For the uninitiated or anyone who thinks “portable audio” means a waterproof pill clipped to a backpack, the boomboxes that ruled the streets were the original mobile music weapons. Born in the late 1960s and peaking in the late ’70s and ’80s, these weren’t just stereos you carried around; they were cultural battering rams. Think Fab 5 Freddy on your TV, Yo! MTV Raps in full rotation, the Beastie Boys causing trouble in a Brooklyn alley, and breakdancers turning flattened cardboard into battlegrounds.
Boomboxes transformed sidewalks into dance floors and backseats into clubs. These weren’t gadgets. They were attitude, wrapped in metal and plastic, blasting identity at unsafe volume levels.
Back then, a ghetto blaster wasn’t a polite lifestyle accessory with Bluetooth and passive-aggressive EQ presets. It was a war chest with woofers; loud, heavy, unapologetic. Models like the JVC RC-M90, Lasonic TRC-931, Sharp GF-777, and Panasonic RX-5600 didn’t just play music; they announced your presence and dared anyone nearby to argue with your taste. And nobody embodied that energy more than Radio Raheem, hauling his box like a sonic manifesto in Do the Right Thing.
Advertisement
Before playlists were swiped, skipped, and forgotten, there were mixtapes—built in real time, often straight off the radio, finger hovering over the pause button like it mattered. Because it did. A mixtape was intent. Sequencing was personal. A Maxell XLII-S with Sharpie handwriting wasn’t nostalgia; it was proof you cared enough to get it right. Boomboxes carried those tapes into the streets, and for a while, they made the world listen.
What Is a Boombox? The Original Portable Stereo Explained
A boombox is a large, portable, battery-powered audio system with built-in speakers, a radio, and a cassette player and recorder. First appearing in the late 1960s, the format hit its peak in the 1980s and early 1990s. Later versions added CD players and, much more recently, Bluetooth and USB connectivity, but the basic idea never changed. A big box, a solid handle, and enough output to make sure your music was heard whether anyone asked for it or not.
The name boombox came from its integrated stereo speakers and their ability to deliver loud, booming sound. The nickname ghetto blaster came later, born on the streets rather than in a marketing meeting. These things were not polite. They were heavy, power-hungry battery pigs that chewed through D-cells like candy, and carrying one any real distance counted as arm day. Portability was relative. You could move it, but you were going to feel it.
While the ghetto blaster became closely associated with early rap and the rise of hip-hop culture, it was never limited to a single genre. Boomboxes powered block parties, fueled breakdancing battles, and blasted everything from rap and R&B to funk, reggae, pop, and rock. For teens and twenty-somethings, the boombox was more than a way to listen to music. It was a status symbol, a social magnet, and a public declaration of taste delivered at full volume.
Advertisement
Let’s take a look at some of the most notable boomboxes from the era when they ruled the streets.
Norelco 22RL962
The Norelco 22RL962, made by Netherlands-based Philips (the same company that invented the compact audio cassette), is widely credited as the first true boombox. Introduced in the late 1960s, the 22RL962 established the core formula: portability, battery operation, a built-in speaker, and a single box that combined radio and tape playback.
Equipped with a carrying handle, AM/FM radio, and a compact cassette player and recorder, the 22RL962 delivered a modest 1 watt of output through its integrated speaker. Crucially, it was the first consumer audio product that allowed users to record radio broadcasts directly to cassette tape for later listening, a feature that would become central to mixtape culture in the decades that followed.
Additional connections included inputs for an external power supply, external loudspeaker or earphones, a microphone, and even a wired remote control. None of this came lightly. The 22RL962 weighed nearly 9 pounds, making it a serious haul by today’s standards and a reminder that early portability came with muscle strain included.
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Advertisement
The original U.S. price was approximately $500, listed at 5,995 Austrian schillings at the time. Today, value depends heavily on condition, originality, and whether the unit still functions, but demand remains strong among collectors who recognize it as the box that started it all.
AIWA was one of the most respected audio brands of the last quarter of the 20th century, and in 1974 it entered the emerging boombox market with the TPR-930. Built like a small appliance rather than a toy, the TPR-930 reflected AIWA’s reputation for serious engineering at a time when portability still meant compromise.
Packed with 40 transistors, an integrated circuit, and a four-speaker system, the TPR-930 delivered sound quality that still earns it respect among collectors. Its heavy-duty construction came at a cost. With batteries installed, it tipped the scales at roughly 13.75 pounds, making it a true battery pig and a reminder that early boombox portability required commitment.
The TPR-930 featured a wide-band radio tuner covering SW1, SW2, AM, and FM, along with a single cassette deck. Supporting features included AIWA’s Matrix Sound System, Loudness control, AFC for more accurate radio tuning, Automatic Stop, and a Memory Replay System. It also supported CrO₂ tapes, included a three-digit analog tape counter and a built-in condenser microphone, and offered connections for external 4-ohm speakers.
Advertisement
Originally priced between $150 and $200 during its production run, the TPR-930 reportedly still trades in that same range today depending on condition. For collectors looking for a historically important boombox with legitimate sound quality, it remains one of the better bargains in the category.
First released in the 1977-1978 timeframe, the National Panasonic Ambience RX-7000 was conceived as a high-end boombox equally comfortable anchoring a living room or making a very loud statement outside. This was not a casual portable. It was Panasonic aiming straight at the top of the category.
At its core, the RX-7000 combined an AM/FM radio with a single cassette deck, but the deck itself was unusually sophisticated for the era. Features included a tape counter, Dolby B noise reduction, Panasonic’s “3 TPS” Tape Program Sensor, a Feather Touch mechanism, microcomputer control, play and record timers, cue and review functions, manual or automatic record level control, support for Normal, FeCr, CrO₂, and Metal tapes, and a Dolby LED indicator.
Supporting features were equally comprehensive. The front panel included VU, tuning, and battery meters, mono, stereo, and Ambience (stereo-wide) listening modes, balance, bass, and treble controls, an FM stereo indicator, and a terminal for a wired remote control. Inputs were generous, with dual microphone jacks featuring mixing level control, an RCA phono input with ground terminal, and a headphone output.
Advertisement
One standout capability was amplification. In addition to its built-in speaker system, the RX-7000’s amplifier delivered 2 x 11 watts RMS and could power modest external speakers via dedicated terminals. The internal speaker array consisted of two 2-inch tweeters and two 6-inch woofers, reinforcing its ambitions as more than a street box.
All of that capability came with mass. The RX-7000 weighed approximately 17.6 pounds, firmly placing it in the “battery pig” category. Original pricing reflected its premium positioning, landing between $850 and $900 at launch. Today, depending on condition and completeness, demand pricing typically ranges from around $500 to well over $1,300, making it one of the most serious and collectible boomboxes of its era.
Released in 1978, the Sanyo M-9994 carved out its place in boombox culture by delivering serious sound in a relatively disciplined package. Rated at 2 x 5 watts of output power, it featured a capable speaker system with 6.3-inch woofers and 2-inch cone tweeters. Notably, the tweeters were rotatable, allowing users to improve high-frequency directionality depending on placement and listening position.
Sanyo marketed the M-9994 as a “professional edition,” and it leaned into that claim with included external handheld microphones complete with plastic desk stands. Supporting features included an Input Volume control that allowed attenuation of incoming signals from line-level or phono sources, along with a dedicated headphone output for private listening.
Originally priced between $300 and $350, the Sanyo M-9994 has appreciated significantly over time. Today, demand pricing can reach as high as $1,500 for pristine, fully functional examples, reflecting its reputation as one of Sanyo’s most desirable classic boombox designs.
Released around 1984, the Conion C-100F is pure boombox legend and remains one of the most aggressively sought models among collectors. Oversized, overbuilt, and unapologetically loud, this was a statement piece even in an era defined by excess.
Pro Tip: The Conion brand was part of Onkyo, which helps explain why this box leaned harder into features and spectacle than restraint.
Advertisement
The C-100F came loaded. It featured a dual cassette deck configuration with one front-loading deck and one slot-loading deck, a four-band radio covering SW1, SW2, FM, and AM, dual VU meters, twin LED level displays, and two headphone jacks. One standout party trick was a built-in motion sensor that could be activated to trigger a security alarm if the unit was moved, a very on-brand feature for a boombox of this size and value.
The speaker array was equally ambitious, consisting of two woofers, two midrange drivers, and two tweeters. Output power was rated at 30 watts RMS at 10 percent THD, a figure that tells you everything you need to know about how hard this thing was meant to be pushed at its limits.
All of this hardware lived inside a massive 30-inch-wide chassis weighing just over 26 pounds. Portability was theoretical. Running the C-100F off batteries required ten D-cells, firmly placing it in battery-pig territory and guaranteeing that shoulder fatigue was part of the experience.
Depending on the market, the same design was also sold as the Helix HX-4365 and the Clairtone 7980. Original pricing for the Conion C-100F landed between approximately $450 and $475 in the U.S. Today, demand pricing typically ranges from around $750 to as much as $2,000, depending on condition, originality, and whether the alarm still scares the neighbors.
Another highly prized boombox among collectors is the Sharp GF-777, also sold in Japan as the GF-909. This model sits firmly in the heavyweight division, both in reputation and in physical presence.
The GF-777 featured a six-speaker array consisting of two woofers, two dedicated “sub” woofers, and two horn-type tweeters. Output power was rated at approximately 2 x 12 watts RMS, giving it the kind of authority that made it impossible to ignore once the play button was pressed.
Size and weight were part of the appeal. The GF-777 stretched roughly 30 inches wide and tipped the scales at about 27 pounds before batteries were added. Running it as a true portable required ten D-cell batteries, though it could also be operated on AC power for less shoulder strain and fewer trips to the battery aisle.
Advertisement
Originally priced at around $800, the Sharp GF-777 remains surprisingly attainable today. Depending on condition, completeness, and functionality, current demand pricing typically falls between $500 and $700, with exceptional examples commanding higher figures from collectors who know exactly what they are looking at.
The Sharp GF-7600 is not the biggest, loudest, or most technically ambitious boombox of the 1980s, but it may be the most culturally significant. Released in 1983, it achieved permanent pop-culture status thanks to its starring role in the 1989 film Say Anything. Pity John Cusack didn’t drop it on his head.
Despite its more manageable size, the GF-7600 was surprisingly well equipped. It featured a four-band radio covering SW1, SW2, AM, and FM, a single cassette deck, a five-band graphic equalizer, an LED VU meter, line-in and line-out connections, and external microphone inputs. This was a serious feature set for a box that looked almost polite by Sharp’s usual standards.
The cassette deck supported metal tape, included full auto-stop and APSS track search, and offered a frequency response rated from 50 Hz to 16,000 Hz. Speaker duties were handled by a pair of 4.7-inch woofers and horn tweeters, while output power is generally estimated at around 5 to 6 watts per channel. Not a brute, but loud enough to make a statement—and immortal once held aloft over a rain-soaked lawn.
Advertisement
Original pricing varied by retailer. Today, demand pricing typically ranges from approximately $125 to $500, depending on condition, completeness, and functionality.
Before Sony upended personal audio with the Walkman, it was already deeply embedded in boombox culture. One of its standout entries was the Sony CFS-99, also known as the Energy 99, released in 1981. Big, loud, and unmistakably ’80s in both sound and styling, the CFS-99 paired a rugged build with serious output. It also weighed in at a back-testing 23 pounds, firmly earning its place in the heavyweight class.
Core features included an AM/FM radio and a cassette deck, with certain variants adding an LED track indicator along with dual microphone inputs featuring pan control and echo effects. Connectivity was unusually flexible for the time, offering RCA line-level inputs and outputs, while some versions also included banana speaker terminals for driving external speakers.
Advertisement
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
The original retail price is no longer well documented. Today, demand pricing typically starts around $500 and can climb higher depending on condition, originality, and whether the unit has been modified to add Bluetooth connectivity.
The Tecsonic J-1 Super Jumbo is another culturally significant boombox, cemented in history by its appearance in Do the Right Thing. Released in the 1987-1988 timeframe and manufactured in South Korea, the Super Jumbo wasn’t subtle. It didn’t need to be. This was a box built to be seen, heard, and remembered. Fight the Power.
The J-1 Super Jumbo featured an imposing speaker array with dual 8-inch woofers, a pair of midrange drivers, and twin tweeters. Feature-wise, it came loaded: dual cassette decks, AM/FM radio, karaoke sing-along functions, a 10-band equalizer, balance control, mixing volume, left and right front microphone inputs, a dedicated mix microphone input, phono jack, auxiliary/CD input, peak level meter, high-speed dubbing, tape counter, A/B continuous play, and an LED clock. Excess was the point.
Advertisement
Physically, the J-1 lived up to its name. It measured roughly 31 inches wide and 16.5 inches tall, and weighed in at around 25 pounds. Reported output power is approximately 2 x 20 watts, more than enough to back up its visual presence with real authority.
Original pricing for the Tecsonic J-1 Super Jumbo is no longer well documented. Today, demand pricing typically hovers around $1,000, depending on condition, completeness, and whether it still looks ready to be hoisted over someone’s head as a very loud act of defiance.
Some regard the JVC RC-M90 as the “King of Boomboxes,” and it’s not an argument without merit. Released in 1981, this was a no-compromise design that combined brute force with an unusually deep feature set.
The built-in speaker system used a two-way, four-speaker layout consisting of dual 8-inch woofers and two 2.5-inch tweeters, driven by amplification rated at approximately 2 x 20 watts. It was designed to move real air, not just make noise.
Advertisement
Operational features were extensive. The RC-M90 included an eight-band tuner with AM and FM coverage plus six shortwave bands, all supported by fine tuning. The cassette deck featured a tape counter, dual-motor full-logic transport, Normal, CrO₂, and Metal tape bias and EQ, JVC’s Multi Music Scanner, record and playback timers, and Dolby NR or Super ANRS noise reduction. With metal tape, cassette frequency response was rated at roughly 30 Hz to 17,000 Hz, impressive for a portable system.
Additional features included two built-in microphones, independent left and right recording level controls, microphone mixing level control, dual meters for VU, battery, and tuning, bass, treble, and balance controls, a loudness switch, and mono or stereo selection. Nothing about this box was casual.
Original pricing is documented at approximately £333 in the UK, with U.S. pricing from 1981 remaining elusive. Today, demand pricing for the JVC RC-M90 routinely exceeds $1,000, with top-condition examples commanding significantly more. For many collectors, this is the mountain every other boombox is measured against.
Jumping ahead to 1993, the Lasonic TRC-975 arrived as a genuine value play, originally selling for around $179. While the decade had shifted, its design was pure late-’80s muscle, and the sound followed suit. The TRC-975 earned a reputation for serious output thanks to its “Jumbo” Extra Bass system and a 10-band graphic equalizer that encouraged aggressive tweaking rather than restraint.
The speaker system consisted of dual 8-inch woofers paired with two 2-inch tweeters, a configuration aimed squarely at loud, physical sound. Feature-wise, the TRC-975 included dual cassette decks for recording and dubbing, AM/FM/SW radio, auto-reverse playback, and both normal- and high-speed dubbing. Connectivity was basic but practical, with an auxiliary input for external sources.
Some units on the secondary market have since been modified to add Bluetooth or MP3 playback, though purists tend to prefer unaltered examples. Closely associated with hip-hop culture, the Lasonic TRC-975 has become one of the most aggressively sought boomboxes of the 1990s era. Current demand pricing typically ranges from around $700 to as high as $2,300 for pristine, original-condition units, while modified versions with Bluetooth often trade closer to the lower end of that range.
Just as CDs were beginning to reshape how people listened to music in the early 1980s, Sharp responded with one of the strangest boombox designs ever put into production: the VZ-2000, released around 1982-1983.
What made the VZ-2000 truly weird was its ambition. In addition to a radio and cassette deck, it incorporated a vertical turntable capable of playing both sides of a record at 33 or 45 rpm without flipping. To pull that off, Sharp employed dual linear-tracking tonearms controlled by a microcomputer, enabling fully automatic playback. Each arm was fitted with a Sharp 118 phono cartridge and STY-118 stylus, turning this boombox into a portable record player in the most literal sense of the word.
Beyond the vinyl trickery, the VZ-2000 featured a two-way speaker system, easy-touch controls, an auto program pause system, and metal tape compatibility for the cassette deck. On paper, it checked an absurd number of boxes for a single portable unit.
Portability, however, was relative. The VZ-2000 weighed over 35 pounds, which severely limited how far anyone was realistically carrying it. Original pricing was approximately $550, and today a fully operational example typically commands between $1,000 and $1,500 or more, depending on condition. It remains one of the clearest examples of early-’80s audio excess, when engineers still believed anything was portable if you added a handle.
These 12 boomboxes barely scratch the surface of what flooded streets, stoops, and backseats throughout the 1970s and 1980s, when portable audio was as much about presence as playback. Today’s Bluetooth speakers and smartphones are lighter, cleaner, and infinitely more convenient, but they’ve traded shared experience for private consumption. Boomboxes weren’t just how people listened to music. They were how music forced its way into the room—and made everyone deal with it together.
Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility — your central hub for news and insights on the future of transportation. To get this in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility!
You might recall the congressional hearing last month that sparked criticism against Waymo over its use of remote assistance workers in the Philippines. We have covered that issue extensively. You can read about the company’s remote assistance and road assistance teams here and here.
Waymo tends to get the most attention because, well, those robotaxis are now operating commercially in 10 U.S. cities, with more coming soon. But the issue of remote assistance is not a Waymo issue. It’s an autonomous vehicle technology issue.
A new report from Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) makes my point.
Advertisement
Markey sent letters to seven U.S. companies — Aurora, May Mobility, Motional, Nuro, Tesla, Waymo, and Zoox — working on autonomous vehicle technology with a list of questions. He wanted to know how often these companies’ vehicles relied on input from remote staff.
They all refused to say, according to the results of Markey’s investigation. Markey said it was a “stunning lack of transparency from the AV companies around their use of remote assistance operators to help guide their AVs.”
You can read senior reporter Sean O’Kane’s article, which digs into the issue and includes the rather mute responses from the companies. (TechCrunch reached out to all of them.) One interesting admission from Tesla: The company said its remote assistance workers are authorized to temporarily assume direct vehicle control (a very different thing than “remote assistance”) as a final escalation maneuver.
Techcrunch event
Advertisement
San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026
But here’s the thing — this is not going away. And silence will not defuse the matter. If anything, Markey seems more motivated than ever to get answers. He is now calling on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to investigate companies’ use of remote assistance workers and said he is “working on legislation to impose strict guardrails on AV companies’ use of remote operators.”
It seems like just last week I was writing about Uber being everywhere, all at once. And I see it is still a trend, although this time it isn’t directly related to autonomous vehicles.
Uber said it is buying Berlin-based startup Blacklane, which provides on-demand, black-car chauffeur services, as the ride-hail giant expands deeper into luxury and executive travel services. Blacklane, which was founded in 2011, had raised more than $100 million to date from rental car company Sixt, Mercedes-Benz, and Alfahim, a conglomerate in the UAE.
The timing of the acquisition is notable. It comes just a few weeks after Uber announced the launch of Uber Elite, a chauffeur service that also offers a bunch of luxury offerings like airport meet-and-greets and in-vehicle amenities.
Other deals that got my attention …
Manna Air Delivery, a consumer drone delivery startup based in Ireland, raised $50 million from ARK Invest, the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, Schooner Capital, Coca-Cola HBC, and Molten Ventures.
Advertisement
Saronic Technologies, an autonomous military ship developer based in Austin, raised $1.75 billion in a Series D funding round led by Kleiner Perkins. The company is now valued at $9.25 billion. Other investors include Advent International, Bessemer Venture Partners, DFJ Growth, BAM Elevate, and other new partners and recognizes the continued commitment of its existing investors, including 8VC, Caffeinated Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Elad Gil, and Franklin Templeton.
Voltify, a startup that has developed a way to retrofit diesel locomotives with battery power, raised $30 million in seed funding co-led by Israeli venture firm Aleph and Australian miner Fortescue.
Notable reads and other tidbits
Image Credits:Bryce Durbin
Also, the micromobility company created inside Rivian that spun out last year, will work with DoorDash to develop autonomous delivery vehicles. As part of the deal, DoorDash took part in Also’s $200 million Series C funding round, which was led by Greenoaks Capital. DoorDash is getting a seat on Also’s board of directors, too.
Baidurobotaxis stalled throughout Wuhan, China, in some cases trapping passengers for up to two hours due to system failure.
GM is ramping up its efforts to improve its advanced driver-assistance system, Super Cruise. CEO Mary Barraposted on LinkedIn that GM has started supervised testing of its next-gen automated driving system on public highways in California and Michigan.
Advertisement
“Soon, more than 200 supervised and manual test vehicles will be in live traffic, with trained drivers ready to take over at any time. This data will guide future updates to strengthen our autonomous capabilities,” she wrote.
Lucidissued a recall for more than 4,000 Gravity SUVs after discovering a problem with the seat belts.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that traffic deaths fell 6.7% to 36,640 in 2025 from the prior year. This is the second-lowest traffic fatality rate in recorded history at 1,10 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, according to the NHTSA.
All of those long TSA lines are prompting airlines to catch up and adapt. For instance, United Airlines has updated its mobile app to show TSA wait times at select airports.
Advertisement
The Subaru-Toyota partnership keeps cranking out EVs. At the New York Auto Show, Subaru introduced the all-electric Gateway, a three-row SUV that is essentially a rebadged Toyota Highlander EV.
Tesla’s Q1 sales figures show its cheaper vehicles aren’t helping it turn around declining sales. (Some legacy automakers have seen EV sales plummet.) That seems to have affected Tesla’s workforce numbers at its Austin, Texas, factory, which dropped 22% in 2025. Meanwhile, I riff on the changing of the guard over at Tesla (and, no, I am not referring to the string of executive departures there, although that is interesting). CEO Elon Musk shared that production of the Tesla Model S and X has ended, a milestone that marks the shift away from building cars designed for people to drive and toward robots and self-driving cars.
Toyota’s Woven Capital has appointed a new CIO and COO in a push to find the “future of mobility.”
Uber and Chinese autonomous vehicle company WeRide launched robotaxi operations without a human safety operator in Dubai as part of a broader expansion in the Middle East.
Advertisement
Waymo’s robotaxi service is now live at San Antonio International, its fourth major airport. Meanwhile, Wired looked at Waymo’s school bus problem (meaning the investigation into the illegal behavior of its robotaxis around school buses). The article provides new details on how the Austin School District tried to help Waymo solve the problem. It didn’t work.
One more thing …
My podcast, the Autonocast, spent some time talking with Ashu Rege, DoorDash’s VP of Autonomy. We recorded the episode prior to the Also-DoorDash announcement, which makes his comments about the company’s strategy all the more interesting. Check out the episode here.
Reports that Russia has been strengthening its navy have been circulating for some time. In recent months, one verifiable sign of activity has been the launch of the Admiral Amelko frigate.
This is the fifth and latest ship in the Gorshkov-class of frigates, or if they’re referred to by their rather dry official designnation – Project 22350. This class of ship represents a key part of Russia’s post-Soviet naval strategy. Indeed, it’s the only class of ocean-going surface warship developed by the Russians since the demise of the Soviet Union. The ships are designed to be multi-role platforms capable of handling a range of missions, from air defense to anti-submarine warfare. Currently, there are three of them in active service, with a fourth, the Admiral Isakov, and the aforementioned Admiral Amelko both set to join the fleet in 2027.
Advertisement
In remarks published by The National Interest, Alexander Stepanov, of the Moscow-based Institute of Law and National Security called the ship “a sea terminator, a universal soldier, that can hunt down enemy nuclear-powered submarines. Given this, it’s likely a relief to hear that these ships are hardly rolling off the production line at a high rate of knots.
For instance, the Admiral Amelko’s keel was laid down in April 2019, and it isn’t expected to enter service until late 2027. This is fast, by the way; the first ship in the class took 12 years to build. Although, to be fair, a major U.S. Navy frigate program was recently cancelled due to major production delays, so this is not a uniquely Russian problem.
Let’s have a closer look at the Gorshkov-class of frigates and whether they live up to their self-penned terminator moniker.
Advertisement
The Gorshkov-class Frigates
The Gorshkov-class frigate is, at least by virtue of being the sole contender, central to the Russian Navy’s current surface fleet development and is representative of a focus shift to smaller ships that carry hypersonic missiles. The Admiral Amelko is the most recent example of the class and was launched at the Severnaya (Northern) Shipyard in St. Petersburg on 24 August 2025.
Russia’s strategy in adopting these multi-role vessels allows its navy to operate without relying on larger destroyers or cruisers. This is part of a change of approach from trying to match the US Navy in terms of sheer numbers to a more versatile fleet that relies heavily on hypersonic missiles.
Advertisement
In terms of equipment, the ships are built around vertical launch systems capable of deploying a mix of cruise and anti-ship missiles. The Admiral Amelko is installed with 32-cell launch systems as opposed to the 16 installed on earlier frigates. These are capable of launching missiles such as the Kalibr and Oniks systems alongside anti-submarine weapons. The Gorshkov-class ships are also the first “surface combatants” of the Russian Navy with the capability of launching the 3M22 Zircon missile, a scramjet missile thought to be the world’s fastest.
On paper, this makes the Gorshkov-class sound like a formidable foe. However, assessing the full impact of these claims is not always straightforward. Russia’s naval modernization is often framed in more dramatic terms than the evidence supports, and much of the available information comes from official announcements or (sometimes state-sponsored) secondary reporting. It’s all very well calling a ship a “sea terminator,” but such a name has to be earned before it means anything.
Pinball video games have been around for years — I cut my teeth on Space Cadet 3D Pinball, which was pre-loaded on Windows 95. They range from realistic recreations of pinball tables you’ll find at arcades to games that could never exist in real life like 2019’s Demon’s Tilt or older ones like Metroid Prime Pinball for the Nintendo DS or Pokémon Pinball for the Game Boy Color.
I didn’t expect to find a detailed pinball game for the humble and delightful Playdate, but a pair of developers working under the name Amano pulled it off with Devils on the Moon Pinball, which arrived last week. It’s the developer’s third game for the Playdate, and Mario and JP (who make up Amano) pointed directly to Pokemon Pinball as the inspiration for this game. “I think one of my most-played games is Pokemon Pinball,” JP said. “But the idea to make a pinball game came from Mario… he came to me and say ‘JP, I want to make a custom engine for Playdate and we should make a pinball game.’”
I love playing pinball in real life, but owning a full-size table is extremely expensive and takes up a ton of room. But Devils on the Moon completely scratches the itch. The controls are extremely simple: pressing left on the d-pad flips the left fipper, A flips the right flipper, and pressing down on the d-pad launches the ball. Amano also included tilt controls; pressing right or up on the d-pad or the B button shakes the table in a particular direction so you can try and save the ball. Sadly, the crank doesn’t come into play, but I can’t say I have a good idea for how it would be used.
A screenshot from Devils on the Moon Pinball. (Amano)
I was impressed with both the physics and table design of Devils on the Moon after playing for just a few minutes. Despite not having analog control, the way the ball reacted when I hit the flippers felt consistent and smooth, and while I was often surprised at some of the bounces it took, it never felt unfair. When I drained a ball, it was almost always something I could have avoided if I knew the game better or had faster reflexes — just like a good, real-life pinball table.
Advertisement
JP and Mario described the game as using “stylized physics” rather than it being fully realistic. “It may not necessarily be accurate to real life,” JP said. “But since the screen is wider than it is tall unlike actual pinball, we needed the ball to feel a little bit floaty and not fall as fast because then it would just zoom straight down the screen.”
The table design feels both grounded in reality while also taking advantage of its virtual nature. There are three vertical “levels,” each with its own set of flippers. The 2D nature of the game means there aren’t any true ramps like you’ll on most pinball tables, but having three separate sections of the game to get used to makes up for that. And provided you complete various modes in the game, you can reach boss battles where you’re tasked with whacking a giant enemy repeatedly to drain away their health bar. Physical pinball tables often have similar encounters, but they have to be worked into the design of the game — in this case, your ball essentially ports to an entirely different space when you battle a boss.
The full three-stage board layout for Devils on the Moon pinball. (Amano)
“It’s kind of playing like the old pinball machines where the rules are really simple,” Mario said.”. “You just have a few things to do. In our case, it ended up going beyond our original scope, but it’s still quite simple compared to an actual pinball machine in terms of rules.” He said the design intent was to make the game friendlier to people who might try it out without a lot of pinball experience while still putting enough challenge into it.
The audio and visual presentation is top-notch for a Playdate game, too. Perhaps most crucially for a pinball game, there’s no lag or stuttering. The game also has a distinct visual identity, something that’s always important for pinball to draw you into the world of the playfield as much as possible. The game’s page cheekily promises “ at least (1) songs” and it delivers on that with a solid theme for the main game that serves well as background music that doesn’t get old if you’re playing for a while, and the beeps and boops the table makes as you play feel well-suited to the game. It doesn’t “sound” like a real pinball table — but it isn’t one, so that’s okay.
Advertisement
A screenshot of Devils on the Moon Pinball. (Amano)
I haven’t played a video pinball game in a long time, but the Playdate feels like an ideal platform for this. I can bring it with me anywhere and play a round or two (provided there’s decent light) or settle in for a longer play session. The game is challenging enough that you’ll need to practice a lot to get the hang of it, but there’s enough variety to the three-tiered table to keep players interested for the long haul. After all, the fun of pinball isn’t necessarily playing a table for the first time — it’s learning it inside out so you can maximize your score. I’m looking forward to getting to that point with Devils on the Moon.
We are just into a new cutting season here, so I haven’t tested these new robot mowers enough to make a full recommendation, but here are my impressions so far.
Photograph: Simon Hill
Mammotion Luba 3 AWD for $2,399: If this robot mower continues to perform as well as it has in its first week, it will earn a spot above. It is pricey, but the Mammotion Luba 3 AWD can handle relatively rough terrain and steep slopes, and it combines three technologies (GPS, LiDAR, and AI vision) to ensure it can cut larger lawns even where there might be tree cover or other awkward spots. It boasts quiet operation, efficient pathfinding, and leaves a lovely finish. The obstacle avoidance is solid, and it does a decent job around the edges. I also appreciate the manual mowing option, enabling you to cut any problem areas with remote app control.
Husqvarna Aspire R6V for £999: I was excited to test this new robot mower from Husqvarna because it is more affordable than many of its range, including our top pick, and it doesn’t require a separate aerial for the satellite connection. It uses a combination of GPS and AI vision with a camera on the front. It was easy to set up and map the lawn in the app, but you will need a good Wi-Fi signal across your yard for it to work effectively. So far, I’ve been a little disappointed in the sensitive obstacle avoidance, as it has been leaving large uncut strips around the edges of my lawn. But I’d like to tinker and test for a bit longer before I deliver a final verdict. This model also seems to be available only in the UK right now. I’m waiting to hear back about a US equivalent.
Advertisement
In my queue, after these two mowers, I have the Mova LiDAX Ultra 1000 and the Anthbot M9.
Other Robot Lawn Mowers We Like
Eufy Robot Lawn Mower E15 for $2,300: This is another wire-free mower, but instead of relying on satellite navigation, it uses a camera system to automatically map lawns and avoid obstacles. It can cover up to 0.2 acres (8,700 square feet), cut from 1 to 3 inches, and handle up to 18-degree slopes. It is also fairly quiet and has GPS tracking, but you must have Wi-Fi coverage in your backyard, or you’ll need a 4G data subscription. I found the setup lengthy due to a firmware download, but the mapping and the first cut were decent. The E15 can only run during the day, and it doesn’t cope very well with inclines. I also found it frequently failed to cut the edges of the lawn and doesn’t perform well if the grass is damp. I wouldn’t recommend it at full price, but it seems to get frequent deep discounts.
Avoid These Mowers
EcoFlow Blade
Advertisement
Photograph: Simon Hill
EcoFlow Blade for £1,849: While it was easy to set up and cut my lawn nicely without the need for any boundary wire, the EcoFlow Blade (6/10, WIRED Review) sometimes struggled with GPS navigation and ended up stuck in a flower bed. It also left an untouched strip around the edge of my lawn. The object avoidance was solid, and it can be automated in the app, though it occasionally failed to start a scheduled cut for me. EcoFlow seems to have discontinued this model, though it is still on sale in Europe. Probably best to avoid.
Yardcare E400
Photograph: Simon Hill
Yardcare E400 for $370: Curious about the budget end of the robot mower market, I agreed to try the Yardcare E400, but this mower was an unmitigated disaster from start to finish. It’s a boundary wire model, so you must run wire around the area you want mowed. Yardcare suggests it can cover up to 4,300 square feet and cut grass between 0.8 and 2.4 inches. The problem is that it gets stuck frequently and struggles to even get on and off its charging station reliably. After trying multiple fixes to no avail and going through customer support, I had to conclude that this model has a serious design flaw.
How Do Robot Lawn Mowers Work?
Advertisement
Perhaps counterintuitively, the setup instructions for your robot lawn mower will likely tell you to start by cutting the grass. Robot mowers mostly can’t deal with long grass. Unlike traditional mowers, these robots don’t collect grass cuttings; they mulch instead, and they are designed to cut frequently, keeping your lawn short and simply leaving the cuttings on the ground, which can also improve lawn health. Most robot mowers are designed to run two or three times a week during the growing season (from late spring to early fall).
They have rechargeable batteries onboard and can last from half an hour to several hours on a full charge. They return to the charging base and recharge automatically when their power runs low. Most mowers have simple controls, a small display, and an emergency stop button. You can generally start and stop mowing, set schedules, and create or edit mapped areas using the onboard controls or the companion mobile app, very much like a robot vacuum.
What Features Should I Look for in a Robot Mower?
There are many robot mower features to consider, and the best choice for you depends on what your yard is like.
Advertisement
Lawn Size and Shape
Robot lawn mowers are generally rated to cover a specific square footage, with wider coverage requiring models with larger batteries. Alongside yard size, you should consider the shape and topography of your lawn, as most robot mowers will struggle with steep inclines. While you can often map out separate areas so your robot mower can mow front and back lawns, for example, it will generally need you to lift and carry it between those areas. If you have an uneven garden or steep slopes, you should look for a four-wheel-drive (4WD) or all-wheel-drive (AWD) mower and check the manufacturer’s rating for inclines.
Navigation Type
There are a few types of navigation that robot mowers employ. We’ve tested five different approaches, though some mowers combine multiple technologies for better performance:
Advertisement
Satellite: Often employing something called Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS), these mowers need a satellite signal to navigate and will have a receiver that must be placed in the open with a clear line of sight to the sky. Satellite navigation mowers are not suitable for areas with tall trees or buildings.
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR): This technology sends out rapid laser pulses to 3D map the terrain (it is also used by self-driving cars). It enables mowers to cut grass under thick tree canopies or near tall buildings where GPS signals usually fail.
Cameras: Cameras and onboard AI are used for obstacle detection and avoidance. AI vision can automatically map areas and cut the grass while avoiding obstacles it encounters, much like how most robot vacuums navigate a home to clean the floors.
Wire boundary: These mowers require you to install a perimeter wire as a boundary around your lawn that marks out the border the mower should not cross. It’s a messy job that can be tricky.
Remote control: You mow your lawn from the comfort of your home using a remote controller or an app on your phone. Some only work via remote control, while others can also cut automatically.
Power and Charging
Robot mowers generally come with large charging docks, and you’ll need to earmark a suitable spot for yours. They usually have extensive weatherproof cabling, but you will have to find a route to an outdoor socket.
Wi-Fi and Bluetooth
To connect to your mower and schedule a mow, update the firmware, or remote control it where supported, you need a decent Wi-Fi signal or a Bluetooth connection. It’s best to set up your mower’s charging station within range of your Wi-Fi network. Some mowers also need a strong Wi-Fi signal to operate effectively, so you might consider adding an outdoor mesh router. If you want to connect your phone via Bluetooth, you will have to get quite close.
How Noisy Are Robot Mowers?
Advertisement
Most robot mowers are far quieter than their traditional counterparts, and you can expect them to operate at around 55 decibels, though they may go as high as 75 decibels. We only tested battery-powered mowers, but expect gas mowers to be louder. While the operation is often quiet, I did find that several mowers made annoying beeping sounds when backing up or had a loud recorded voice during setup or upon receiving a command.
Do Robot Mowers Work in Any Weather?
Robot mowers and their charging stations usually have an IP rating and can cope with rain, but you should pack up and bring your mower indoors during the winter months. Many robot mowers have some kind of rain sensor and will pause mowing when it gets too wet. Some mowers may need to be paused manually. The wheels can churn up your lawn and get caked in mud if mowers continue to labor in the rain, especially with larger and heavier models.
How Well Do Robot Mowers Cut?
Advertisement
Mowers of different sizes will have varying cutting widths, denoting the width of the strip they can cut on each pass. Most also have floating cutting decks that enable you to choose the length of grass you want (typically 1 to 3 inches). Many robot mowers seem to struggle with cutting around the edges of a lawn, especially if there’s a wall or fence that prevents them from getting close enough.
It’s common to find an uncut verge around the edge of your lawn, so you might need to occasionally get the string trimmer out. Every robot mower I’ve tested has also struggled to cut the area around the charging station, so I recommend placing the unit on a deck or paving if possible.
Can I Install a Robot Mower Myself?
Yes, most robot mowers can be installed by anyone, but you might want to set aside an afternoon to work out any snags. Finding the best spot for the receiver for a satellite mower can be tricky. The mapping process can also take a while; usually, it prompts you to remote-control your mower around the border you want to set. After the first mow, you should review its performance and make tweaks to ensure it’s covering the entire area you want to cut.
Advertisement
How I Test Robot Lawn Mowers
I test each robot lawn mower for at least a month, on at least two different lawn areas, assessing the ease of setup, the mapping process, automatic scheduling (where available), navigation, obstacle avoidance, and the quality of the final cut, looking for length, uniformity, and any missed patches. Where applicable, I try extra features, tweak settings in the app, and check how the mower handles different weather conditions. I also keep an eye on battery performance and charging time to ensure it aligns with the manufacturer’s claims.
SpaceX has reportedly filed confidential paperwork for an initial public offering in which the company would raise $75 billion at a $1.75 trillion valuation. And according to CEO Elon Musk, orbital data centers will be a big part of SpaceX’s future.
On the latest episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Kirsten Korosec, Sean O’Kane, and I discussed Musk’s vision, as well as other companies that are pursuing similar goals.
It will take significant tech development and massive capital spending to make orbital data centers a reality, but as Sean noted, with “opposition happening around the country to data centers in general,” executives like Musk and Jeff Bezos may be thinking, “The engineering challenge may be less than the social challenge back here” on Earth.
Advertisement
Read a preview of our conversation, edited for length and clarity, below.
Sean: This has been a trend — I would say a rapidly forming trend — over the last half year to a year, and we have different examples of it. We have SpaceX; I feel like in some ways, Elon Musk was late on this trend. And for the moment, let’s set aside the actual mechanics and the viability of data centers in space. We could talk about that in a second if we want, but —
Kirsten: We have a really good story we’ll link to in the show notes, by the way. One of our most recent hires, Tim Fernholz, is amazing. He writes all about the physics and the constraints of that.
Sean: Yeah, I think it’s a really interesting engineering challenge. It’s a really interesting physics challenge. It’s a really interesting orbital mechanics challenge. But it’s something that clearly a bunch of companies and people are going to try and chase. [There’s] going to be SpaceX doing it, with a kind of variance of what they’re already working on with their Starlink network.
Advertisement
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026
Advertisement
There’s a startup that had come out of Y Combinator, originally called Starcloud, that was really one of the first ones out there trying to build a huge business around this, that just raised $170 million this week, their valuation [on] that tipped them over into a unicorn status.
Jeff Bezos is trying to go after this as well. This is a next generation version of the competition that we’ve seen happening between Starlink and Amazon’s Leo satellite network, and Blue Origin has its own satellite network coming online as well in the next couple of years.
So there’s going to be a whole bunch of this happening, and it feels like it wasn’t happening a year ago. I know the way that Elon Musk pitches it is — we know he’s allergic to red tape, he’s built a data center in Memphis, too. Maybe now he knows the challenges and the risks you have to take to sidestep that red tape.
There’s a lot of opposition happening around the country to data centers in general. And these people say, “We have access to space, so let’s just try and do it up there.” The engineering challenge may be less than the social challenge back here on our [planet].
Advertisement
Kirsten: And it also creates excitement, right? If a company is about to go [public] and they’re working on data centers in space, this is something that people can have expectations about in a positive way and ignore the constraints. It feels like a company that is working on something that’s not old and outdated, but signals the future. And it’s really a great strategy when you think about it.
Anthony: Not that Elon Musk is the only one who does this, but it seems like he’s incredibly successful at being like, “Don’t judge my companies based on how much money they’re making now, judge them based on these grand visions that I can spin out about what will happen in the future.”
And going back to a point that Sean was making, I think that part of what’s interesting is to [ask]: How does this fit in with the broader data center rollout? How does it fit in with opposition and the idea that maybe people are not going to be able to build as many data centers as they want to?
I don’t think any of us are engineers who can really assess the viability of these plans. It does certainly have a tinge of fantasy to it, but even when they do lay out these plans, it feels like just a drop in the bucket in terms of compute capabilities compared to what they want to build out on Earth. So it feels like there’s not a scenario where this replaces a whole bunch of new data centers on Earth. It’s just sort of a […] supplement to it.
Advertisement
Sean: The last two things I’ll point out that are really front and center for me is, one, we’ve seen a backing off in some ways [from] data centers — not just because of opposition, but because maybe we don’t need as much, right? We see a bunch of jockeying from some of the AI labs about, “Well, maybe we don’t need to lease this much from this company,” or whatever. And if that becomes a thing that is more true than it was five months ago, do you all of a sudden lose all that momentum to do something as crazy as putting the data centers in space? Providing that it works, even.
The other thing is that the idea of building these massive data centers in space, with all these satellites that make up the quote unquote “data center,” is business for SpaceX. And I think this is unique to them compared to these other companies: They are a launch company primarily, even though they generate a bunch of revenue from Starlink. They are the vehicle that gets the data centers to space. They get to book that as revenue for SpaceX.
And so it becomes this thing where, of course [Musk] wants — whether or not it works, he would eventually have to prove it — but of course he wants to send more and more satellites into space because it’s more revenue for SpaceX. And that makes SpaceX look better as a public company. And then you just kind of tumble down the path until he finds something else to pitch the investors on.
Prof Neil Rowan sits down with SiliconRepublic.com to chat life, work and advice for students.
As he describes it, Prof Neil Rowan was thrust into the world rather prematurely. Coming in at less than a kilogram at birth, Rowan tells me he spent months in an incubator, sure that he wasn’t supposed to make it.
Later, he wonders if that’s what gave him the drive – a sort of “accelerator button” on his life, firmly pressed, “always”.
From breaking regional sprinting records at the local athletic club as a teenager, to being awarded a higher doctorate of science some four decades later, Prof Rowan has achieved more than many – especially for a boy from a middle-class family from Coosan in Athlone.
Advertisement
Among his very large list of accomplishments, Rowan is an expert in medtech, food security, environmental sustainability and bioeconomy, and the inaugural director of the Bioscience Research Institute at Technological University of the Shannon (TUS). He is ranked number one in the world for decontamination research.
He is also on a United Nations panel on the effects of nuclear war, as well as on the new National Science Advisory panel and a new scientific committee for the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. He also works closely with the European Commission and Research Ireland on various innovation programmes. I will refrain from adding to this list, lest I overwhelm the reader.
“The funny thing is, I’m colourblind,” Rowan tells me. “I only ever saw green … so I was constantly ‘going’.”
One of five children, Rowan was the first from any generation in his family to have attended university. His parents never finished school, he tells me.
Advertisement
“My dad was 52 years working with the one company [fixing weighing scales],” he says. “Going to college [at the time] would have been very expensive.”
A football scholarship led Rowan to the University of Galway in the 1980s, after which the young academic made his way to the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow on a different scholarship to take the first-ever course at the institution looking at biotechnology.
10 papers and a PhD later, Rowan was appointed as a lecturer – and then a senior lecturer at the University. He was 29 years old.
Rewarded for decades of research
Rowan made headlines earlier this year for being recognised with a higher doctorate of science by the University of Strathclyde – a first for any academic working in TUS.
Advertisement
A higher doctorate of science is above a PhD. It is the highest academic degree in the Irish and UK university systems, awarded to scholars who demonstrate a significant contribution to their field over several decades. Fewer than 10 higher doctorates are awarded per year in Ireland. Rowan describes the degree as a ‘black swan’, a definite rare occurrence.
“Every day is a school day”, according to Rowan, who has published a minimum of six to seven research papers every year for the past 30 years. His higher doctorate thesis comprises 150 peer-reviewed journal papers presented in two volumes, totalling approximately 1,600 pages.
The submission covers his research from 1995 to the present day, delving into his work in advancing the fields of disease prevention and control that cross-cut medtech, food safety and food security globally.
Rowan’s still surprised at his achievements. He tells me that he is “constantly surprised, pleasantly surprised” at any recognition, even after all these years.
Advertisement
Throughout our chat, the professor made several mentions of ‘firsts’ in his various fields of research.
According to Rowan, he created the first-ever toxigenic-mould growth prediction model for the built environment in the early 1990s. It was the first to use computer simulations and algorithms for elucidating biological solutions to inform improvements in sustainable building design that subsequently became a European reference model.
More recently, Neil leads the first ever bio-economy demonstrator facility at scale using freshwater fish in peatlands, now used in Ireland and to be replicated across Europe.
Prof Rowan introduced the first PhDs in biomedical sciences, health and sterilisation science in TUS, and also reported on the first use of several disinfection technologies such as pulsed light, pulsed electric fields and pulsed plasma for disease prevention and food security, including from a underpinning mechanistic perspective.
Advertisement
An educator and an enabler
When asked how he describes his work, Rowan says he’s both an “educator and an enabler”.
“I think I enable people to help themselves,” he explains.
He has supervised around 120 undergraduate projects, as well as around 40 PhDs with industrial applications – such as a new vaporised hydrogen peroxide terminal sterilisation method, or a new classification system for medical device features and cleaning for improved patient safety.
Rowan says he loves to teach and that he resonates with his students. He says his work has a “lasting legacy”, given his students’ creative footprints on society.
Advertisement
Through our chat, the professor highlighted the importance of being an “agile listener”.
“I was always an active listener and prepared to spend considerable time studying to understanding to get to the root of things.”
However, also important is having ambition, he says. “I was always brave and ambitious. I was always not afraid of taking on very grand challenges. I was always trying. I was never not afraid to do things.”
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.
But once you’ve set up your device, Heatbit will track and file your mining revenue to your phone, even if you don’t yet have a bitcoin wallet set up. After you reach the transfer minimum of 100,000 satoshis, or one thousandth of one bitcoin ($66 at April 2026 prices), you can transfer this to your wallet and, presumably, spend it. Heatbit’s app is compatible with the Lightning networks and most major exchanges (Coinbase, Binance, OKX, BitFinex).
Unlike many air purifiers that activate only when there are air quality issues, the Heatbit continually pushes air through its HEPA filter while the miner and heater are active. While Heatbit recommends filter replacement once every six months, in practice, the app showed that the filter was being used up by about 1 percent a day. For whatever reason, my Heatbit app refused to believe that I was not in Seattle, and so my exterior air quality readings were all tied to King County, Washington.
Early quirks aside, the ease of onramp is admirable for a device not aimed at crypto-loving engineers. At current prices, if I run my heater/miner nonstop, this would net me about a $70 rebate on my heating bills once every two months. Pretty cool, right?
Why the Math on Heatbit Doesn’t Pencil
Heatbit via Matthew Korfhage
But here’s the problem with that math. I’d also need to pay at least $1,500 upfront (the current discounted price of the Maxi Pro) before I get access to these savings. This is about $1,350 more than the best space heaters I’ve tested. It’s also around $900 or $1,000 more than a combination purifier–heater from Dyson. So your money-saving math needs to take this upfront cost into account.
Advertisement
At this rate, assuming my energy costs and bitcoin prices stayed constant, it would take me between five and eight years to “make my money back” in bitcoin if I ran this thing 24/7 for four months a year. That’s on a device with a one-year warranty. (Heatbit’s founders say there has been a failure rate only in the “low single digits” after three years for the first-generation Heatbit Trio.)
These numbers assume I would otherwise run a space heater nonstop at full blast for months on end as a primary heat source—which is not how most people use space heaters. I tend to turn on a space heater only when I’m in a room, and direct it toward myself. For heating a whole house, natural gas or a heat pump are both far more cost-effective options, if available.
But let’s say you have only electricity for heat. And you would always be running a space heater. And let’s assume the Heatbit keeps running at the same efficiency for at least five years. Is the Heatbit now the best choice, economically? Well, still maybe not.
Every Crypto Miner Is a Heater
Every crypto mining device will heat your house, whether or not its makers advertise it as a space heater. Each miner will release heat with 100 percent efficiency, according to how much power it uses. That’s because one way or another, all power waste will eventually get converted to heat.
Advertisement
The most efficient combination space heater and bitcoin miner will always be the one that mines bitcoin most efficiently. At that point, you could just pick up a Canaan Avalon Q ($1,900) and get a 50 percent better hash rate and produce about the same amount of heat. Newfangled ASIC Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) miners might net you even better efficiency. Pretty much anything you use, with the same amount of power, will release this much heat.
The use of drones and autonomous vehicles is continuing to rise. In a military capacity, this has allowed people in the service to access areas that would otherwise be incredibly difficult and dangerous to reach. While the public may be more familiar with how the U.S. military is developing new ways to deal with drones on the battlefield, this idea pertains to the depths of the ocean, too. This is why the U.S. Navy is so interested in the capacities of the Dive-XL, an autonomous submarine developed by Anduril.
In April 2025, the U.S. Navy announced the beginning of its Combat Autonomous Maritime Platform program. Its aim is to find partners that can deliver an unmanned and autonomous vessel capable of diving as far as over 650 feet below the surface. The vessel should be sizeable-enough to have the ability to dispatch payloads at these considerable depths, and boast a range of around 1,000 nautical miles. It was specified, too, that this autonomous submarine should be capable of handling equipment of varying sizes. This is particularly important because the possible scope of such a vessel’s mission notably varies from reconnaissance to something considerably more offensive.
Advertisement
Anduril’s Dive-XL has been selected to fulfill this role. Stretching 27 feet long with a 7-foot beam, it’s far from the tiny, stealthy drone some militaries are so used to wielding in the air. Let’s see exactly why this sub might be so important to the future of naval warfare.
Advertisement
Why the Dive-XL sub could be right for the U.S. Navy
With a range of about 2,000 nautical miles and the capacity to reach depths of about 20,000 feet, the Dive-XL definitely meets the requirements established by the Combat Maritime Autonomous Platform. It’s also designed to support single, double, triple, and extended payload configurations with a modular body. Powered with an all-electric power train that allows for long missions without surfacing, the Dive-XL can serve a variety of missions. An overly-specialized machine can only suit a niche role, while something like the Dive-XL is more versatile.
It’s also designed to accommodate and deploy tech such as Anduril’s Seabed Sentry, which is essentially individual Lattice AI-enabled cogs in an underwater communication and surveillance network. It also works with the Copperhead drone, an autonomous weapon that can be equipped with an explosive and is available in different capacities. The latter was specifically built to be deployed by a system like Dive-XL.
Anduril boasts that the capacity to stay underwater for long periods using pure electric power dramatically boosts the model’s ability to “operate undetected, extend its range, and deliver payloads in contested maritime environments.” This, according to the manufacturer, will be key to performing its role in an environment, and in a future, where it is unlikely to be the only autonomous vessel of its type.
Advertisement
The practicality of deploying the Anduril Dive-XL
The U.S. Navy has wielded many deadly attack submarines, and this Anduril model will be a formidable, though far from conventional, addition to the ranks. The variable hull design will make it less costly as well as more versatile, all of which will help to accomplish the main goal of quickly accumulating an autonomous force that can dispense numerous drones. This can in turn ease the pressure on already-strained sailors of crewed vessels.
Anduril also claims that the system “enables warfighters to launch, employ, and recover the system flexibly at sea or ashore with minimal infrastructure and heavy equipment.” To help with that, it’s first got to be easy to get it to where it needs to be. That is why Anduril designed it to be launched and collected by ship or pier and transported via aircraft or truck. It can also be carried across water in a shipping crate.
Advertisement
There’s no doubt that drones and autonomous vehicles will be an increasingly prominent part of warfare and defense in the future. The U.S. Navy clearly considers Anduril’s Dive-XL to be a significant part of that equation, but how it will continue to evolve and which different functions it will be able to fulfill beneath the surface remain to be seen.
It’s a yearly delight to feel the weather warm up as spring approaches, but this season of renewal does come with some downsides. One of the most annoying and dangerous is the road pothole, which manifests itself as a small dent, a massive hole, or something in between on the roadway. These become especially frequent sights throughout the spring season, thanks largely to the transition from winter to spring. Temperatures going from freezing to warm and snow and ice melting into water, freezing, and remelting ultimately lead to potholes being a common issue.
The formation of a pothole begins with the accumulation and subsequent melting of snow and ice during winter. This water makes its way into the dirt below the pavement via small cracks and holes. Freezing temps then turn that water into ice, which expands to lift and move the soil around it. As a result, the pavement above moves around, too, and when that ice melts in the warming spring, it leaves weak spots in those areas. Combine this weakened state with frequent driving, and it’s only a matter of time before the pavement breaks apart into a pothole.
While the squiggly road lines known as tar snakes often prevent some potholes from forming, plenty manage to take shape all the same. Potholes can mean serious trouble on the road. That’s why it’s crucial to practice safe driving habits and even take action should you encounter them.
Advertisement
How to take action when potholes form
Mikhail Yakovlev/Getty Images
When potholes have formed on the road, it’s key to drive safely in their presence. It can be difficult to tell just how big and deep they are from the driver’s seat, and hitting potholes could mean a guaranteed trip to the mechanic, be it for new tires or suspension parts, so you want to exercise caution. Don’t drive right over them, skirt around them when you can, and if they’re bad enough, safely change lanes to avoid them if possible. If you have little choice other than to drive your vehicle over one, be sure to do so at a low speed to prevent unnecessary wear.
Once you’re off the road, you can still take action against the potholes in your area. While more often than not, towns and cities will eventually get around to filling potholes, especially those in traffic-heavy areas, sometimes those on side streets will be overlooked. Oftentimes, you can go online and bring awareness to them by filling out a pothole repair request form or using other methods to get in touch with those responsible for repairing them. Doing so will benefit your vehicle’s health in the long run and the wider community as well.
Advertisement
There is no shortage of dangers and obstacles on the road, but few are more jarring than the pothole. That’s why, as spring approaches, it’s in every driver’s best interest to be extra careful while driving and, if they feel strongly enough, speak up to get something done about them.
He’s Apple’s Chief Operating Officer who became the CEO — but he’s not Tim Cook. Instead, this was how Michael Spindler replaced John Sculley, and made himself ill trying to save the company in the 1990s.
Apple CEO Michael Spindler — image credit: Apple
Michael Scott was the first Apple CEO, brought in by Mike Markkula, who became the second CEO when Scott was shown the door. Markkula was then responsible along with Steve Jobs for recruiting John Sculley, until he was also shown the exit sign. But while it was Sculley who made Spindler Chief Operating Officer, and then it was the board that made him CEO, Markkula was again behind all of this. It was Markkula who recruited Spindler to join Apple in September 1980. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums
You must be logged in to post a comment Login