentic capabilities demonstrated by K3 — chip design, multi-week research compression, long-horizon information seeking — point toward a future where AI models are not just answering questions but autonomously executing complex, multi-day projects. For enterprises evaluating AI investments, this shifts the value proposition from “productivity copilot” to “autonomous technical workforce.”
Xinhua, China’s state news agency, framed the release as a national milestone, reporting that K3 “marks a new step forward in the development of China’s artificial intelligence models.” Liu Tieyan, dean of the Zhongguancun Academy in Beijing, was quoted as saying that a wave of Chinese open-source models has moved from isolated breakthroughs to collective advancement, providing “new solutions and new paths” for global AI development.
Just two years ago, Moonshot AI was a scrappy startup named for the audacious problems it hoped to solve. Eighteen months ago, it was a cautionary tale about how quickly a market darling can lose its footing. Today, it is the maker of the world’s largest open-source AI model — one that can, given 48 hours and an internet connection, design a chip to run itself. The frontier, it turns out, is not a place. It is a race. And the field just got a lot more crowded.
McIntosh does not replace its home theater processors every time HDMI acquires another acronym, but the MX123 has been anchoring the company’s multichannel lineup since 2019. Although it received an important 8K hardware update in 2021, nearly seven years is a long time in a category where video standards, immersive-audio formats, room-correction platforms, and bass-management capabilities continue to evolve at an exhausting pace.
The newly announced McIntosh MX124 A/V Processor is therefore less an impulsive refresh than an overdue response to a much more competitive high-end home theater market. Marantz continues to apply pressure with the AV 10, while Trinnov and StormAudio offer highly configurable processors with more channels, sophisticated bass management, and upgrade paths aimed directly at demanding custom installations. A bank of blue meters and a substantial glass faceplate still carry considerable weight, but at this level, heritage alone will not prevent the competition from eating your popcorn.
Building on the MX123, the MX124 supports 13 main audio channels and four independent subwoofer outputs for configurations including 7.4.6 and 9.4.4. It also adds Dirac Live Room Correction and Dirac Live Bass Control alongside Audyssey MultEQ XT32, expands 8K connectivity across all seven HDMI inputs, and introduces updated streaming, configuration, and installation features designed to keep McIntosh relevant in theaters where both the expectations and equipment budgets are substantial.
The McIntosh MX124 is an A/V preamplifier/processor designed to function as the central command center of a high-end home theater system. It handles source switching, surround decoding, room correction, bass management, video routing, and system control, but it does not include onboard amplification.
Advertisement
That distinction matters. The MX124 must be connected to one or more external power amplifiers, or to active loudspeakers, before it can produce any sound. A television or projector is also required to display the video signals it processes and routes. In other words, the MX124 may run the theater, but it still needs the rest of the cast before the lights go down.
McIntosh has engineered the MX124 for sophisticated home theater installations where flexibility, long-term integration, and installer support are just as important as raw specifications. Its expanded connectivity, configurable speaker layouts, room-correction options, and control features are intended to let a system evolve over time without forcing owners to replace the processor every time the theater grows or another component joins the rack.
The MX124 A/V Processor supports speaker configurations of up to 7.4.6 or 9.4.4 through 13 audio channels and four independent subwoofer outputs. Compared with its predecessor, the MX123, the MX124 doubles the number of subwoofer outputs from two to four, enabling more advanced system configurations, greater bass-management flexibility, and improved performance in larger, more sophisticated home theater environments.
Additional connectivity includes seven HDMI inputs and three HDMI outputs, along with four digital audio inputs, one balanced and eight unbalanced analog stereo inputs, component and composite video inputs, and dual analog stereo outputs for two additional listening zones, plus Bluetooth headphone support.
Advertisement
Immersive Audio
The MX124 supports Dolby Atmos, DTS Pro, Sony 360 Reality Audio, and MPEG-H Audio. It also employs nine premium 32-bit digital-to-analog converters designed to deliver greater detail, wider dynamic range, and improved sonic accuracy.
Bass and treble controls provide additional tuning flexibility, allowing the system to be adjusted for personal preferences, room acoustics, and specific installation requirements.
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Room Calibration
To help deliver optimal performance in a wide range of listening environments, the MX124 A/V Processor incorporates multiple room-calibration options. Licenses for Dirac Live Room Correction and Dirac Live Bass Control are included, while Audyssey MultEQ XT32 is available without an additional license.
Advertisement
These options allow installers and owners to select the calibration platform best suited to their system, room, and level of setup complexity. Both technologies are designed to improve speaker integration, bass performance, imaging, tonal balance, and overall clarity while preserving the natural musicality and sonic character associated with McIntosh.
Video
For video, the MX124 provides seven HDMI inputs and three HDMI outputs, including one with eARC. Two HDMI outputs support the primary video zone, while a third provides independent video playback in a second zone. All HDMI inputs and the primary outputs support 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz video and are compatible with Dolby Vision, HDR10+, HLG, and IMAX Enhanced.
Beyond home theater, the MX124 A/V Processor can also serve as the centerpiece of a premium whole-home entertainment system, with support for high-resolution streaming at up to 32-bit/192 kHz.
Advertisement
Integrated streaming options include Apple AirPlay, Bluetooth, Qobuz Connect, Spotify Connect, and TIDAL. The MX124 is also Roon Ready, providing additional flexibility for managing and distributing music throughout the home.
Custom Control
To further support professional custom integration, the MX124 supports web-based configuration, pre-configuration and file upload capabilities, backup and restore support, RS232 and IP control, and certification for Control4 Simple Device Discovery Protocol (SDDP) integration.
17-1/2” (44.45cm) x 7-3/4” (19.7cm) x 17” (43.2cm)
17-1/2” (44.45cm) x 7-5/8” (19.37cm) x 19-1/2” (49.53cm)
Unit Weight
29 lbs (13.2 kg)
31 lbs (14 kg)
The Bottom Line
The McIntosh MX124 does not try to beat Trinnov or StormAudio in a channel-count arms race. Instead, it targets McIntosh owners and custom installations that want modern connectivity, sophisticated room correction, and support for serious 7.4.6 or 9.4.4 home theater systems.
Its most significant upgrades are four independent subwoofer outputs, Dirac Live Room Correction and Bass Control, Audyssey MultEQ XT32, and seven HDMI inputs with support for 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz video. Offering both Dirac and Audyssey gives installers more flexibility, while doubling the MX123’s subwoofer outputs should improve bass integration in larger rooms.
There are some notable limitations. Auro-3D, which was supported by the MX123, is absent from the MX124 specifications and owner’s manual. McIntosh has not explained the omission, so claims about licensing costs or changes at Auro parent company Goer Dynamics would be speculation.
The phono input supports moving-magnet cartridges only, which means owners using a moving-coil cartridge will need an external phono preamplifier. More importantly, the MX124 provides 15.4 RCA outputs but only 11.4 balanced XLR outputs. A full 13-speaker system therefore cannot be connected entirely through balanced outputs.
The MX124 also requires external amplification. Owners can use 13 monoblocks, six stereo amplifiers plus one monoblock, two five-channel amplifiers plus one three-channel amplifier, or another suitable combination. Add speakers, subwoofers, a television or projector, cabling, networking, and rack space, and the final system cost will rise considerably.
Advertisement
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Buyers who want McIntosh home theater without a rack full of power amplifiers can consider the MHT300 receiver, while the MX200 offers a lower-priced path into McIntosh separates.
The MX124 is not the most expandable processor in the high-end market, but it combines four-subwoofer management, two respected calibration platforms, extensive HDMI connectivity, broad streaming support, and enough processing power for nearly any residential theater that does not require its own ZIP code.
McIntosh MX124 A/V Processor with remote control
Price & Availability
Built to remain the center of a luxury home entertainment system for years to come, the MX124 A/V Processor will be available through authorized McIntosh dealers at a reported price of $15,000.
For all the technological advancements they promise, EVs haven’t entirely convinced people about their batteries. Many people may assume they wear down as fast as the units in phones do, which seems like a valid fear at first considering how pricey batteries are to replace. However, they have turned out to be well capable of lasting as long as the cars themselves. Recent research has proven that the industry has been setting its battery lifespan numbers way too low — by a huge margin, too.
A Wall Street Journal report from July has laid out how far off the early predictions were. It cited figures by Recurrent, which found that an electric car — even after five years of use — still retained 95% of its driving range. That’s impressive, and it gets even more so when the actual claims by EV makers are taken into account. One example is Tesla, which for most of its cars, promises the battery will stay above 70% of its original capacity for eight years. However, if the Recurrent report is anything to go by, the degradation is a lot slower, so the promise looks rather humble.
Take one particular 2016 Tesla Model S 90D that has spent nearly a decade serving as a UK airport taxi as an example. As reported by InsideEVs, the car had racked up around 430,000 miles on its original battery and motors. Yet through it all, it only lost about 65 miles of range. Some back of the napkin math later, you’d arrive at a battery capacity of roughly 78% at the time.
Advertisement
Why companies have been getting it all wrong
A big reason estimates have been so off is apparently because lab tests have been roughing up batteries a little too much. Research coming out of Stanford in 2024 put 92 lithium-ion batteries through their paces for over two years. They found that real-world driving is actually a lot easier on the batteries. All that stopping, starting, and staying parked for hours actually helps the cells recover.
Advertisement
Taking all this into account, they concluded that most batteries could last up to a whopping 40% longer than previously thought. The lead researcher went as far as saying that the industry had been testing those poor batteries wrong. One of the lead authors even noted that something like hard acceleration – a huge power drainer and therefore also long assumed to be rough on a pack — seemed to actually slow the wear a bit rather than speed it up.
Viet Nguyen-Tien, a research officer at the London School of Economics, told WSJ that the newest electric cars now hold up roughly as long as gas cars. In fact, newer estimates peg a pack’s useful life somewhere between 15 and 20 years.
Advertisement
Batteries are getting better, too
At the same time, batteries themselves have been getting better — and getting cheaper too while at it. Since 2010, prices have dropped more than 90%, per BloombergNEF. At the same time, newer cells are also more consistent and their software is able to squeeze more life out of them than ever before.
Another fear customers have had is about fast charging, that speeding things up leads to faster degradation. The thing is that while fast charging does take a toll, it’s far lower than what you might assume. According to a January 2026 study by Geotab, a vehicle data company, the average yearly battery degradation of studied cars was around 2.3%. For cars that were heavily reliant on high-power DC fast chargers (rated above 100kW), that number was found closer to just 3.0%. And for cars charging primarily at home, it was around 1.5%. Heat plays a role, too, according to the same report. Compared to cars in milder climate, cars operating in hot areas wear down about 0.4% faster each year. However, with batteries now estimated to last longer than previously thought, all these worries may be even smaller than they previously were.
A joint Insider/Der Spiegel/Le Monde investigation published leaked documents showing a Chinese-authored, three-level plan to contain and defeat Starlink
The plan, presented to Russian officers at a secret forum in 2023, highlights a three-level approach to contain and destroy SpaceX’s Starlink
A separately signed June 2023 Moscow protocol also commits Russia and China to jointly build a hypersonic-missile-defense system based on technology Russia had never before been willing to share, even with allies
Starlink is the world’s largest satellite constellation ever built, and as a result, it also doubles as the backbone for many civilian and military communications channels.
With approximately 10,400 satellites in low-Earth orbit as of June 2026, SpaceX’s low-Earth-orbit satellite internet network covers nearly 160 different countries and territories while delivering low-latency communications (20-40 milliseconds) that often make it a better choice than GEO systems that have a baked-in round trip delay of 500-700 milliseconds.
Its potential for military use, until recently, was downplayed by many in the industry, but it has formed the backbone for communications for Ukraine in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war earning it the ire of the Russian government and renewed focus from China, which has already covertly begun to prepare for an eventuality where it would have to disable the network.
Latest Videos From
A secret meeting that highlighted growing Chinese-Russian military co-operation
With China affirming that its ‘no limits’ partnership with Russia is still very much in play as early as 2025, a year-long investigation spearheaded by The Insider, Germany’s Der Spiegel, and France’s Le Monde indicates that both players may have already considerably broadened its scope beyond what was visible earlier, especially when it came to their respective military ambitions.
Advertisement
Starlink, which Russians consider a key hindrance to their campaign in Ukraine, forms the backbone of the latter’s communications even as the former are cut off from access as the conflict continues to evolve in what is now the 5th year of fighting.
For China, it represents a growing threat, underscored by the US military’s increasing reliance on SpaceX, which is not only the Pentagon’s most important space contractor but also helps the US government deploy and service its military-grade version of Starlink: Starshield.
Chinese military officials and engineers met with Russian officers in November 2023 at a summit in Guangzhou to discuss how to tackle Starlink, presenting a 3-pronged plan of action: diplomatic pressure, jamming, then cyberattacks, and, alternatively, physical destruction.
Advertisement
Sign up to the TechRadar Pro newsletter to get all the top news, opinion, features and guidance your business needs to succeed!
Not only would both China and Russia aim to leverage their considerable weight in diplomatic forums to hinder Starlink’s growth by imposing regulatory pressures, but they would also invest in electromagnetic-jamming infrastructure to render existing satellites useless in certain geographic areas, even as they collaborated within each other’s ecosystems.
Perhaps more troubling for Elon Musk and SpaceX would be the cyberwarfare and physical warfare component, where plans to leverage “access spoofing, virus infection, and the exploitation of vulnerabilities” meet plans to “eliminate” satellites already in orbit altogether.
Given that these plans were first discussed in 2023, one can assume they have evolved considerably since then, even as drone warfare, laser-based weaponry, and anti-satellite missiles have made major inroads, as modern militaries prepare for asymmetric warfare in future conflicts.
Advertisement
For example, Chinese researchers at the Northwest Institute of Nuclear Technology in Xi’an have reportedly built a ground-based microwave weapon capable of targeting low-orbit satellites, as per local media
With China and Russia also agreeing to deploy an air-defense solution as part of the “Working Protocol” signed in Moscow, which is expected to dwarf existing capabilities, including Russia’s S-500, the revelations indicate that China is not passively but rather actively supporting Russia in its ongoing endeavors.
This makes for a tricky subject to broach for Elon Musk and a White House that backs him: the former has taken a conciliatory stance toward China even as Tesla depends on the market for sales, houses its largest and most efficient plant, and has previously resulted in favorable lease terms and loans in play from the Chinese government, while the latter might tip his hand based on ‘national security’ concerns that could make for an uncomfortable situation much like how it has played out for Nvidia after Beijing intervened.
Advertisement
Starlink might be an important piece of the pie for both the US government and Elon Musk, but the response from both to Chinese plans for the service might considerably differ as a result, given what is at stake for both entities.
If you have ever lost a great ChatGPT answer somewhere in your endless chat history, that headache is finally over. OpenAI has rolled out a major search upgrade that lets you find old chats, projects, documents, and images all from one place.
Before this update, the sidebar search only pulled up past conversations, leaving uploaded files, projects, and generated images completely out of reach. The new search option is now available across web, iOS, and Android, on every ChatGPT plan, including free accounts.
Search across your chats just got faster and more powerful 🔎
From the sidebar, you can search chats, projects, images, and documents in one place across web, iOS, and Android.
Use filters to narrow results, then select anything to open it directly in ChatGPT. pic.twitter.com/wYNi2a39wh
You can start searching right from the ChatGPT sidebar, just like before, except now it covers everything in your account instead of only chats. If you want to narrow things down, there are filters that let you search by specific content type, such as pulling up only images or files tied to one particular project. Once you find what you need, selecting a result opens that chat, project, or file directly inside ChatGPT to skip endless scrolling.
OpenAI
This rollout also lines up closely with OpenAI’s recent GPT-5.6 launch, which brought its own wave of upgrades, including a new AI agent called ChatGPT Work that takes on entire projects instead of single questions. It connects to your apps and files, works through multi-step tasks, and can keep running in the background even after you close ChatGPT.
Why does it matter?
The new ChatGPT search does not change what it stores; it simply makes everything already saved much easier to surface. That’s useful if you regularly use ChatGPT for ongoing projects, research, or document analysis. By bringing everything together in one searchable place, you can look for what you need, filter the results, and jump back into your work within seconds.
Vinyl’s resurrection stopped being a charming nostalgia story years ago. U.S. vinyl revenue surpassed $1 billion in 2025, with 46.8 million records sold and the format recording its nineteenth consecutive year of growth. Luminate previously reported that annual U.S. vinyl album sales had increased from 13.1 million in 2016 to 49.6 million in 2023, an increase of nearly 300 percent.
That growth has transformed the turntable category along with everything connected to it. Consumers can now choose from inexpensive wireless record players, sophisticated direct-drive designs, restored vintage decks and turntables with genuinely balanced outputs. Phono preamplifiers have consequently become a serious battleground again rather than an inexpensive circuit manufacturers conceal beside the headphone jack.
EAT, or European Audio Team, has operated at the more ambitious end of that market for years. Its turntables, tonearms, cartridges, vacuum tubes and phono stages are not designed for shoppers searching Amazon for something to play the copy of Aja they bought at Target — an album whose reputation remains vastly more impressive than the music itself.
The new E-Glo CB and E-Glo SB continue that approach with full-width chassis, dual-mono construction, discrete circuitry, extensive cartridge adjustment and tube-based amplification. VANA Ltd., EAT’s North American distributor, has announced immediate availability at $4,599 for the E-Glo CB and $6,250 for the E-Glo SB.
Advertisement
Related Reviews:
The EAT and Pro-Ject Connection
EAT is owned and led by Jozefina Lichtenegger, who is married to Pro-Ject Audio Systems founder Heinz Lichtenegger. That relationship has inevitably resulted in some shared analog DNA, manufacturing resources and expertise, but the two companies are not merely different badges attached to the same products.
Pro-Ject has built its reputation by making serious analog playback accessible across a wide range of prices. EAT operates several floors higher, with heavier construction, more elaborate materials, tube-based electronics and products aimed at listeners assembling genuinely high-end vinyl systems.
That relationship also helps explain EAT’s interest in balanced phono playback. Pro-Ject has spent several years expanding its True Balanced ecosystem with compatible turntables, phono stages and cables, including the X1 B, X2 B and X8.
E-Glo SBE-Glo CB
Two Models Built Around a Common Platform
The E-Glo CB and SB occupy the space between EAT’s compact Petit B and flagship E-Glo FB. Both use three gain stages, discrete components rather than integrated-circuit op-amps, split passive and active RIAA equalization and dedicated DC servo circuitry to minimize offset at the outputs.
Advertisement
The first gain stage uses three discrete semiconductor amplifier circuits. Separate circuits handle the positive and negative phases, while a third sums the two signals to reject common-mode noise. The high-frequency portion of the RIAA equalization is also applied at this stage.
Both models accept moving-coil cartridges through their balanced XLR inputs, while the RCA inputs support both moving-magnet and moving-coil designs. Balanced XLR and single-ended RCA outputs can be used simultaneously.
EAT reserves the balanced input for MC cartridges, whose very low output makes common-mode noise rejection especially valuable. Although a phono cartridge is inherently a balanced signal source, the internal wiring of many MM designs prevents access to the complete differential signal. Purpose-built balanced MM cartridges exist, but the E-Glo CB and SB are not designed to accept them through their XLR inputs.
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Advertisement
E-Glo CB
The Difference Is in the Second Stage
The two models diverge most significantly in their second amplification stages.
The E-Glo CB uses a hybrid, single-ended tube and transistor circuit composed of two ECC83S triodes and one transistor. This stage handles the low-frequency portion of the RIAA equalization and incorporates a switchable subsonic filter.
The more expensive E-Glo SB moves closer to the architecture of the flagship E-Glo FB. Its second stage is a symmetrical tube design using two ECC83S and two E88CC triodes. EAT also specifies higher-grade semi-crystalline hydrocarbon polypropylene capacitors in the gain and RIAA networks.
The difference is not simply one additional pair of glowing bottles behind the ventilation slots. The SB maintains balanced operation through its second gain stage, while the CB converts to a single-ended signal before its output stage creates the balanced output.
That does not make the CB badly designed, but it does mean that “balanced” requires some qualification. The CB provides a symmetrical MC input stage, common-mode noise rejection and balanced XLR output, but it is not a fully differential circuit from cartridge to output. An XLR socket is a connector, not a blessing from your rabbi.
Advertisement
The SB comes considerably closer to the flagship concept through its symmetrical tube stage and upgraded capacitor selection.
E-Glo SB
Cartridge Adjustment
Both models provide enough adjustment to accommodate a broad range of moving-magnet and moving-coil cartridges.
Moving-magnet resistance can be selected from 30,000 to 75,000 ohms, while capacitance settings range from 50 to 620 pF. Moving-coil loading options extend from 10 ohms to 1.2 kilohms.
Six gain settings are offered: 40, 45, 50, 55, 65 and 70 dB. According to EAT’s specifications, using the balanced XLR outputs adds another 6 dB.
Advertisement
Both models also include a 20 Hz subsonic filter with an 18 dB-per-octave slope. That will be useful for systems vulnerable to record warps, turntable suspension movement or subwoofers attempting to reproduce low-frequency information that was never part of the recording.
RIAA accuracy is specified within 0.5 dB from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. The CB claims an MM signal-to-noise ratio greater than 92 dBV and an MC figure greater than 80 dBV. The SB is rated at greater than 90 dBV for MM and greater than 80 dBV for MC.
Each measures 395 x 86 x 262 mm (15.6 x 3.4 x 10.3 inches). The E-Glo CB weighs 5 kg (11 pounds), while the E-Glo SB weighs 5.1 kg (11.2 pounds). Both use an external 18-volt power supply, keeping the transformer away from circuitry responsible for amplifying signals measured in fractions of a millivolt.
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Advertisement
E-Glo SB
The Bottom Line
Neither model represents an attempt to make balanced tube phono amplification affordable in any conventional sense. The E-Glo CB costs $4,599, and the E-Glo SB raises the admission price to $6,250 before one buys the turntable, tonearm, cartridge, cables or records.
Welcome back to high-end analog, where the software occasionally costs $150 and the component amplifying it can cost more than the car used to bring it home.
The CB nevertheless fills a credible position for listeners using a serious moving-coil cartridge who want balanced input capability, extensive loading control and some tube character without climbing into five-figure phono-stage territory. Its hybrid architecture also gives EAT an alternative to competitors such as the Nagra Compact Phono, MoFi UltraPhono Pro and upper-tier phono stages from Rega, Musical Fidelity and Pro-Ject.
The SB is the more technically ambitious product. Its symmetrical tube-based second stage, upgraded capacitors and closer relationship to the E-Glo FB make it the logical choice for systems already built around a high-end balanced preamplifier and a low-output MC cartridge.
EAT has not simply removed parts from its flagship, installed cheaper capacitors and declared victory. The CB and SB are distinct implementations for different buyers, and their construction, flexibility and circuit design suggest products created for long-term analog systems rather than another brief ride aboard the vinyl revival train.
Advertisement
Vinyl, after nineteen consecutive years of growth, is no longer waiting at the station.
Although Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is typically associated with really large and really heavy things like plants in solar systems and big things in universes in general, it turns out that even at an atomic scale its effects can be measured. These are the findings of Brown University scientists, whose measurements on very heavy elements indicate the presence of relativistic bonds.
Unfortunately the paper by [Kirk A. Peterson] et al. in Science is paywalled without a convenient ArXiv version to ogle details beyond the supplemental, but the Brown press release gives quite a few details by itself, including the use of photoelectron spectroscopy to measure the strength of the bonds between the examined nuclei.
The essential summary is that our concept of how triple bonds work may be flawed, with the assumption that there are distinct sigma and pi bonds, the latter being the awkward, weaker ‘side bonds’ where the overlapping atomic orbitals do not directly line up as with a sigma bond. As it turns out, if there’s enough mass involved, relativistic effects smudge both types of bonds together into a hybrid type of bond.
Advertisement
Although the sigma-pi triple bond theory still seems to hold up for lighter atomic nuclei, in the case of the examined bismuth-carbon triple bond, the typical, slightly radioactive bismuth-209 nucleus with atomic number 83 is heavy enough to affect the orbital mechanics and with it the chemical bonds that these produce.
This is an important finding, as it affects our basic understanding of how strong the bonds between certain elements are. Pi bonds are after all significantly weaker than sigma bonds, so a hybrid form would effectively make triple bonds involving a heavier element stronger than one between lighter elements.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login