Saturday, October 31, 2026

When Electric Cars Were for Women


<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/black-and-white-photo-of-a-woman-standing-in-an-early-20th-century-car-next-to-an-upright-electrical-apparatus.jpg?id=68537019&width=1200&height=400&coordinates=0%2C500%2C0%2C501"/><br/><br/><p>At the turn of the last century, the automobile industry was still new and evolving rapidly. In 1898, there were about 50 carmakers in the United States. A decade later, that number had increased fivefold. In 1901, the companies produced 7,000 vehicles. By 1910, production had reached 181,000.</p><div class="rm-embed embed-media"><iframe height="110px" id="noa-web-audio-player" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=q5m19e&id=https://spectrum.ieee.org/early-electric-vehicles&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=1b1b1c&playColor=1b1b1c&progressBgColor=F5F5F5&progressBorderColor=bdbbbb&titleColor=1b1b1c&timeColor=1b1b1c&speedColor=1b1b1c&noaLinkColor=556B7D&noaLinkHighlightColor=FF4B00&feedbackButton=false" style="border: none" width="100%"></iframe></div><p><span>For several decades, electric cars vied with those powered by steam and internal combustion, and nobody was sure which technology would come out on top. Steam had the legacy of locomotive technology behind it but came with a risk of fire. Steam-powered vehicles could also become exceedingly hot, depending on the placement of the boiler and the steam piping. Both gasoline and electric cars faced logistical challenges: How far could you travel without refueling or charging? You could always throw an extra can of gasoline in the back of the car, but charging a battery involved more planning. The infrastructure for long-distance travel was not yet in place.</span></p><p>Before the invention of the electric starter in 1911, gasoline-powered engines had to be started with a hand crank; once running, they were loud and emitted noxious fumes. Fully electric vehicles, by contrast, were easy to start; you just turned on the main battery switch, often with a key, and there was no foul exhaust to deal with. </p><p>Electric carmakers looking for a way to differentiate their products decided that these attributes made their vehicles perfect for women. (Electric cars were also marketed to doctors so that they could make house calls in the middle of the night without waking the neighbors.) General Electric, which made car chargers based on <a href="https://heritagemuseumsandgardens.org/charging-ahead-merc-arc-rec/" target="_blank">mercury-arc rectifiers</a>, was so captivated by the idea of women driving electric cars that the company created a <a href="https://artsandculture.google.com/story/OwXBW0hRZDluIQ?hl=en" target="_blank">series of advertisements</a> featuring stylishly dressed women plugging in their cars and posing with their charging stations.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt="Black and white photo of a woman standing between an early 20th century car and an electrical apparatus." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ce082e5767ff4f6ec9f161cf54f405ca" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="80d5d" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/black-and-white-photo-of-a-woman-standing-between-an-early-20th-century-car-and-an-electrical-apparatus.jpg?id=68537062&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">In ads for its electric car chargers, General Electric featured women using the equipment.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit..."><a href="https://nyheritage.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16694coll20/id/33/rec/38" target="_blank">miSci—Museum of Innovation and Science</a></small></p><p>A young woman named Fannie Goodnow was an early EV adopter. She owned a 1908 Bailey Victoria Phaeton, an open two-seater that really did look like a horseless carriage, and she used a GE mercury-arc rectifier to charge it. </p><h2>Who Invented the Mercury-Arc Rectifier?</h2><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image rm-float-left rm-resized-container rm-resized-container-25" data-rm-resized-container="25%" style="float: left;"> <img alt="Black and white photo of an older mustached white man wearing a hat and a winter coat. " class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a403e37e937f9cab15436462cdde1c5b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="d77e7" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/black-and-white-photo-of-an-older-mustached-white-man-wearing-a-hat-and-a-winter-coat.jpg?id=68537214&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Electrical engineer Peter Cooper Hewitt invented the mercury vapor lamp, which became the basis for the mercury-arc rectifier used in car-charging systems. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Bettmann/Getty Images</small></p><p>Electrical engineer <a href="https://www.ringwoodmanor.org/peter-cooper-hewitt.html" target="_blank">Peter Cooper Hewitt</a> is generally credited with the invention of the mercury-arc rectifier. During the first decade of the 20th century, Hewitt received several U.S. patents for electric lamps and other apparatus for transmitting and using electric currents. U.S. patents <a href="https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/14/53/af/25e40edaefe169/US968896.pdf" target="_blank">968,896</a> and <a href="https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/3a/ec/43/2d000ab50a0f86/US1163706.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">1,163,706</a>, granted to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1957/03/19/archives/percy-h-thomas-engineer-84-dies-exaide-of-federal-power-commission.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Percy H. Thomas</a>, advanced Hewitt’s designs. Thomas was chief electrician for the Cooper Hewitt Electric Co., which Hewitt had cofounded with George Westinghouse to manufacture and sell his lamps.</p><p>The mercury-arc rectifier functioned as a diode. In a car charger like the one Fannie Goodnow used, it converted alternating current from the power grid into direct current needed to charge the car’s battery. A small amount of liquid mercury contained in a glass tube would vaporize and glow as electricity passed through it. Coupled with the carbon anodes, the vapor allowed current to flow in only one direction. This unit took about 12 hours to charge a drained battery. </p><h2>A Carriage Maker Pivots to Electric Cars</h2><p>I couldn’t find any records as to why Fannie Goodnow opted for an electric car. But as a well-to-do woman living in the Boston area, she had more than a half dozen automobile producers to choose from. The one she chose was S.R. Bailey & Co. of Amesbury, Mass.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image rm-float-left rm-resized-container rm-resized-container-25" data-rm-resized-container="25%" style="float: left;"> <img alt="Color photo of an electrical apparatus with a number of levers, meters, and cables, attached to a wooden stand " class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0a3e626cf5b051d0adf7a62837cca583" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="3c816" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-of-an-electrical-apparatus-with-a-number-of-levers-meters-and-cables-attached-to-a-wooden-stand.jpg?id=68537042&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">This early electric car charger used a mercury-arc rectifier to convert AC to DC.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Heritage Museums & Gardens</small></p><p>According to Galen Handy, who maintains the <a href="https://earlyelectric.com/bailey.html" target="_blank">Early Electric Vehicles</a> website, Samuel Robinson Bailey started in the carriage and sleigh business as a teenager, winning a best-in-show prize at a carriage exhibition in Portland, Maine, in 1855. Bailey developed a reputation as an inventor and designed processes to streamline the manufacture of his vehicles. He went into business for himself in 1882. Just over a decade later, one of Bailey’s carriages won a gold medal at the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago.</p><p>Bailey’s son Edwin attended the exposition, where he likely would have seen a vision of the future: the Morrison electric wagon. This six-passenger, battery-powered vehicle ferried visitors and VIPs around the fairgrounds. It wasn’t long before automobiles began eating into the carriage business. In December 1906, with the carriage industry collapsing, S.R. Bailey & Co. announced it was getting into electric vehicles.</p><h2>Thomas Edison Designed a Bad Battery</h2><p>Bailey’s first model, the Victoria Phaeton, used an <a href="https://ethw.org/Edison%27s_Alkaline_Battery" target="_blank">Edison alkaline battery</a>. Thomas Edison had been working on a lighter, more reliable, and more powerful <a href="https://ethw.org/Edison%27s_Alkaline_Battery" target="_blank">battery for the auto industry</a> since the 1890s, and announced the achievement with great fanfare in 1903. Unfortunately for Bailey and other carmakers who deployed it, the battery leaked and wouldn’t hold a charge. Edison was forced to go back to the drawing board. By 1910, he had a better battery in production, but by then his friend Henry Ford had introduced the Model T, setting the stage for the internal combustion engine to take over the market.</p><p>While Edison toiled to improve his tech, Bailey pivoted to a battery from the Gould Storage Battery Co. of Depew, N.Y. Gould also supplied batteries for railroads, utilities, subways, elevators, and farms. Goodnow’s Victoria Phaeton used a 30-cell lead-acid battery housed in a wooden box that was suspended under the chassis. The standard battery had a range of 64 to 80 kilometers; a larger battery with 50 percent more capacity was available for an upcharge. With the standard battery, the Victoria Phaeton cost US $2,000 (about $73,000 today, or about the list price of an upscale EV like the Audi Q8 or BMW i5).</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt="Color photo showing an early 20th century car with a red seat, with an electrical apparatus in the background." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6ee4d9d5f8d6d1bc7c05a5ea9cdfaafc" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="0c1a1" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-showing-an-early-20th-century-car-with-a-red-seat-with-an-electrical-apparatus-in-the-background.jpg?id=68537149&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Fannie Goodnow’s electric car charger now resides at the Heritage Museums & Gardens in Sandwich, Mass. But her 1908 Bailey Victoria Phaeton has been lost to history. Shown here is a 1911 version of that model.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Sarah Thornington/Heritage Museums & Gardens</small></p><p>Goodnow installed a mercury-arc rectifier charging station in the barn adjacent to her parents’ summer home in Hull, Mass. Bill Lillie of <a href="https://vintageelectriccars.com/default.aspx" target="_blank">Vintage Electric Cars</a> notes that the charging plug was of an unusual design. This is, of course, one of the banes of any early adopter: nonstandardized plugs and cables. The Electric Vehicle Association of America, which formed in 1910, tried to put forward a standard so that electric vehicles could be charged at any charging station. (Modern EV owners can <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/ev-charging-adapters" target="_blank">no doubt relate</a>.) But savvy electric car owners knew to carry spare plug adapters and cables when traveling.</p><p>When Edison’s improved battery was finally available, Bailey began using it in the Victoria Phaeton and then went on a publicity blitz. In September 1910, the carmaker sponsored a round-trip tour from New York to Boston, with a side trip up New Hampshire’s Mount Washington, totaling about 1,600 km. Sadly, the “<a href="https://mt-washington.com/bumper-sticker/" target="_blank">This Car Climbed Mt. Washington</a>” bumper sticker hadn’t yet become popular. </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt="Black and white photo of an older white man in a suit standing next to an early 20th century car, with two younger men sitting inside the vehicle. A sign on the front of the car says in part \u201c1000 mile endurance run.\u201d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="98daccb2815b0cb8d6ebbf7d2bcdb071" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="70ad7" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/black-and-white-photo-of-an-older-white-man-in-a-suit-standing-next-to-an-early-20th-century-car-with-two-younger-men-sitting-i.jpg?id=68537097&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Thomas Edison supplied the batteries for an electric car made by S.R. Bailey & Co., which then went on a publicity road trip from New York to Boston. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit..."><a href="https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/edison-with-bailey-electric-car/9QEP9LivWPhwOw" target="_blank">miSci—Museum of Innovation and Science</a></small></p><p>Although Thomas Edison posed for a photo with the new Bailey Victoria Phaeton that featured his new battery, he himself chose a <a href="https://www.thomasedison.org/thomas-edison-historical-garage" target="_blank">Detroit Electric Victoria</a> for his own use. (Edison was known to be a terrible driver, so someone else likely chauffeured him around.) </p><p>Unable to compete against the rising tide of Model Ts, S.R. Bailey sold its factory in 1915, having produced about 500 to 600 electric vehicles.</p><p>Although the vehicle Fannie Goodnow chose turned out to be just a blip in automotive history, I like to imagine her driving about town in a beautiful car that embodied all the quirks of early adoption. I hope her friends didn’t make fun of her for investing in electric just before internal combustion took off. I hope she didn’t get stranded without the proper charging cable. I do not know what happened to her or her Victoria Phaeton, but her charging station remained in situ until 2022, when it was donated to the <a href="https://heritagemuseumsandgardens.catalogaccess.com/objects/5896" target="_blank">Heritage Museums & Gardens</a> in Sandwich, Mass. Now it stands ready to tell stories of technological change and adoption that continue to resonate today.</p><p><em><em>Part of a </em></em><a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/collections/past-forward/" target="_self"><em><em>continuing series</em></em></a><em> </em><em><em>looking at historical artifacts that embrace the boundless potential of technology.</em></em></p><p><em><em>An abridged version of this article appears in the November 2026 print issue.</em></em></p><h3>References</h3><br/><p>For a detailed history of the development of the mercury-arc rectifier (or valve), see Deepak Tiku’s <a href="https://magazine.ieee-pes.org/marchapril-2014/history-12/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">article</a> in the March/April 2014 issue of <em>IEEE Power & Energy Magazine.</em></p><p>Harry Cooke Cushing Jr., a fellow of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, wrote (and updated regularly over a number of years) <a href="https://archive.org/details/electricvehicleh00cush/mode/2up" target="_blank"><em><em>The Electric Vehicle Hand-Book</em></em></a><em>, </em>which gave general instructions for the care and storage of batteries, including how to charge them with a <a href="https://archive.org/details/electricvehicleh00cush/page/156/mode/2up" target="_blank">mercury-arc rectifier</a>. Discussion of the mercury-arc rectifier begins on <a href="https://archive.org/details/electricvehicleh00cush/page/156/mode/2up" target="_blank">page 156</a> of the 10th edition, published in 1922. (The American Institute of Electrical Engineers is one of the predecessor organizations of the IEEE.)</p> Reference: https://ift.tt/BWQrSTG

Friday, October 30, 2026

Anthropic VS code extension on Cursor backdoored for nearly 12 hours


<p>An official extension for Anthropic’s Claude model was backdoored and threatened as many as 5,000 developers' machines, multiple sources reported Friday. Anthropic so far has yet to warn customers of the incident.</p> <p>The compromised package was a VS Code extension available in the marketplace of Cursor, a maker of AI-assisted developer tools, the company <a href="https://cursor.com/blog/claude-code-extension-security-notice">said</a> Friday. The malicious version, 2.1.313, subsequently affected “at most 5,000 users,” presumably when they either downloaded it or their systems automatically fetched and installed it. Anthropic pushed version 2.1.314 several hours after the previous version became available on Cursor, <a href="https://doublepulsar.com/anthropic-hacked-to-deliver-remote-access-trojan-to-claude-developer-laptops-worldwide-1148a92baae2">according to</a> independent researcher Kevin Beaumont. Both Beaumont and the CTO and co-founder of security firm Phorian said that version 2.1.313 was distributed through Anthropic’s official account on Cursor. So far, neither Cursor nor Anthropic has explained how the attackers gained control of the account.</p> <h2>In search of cloud credentials</h2> <p>“It was a supply-chain compromise where the attacker gained access to the official distribution channel,” Phorian CTO and co-founder Luke Roberts told Ars. “The malicious version 2.1.313 was posted to the official Anthropic account, effectively superseding 2.1.312. Extensions auto-update in Cursor by default, but users can configure this in settings.” Phorian has more details <a href="https://phorion.io/blog/offical-claude-code-vsx-compromise/">here</a>.</p><p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/10/anthropic-vs-code-extension-on-cursor-backdoored-for-nearly-12-hours/">Read full article</a></p> <p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/10/anthropic-vs-code-extension-on-cursor-backdoored-for-nearly-12-hours/#comments">Comments</a></p> Reference : https://ift.tt/Tw7E3ui

Thursday, October 29, 2026

Consumer Appetite for Personal AI Goes Mainstream


<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/smiling-man-in-headphones-with-on-screen-alerts-for-calendar-emails-and-awareness-mode.png?id=68506456&width=1245&height=700&coordinates=0%2C112%2C0%2C113"/><br/><br/><p><em>This article is brought to you by <a href="https://www.qualcomm.com/" target="_blank">Qualcomm Technologies</a>.</em></p><p>For many consumers, much of the promise and appeal of AI is personal. Consumers are looking past generic tools and want to know how these technologies will help them in their daily lives. These trends coincide with the advent of new classes of wearable devices that, in addition to being able to leverage powerful frontier models, feature built-in intelligence that understand the context of a user. Where are they? What are they seeing and hearing? What are their habits, their preferences, their schedules?</p><p>It’s an astonishing pivot, from passive accessories that served mostly to send users smartphone notifications to proactive, intelligent companions. The smartphone is no longer the center of that universe; though it’s still incredibly important, in this personal AI paradigm, the AI is the UI. And it shifts the focus toward you, the user.</p><p>These new technologies are exciting. But what do consumers really want?</p><p><a href="https://content.knowledgehub.wiley.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/QUL8805_PersonalAI_WhitePaper_0907_v06a.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">A Personal AI report</a>, commissioned by Qualcomm Technologies, built on a survey of more than 12,000 people across key geographies worldwide (the U.S., U.K., Germany, India, Brazil, and China) focused on the rise of personal AI in intelligent wearables looks deeply at these developments.</p><p class="pull-quote">The smartphone is no longer the center of that universe; though it’s still incredibly important, in this personal AI paradigm, the AI is the UI.</p><p>Survey respondents are less interested in single devices and are responding more to the idea of connected ecosystems. As people expand their roster of devices, it only makes sense. Instead of relying entirely on a smartphone and a laptop, respondents also have connected technology in their cars, as well as intelligent wearables like smartwatches, smart glasses, hearables, and other wearables like rings, pins, and pendants. They want those devices to work in concert, and the way to do that is to decentralize any single one of them. Instead, the AI agent that knows the user and works across all of those devices becomes the unifying factor.</p><p>Consider a typical workday: A user’s watch detects it is time to leave for a meeting and, with permission, their AI agent factors in calendar details, real-time traffic and battery status across their devices. In the car, it suggests the best route and briefs them on their meeting agenda. As they arrive, smart glasses surface a discreet reminder, such as the meeting location or the name of a new contact, while the phone stays in their pocket. No one device has to do everything; each plays the role it is best suited for, coordinated by a personal AI agent that understands the user’s context and acts only at the user’s direction.</p><p>With this in mind, simply adding more hardware to the mix isn’t sufficient. Even though respondents will be open to new form factors, they’ll demand more from their ecosystem of devices. They’ll be sensitive to points of friction and needless complexity, and they’ll require each new device to bring something new to the table — “incremental intelligence, convenience, or contextual awareness that their existing devices cannot deliver on their own what the report,” reads the report.</p><p>The usage trends are up. The report found that those who own wearables are already using AI frequently (60 percent use it at least weekly), which indicates that it’s becoming less of a fun experiment for early adopters and more of a critical mass habit.</p><p>The “always-on” nature of intelligent wearables appears to be winning respondents, too. The report found the following statistics on average continuous wear among users:</p><ul><li>True wireless earbuds – 3 hours</li><li>Wireless headphones – 3 hours</li><li>Smart glasses – 5 hours</li><li>Audio glasses – 6 hours</li><li>Smartwatches – 9 hours</li><li>Smart rings, necklaces and pendants – 8 hours</li></ul><p class="pull-quote">Consumers want AI that is personal and understands their context — <span>they’re looking for smooth, intuitive experiences that are marked by privacy, security, and user control.</span></p><h2>Consumer Trust Is Hard-Won</h2><p>But for all the excitement and engagement around intelligent wearables, there’s a gating factor: trust. As use cases for intelligent wearables expands to more personal and persistent experiences, trust is a necessity for Personal AI.</p><p>The top reported issues around adoption are privacy, security, and user control. The data points to a certain amount of caution around deeply personal use cases, like voice, health, and location, as almost 60 percent of respondents want to keep data from their wearables private, or at least insist on gaining approval before it gets shared.</p><p>In other words, even though premium features like high-quality audio, perception sensing, battery life, and comfort whet consumer appetites (and agentic AI capabilities drive upgrade intent), true adoption will come only with consumer trust. They want security, privacy, transparency and control.</p><p><span>Notably, the report found that respondents expressed more interest in adopting intelligent wearables when Snapdragon was introduced as the enabling platform. This reinforces the value of having an established, trusted technology foundation in the mix.</span></p><h2>The Industry Remains Fluid</h2><p>The report shows that consumer appetite for AI is high, with 60-70 percent of those surveyed expressing interest in advanced AI as they consider a new device. That’s a constant. But remaining purchase drivers differed between device categories.</p><p>Audio playback quality is the most influential purchase driver for true wireless earbuds and headphones. For smartwatches, it’s display quality and responsiveness. Respondents are less concerned about technical specifications than aesthetics like materials and finish when it comes to devices like smart rings and pendants. And for smart glasses, it’s all about the type of control, whether it’s voice, gesture, or touch.</p><div class="ieee-sidebar-medium"><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="margin-top: 0;"> <a href="https://content.knowledgehub.wiley.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/QUL8805_PersonalAI_WhitePaper_0907_v06a.pdf" target="_blank"></a><a class="shortcode-media-lightbox__toggle shortcode-media-controls__button material-icons" style="background: gray;" title="Select for lightbox">aspect_ratio</a><a href="https://content.knowledgehub.wiley.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/QUL8805_PersonalAI_WhitePaper_0907_v06a.pdf" target="_blank"><img alt="Man in suit wearing AI wearable pendant, Snapdragon report cover on personal AI" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="67c33ed1fa8f213674863d26b39a2be2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="3a4c6" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/man-in-suit-wearing-ai-wearable-pendant-snapdragon-report-cover-on-personal-ai.jpg?id=68530945&width=980"/></a></p><h3 style="padding-top: 16px;">The Rise of Personal AI in Intelligent Wearables</h3><p>Artificial intelligence is entering a new phase, one that is deeply personal, continuously present, and seamlessly embedded into the devices we wear every day. This evolution, which we define as “Personal AI”, represents a shift away from generic, cloud-only intelligence toward AI that understands individuals in context: their habits, preferences, environments, and intent, in real time.</p><p><a href="https://content.knowledgehub.wiley.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/QUL8805_PersonalAI_WhitePaper_0907_v06a.pdf" target="_blank">Get the full report</a> →</p></div><h2></h2><p> Alongside these purchase drivers is another key finding: Consumer appetite for Personal AI agents has gone mainstream. The report says that 70 percent of respondents “express strong interest in an AI assistant that can interact naturally through voice and seamlessly manage devices, apps, and everyday tasks.” With each individual as the center of their own ecosystem, voice becomes the most critical, natural method for interacting with agents.</p><h2>The Opportunity</h2><p>The industry for intelligent wearables is exciting. It’s clear that consumer demand for Personal AI is high, and this report dives deeply into the specifics of what respondents want out of it. They want AI that is personal and understands their context, and they want it to be proactive and helpful instead of merely reactive. They’re looking for smooth, intuitive experiences that are marked by privacy, security, and user control.</p><p>Intelligent wearables comprise much of the hardware of this “ecosystem of you.” Consumers are interested in ecosystems instead of single devices, and they’re looking for agentic AI capabilities that understand and act on their behalf.</p><p>Yet so much of the industry remains undefined. OEMs and technology makers have an enormous opportunity right now to innovate and iterate on the strong technological foundations that platform makers are building. And the roadmap for what consumers want is clear.</p><p><em>All percentages, consumer behaviors, and attitudes stated in this report are based only on the responses of the individuals who participated in our survey.</em></p> Reference: https://ift.tt/O6GWUIf

Wednesday, October 28, 2026

Systems Thinking Is Vital in the Age of AI


<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/illustration-of-a-robotic-and-a-human-hand-with-different-color-bands-wrapped-around-both-hands.jpg?id=68528703&width=1200&height=800&coordinates=125%2C0%2C125%2C0"/><br/><br/><p>Modern engineering projects increasingly combine human judgment with machine capability. An engineer can define a problem, then ask an artificial intelligence tool to search relevant research and technical standards, generate design options, test them in simulation, and compare the results. The engineer can then bring the results to specialists who understand the parts AI cannot judge on its own, such as whether a design can be built safely, whether it makes sense in a particular setting, or how it might affect its users. The final decision about whether and how to move forward remains a human responsibility.</p><p>AI can help engineers do early project steps that once required several people with different technical skills. The engineer’s role is therefore expanding from performing each technical step to deciding how people, machines, and specialists’ knowledge should work together on the project.</p><h2>The problem, not the title</h2><p>Engineering has always been divided into disciplines, and for good reasons. Electrical, mechanical, civil, software, and other engineering fields require deep knowledge that takes years to develop. AI does not replace that need. It simply changes how easily engineers can explore the parts of a problem that sit outside their own specialty.</p><p>Consider a software engineer working on a <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/medical-mobile-app-ieee-verified" target="_self">medical device</a>. AI can help the engineer review relevant biomedical research, understand unfamiliar terms, analyze data, and build an early model.</p><p>That does not make the engineer a physician or biomedical expert. It allows the engineer to ask better questions before working with the experts.</p><p>The same is true in <a href="https://ieee-pes.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">energy</a>, transportation, manufacturing, and many other fields. A problem might begin as a software issue and then quickly involve hardware, safety measures, economics, human behavior, and regulations.</p><p>Engineers do not need to master every field; they need to recognize which expertise the problem requires and bring the right people and tools together.</p><h2>The importance of systems thinking</h2><p>Systems thinking thus becomes especially important. It requires looking at the whole problem: understanding how its parts affect one another, identifying constraints and failure points, and making trade-offs.</p><p>AI adds a new element to the process. Engineers must decide not only how the technical parts fit together but also what work to give to AI, what a person must check, when a specialist should make a decision, and when the problem needs to be redefined.</p><p><span>An engineer’s value is not in knowing everything. It is in knowing how to frame the problem, how to ask the right questions, how to test the answers, and when another expert must lead the project.</span></p><p><span></span>This aspect is crucial because technical challenges in engineering are seldom static. As new insights emerge, objectives might shift, unseen limitations can surface, and the initial premise might prove flawed. Rather than rigidly following the starting specifications, an effective engineer adapts and refines the scope as a deeper understanding of the system develops.</p><p>Thus, engineering extends beyond mastering technical concepts; it is an adaptable, structured approach to navigating evolving challenges.</p><p>New evidence can change the goal, reveal a hidden constraint, or show that the original hypothesis was wrong. Effective engineers go beyond merely acting on the initial problem statement. They update it as the system becomes better understood.</p><p>In that sense, engineering is not only a body of technical knowledge, it is also a disciplined way of thinking about a project.</p><h2>Human judgment is important</h2><p>AI can produce convincing answers even when its assumptions are weak. It can generate code that works in one test but fails in another. It can summarize research without understanding which evidence is strongest, or optimize a design for the wrong goal. Such limits make human expertise more important, not less.</p><p>Machines are useful where speed, scale, search, pattern recognition, and data generation matter. People are essential where context, values, responsibility, and judgment matter. The challenge is to decide where each belongs.</p><p>An AI system might generate several designs for a medical sensor, for example, and predict how each will perform. An engineer can test the predictions and reject designs that violate technical requirements. A clinician can determine whether the sensor can be realistically used. Patients and practitioners might reveal problems that neither the engineer nor the developer considered. The final solution emerges from combining the perspectives.</p><p>The engineer is still a builder and specialist but increasingly also a coordinator of knowledge.</p><p>An engineer’s value is not in knowing everything. It is in knowing <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/6-guidelines-governing-ai" target="_self">how to frame the problem,</a> how to ask the right questions, how to test the answers, and when another expert must lead the project.</p><h2>IEEE’s vital role</h2><p>The broader form of engineering creates an important role for IEEE. Its <a href="https://www.ieee.org/communities-connection/societies-councils-and-communities/societies" target="_blank">societies</a> already bring together expertise in various technologies, <a href="https://ea.ieee.org/ea-programs" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">engineering education</a>, <a href="https://standards.ieee.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">technical standards</a>, and other fields. That makes IEEE well placed to help engineers work across specialties without weakening the value of specialization.</p><p>IEEE could create more <a href="https://ieee-collabratec.ieee.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">communities</a> organized around problems that require expertise from several fields. Examples include <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/medical-mobile-app-ieee-verified" target="_self">trustworthy clinical AI</a>, resilient infrastructure, energy reliability, scientific discovery, and safe autonomous systems. An engineer could begin in a home discipline and then work with specialists from other IEEE communities as a project requires.</p><p>IEEE also can help <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/two-new-ai-ethics-certifications" target="_self">set practical standards</a> for human-machine collaboration. Engineers will need clear guidance on when AI-generated work must be checked, how uncertainty should be documented, when a specialist must make a decision, and who is responsible when a system uses both human judgment and machine output.</p><p>Those questions are becoming part of everyday engineering. They should not be left to each company or project manager to answer independently. A professional organization can provide common expectations that follow engineers as they move between jobs, industries, and technical fields.</p><h2>A larger definition of the engineer</h2><p>AI does not make engineering disciplines less important; it makes the connections between them easier to use. Deep expertise gives engineers the foundation to judge what is sound. Systems thinking helps them understand how different parts of a problem fit together. AI can extend engineers’ ability to explore, test, and communicate across fields. Human judgment gives the work direction and responsibility.</p><p>An engineer is not defined only by a job title or a fixed set of tasks. An engineer is someone trained to understand complex systems, define and redefine problems, bring together the knowledge and tools needed to solve them, test whether solutions work, and take responsibility for the outcome.</p><p>That is what it means to be an “unbound” engineer.</p><p>The boundaries between specialties become easier to cross, and machines might take on more of the technical work, but the core of engineering remains human: deciding what problem is worth solving, what evidence is good enough, how the pieces fit together, and what to do when the answer is uncertain.</p> Reference: https://ift.tt/A3MeoQ8

How Beta Technologies Is Clearing the Runway for Electric Flight


<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-of-a-small-gray-airplane-with-a-man-standing-beside-it-and-plugging-in-a-charging-cable.jpg?id=68517917&width=1245&height=700&coordinates=0%2C141%2C0%2C141"/><br/><br/><p><strong>In the cockpit </strong>of Beta Technologies’ Alia CX300, pilot <a href="https://linkedin.com/in/christopher-caputo-80a470157" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Chris Caputo</a> steers onto Runway 33 at <a href="https://btv.aero/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Patrick Leahy Burlington International Airport</a> in Vermont. Cleared for takeoff, he releases the brakes and nudges the throttle forward.</p><div class="rm-embed embed-media"><iframe height="110px" id="noa-web-audio-player" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=q5m19e&id=https://spectrum.ieee.org/beta-technologies-electric-aircraft&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=1b1b1c&playColor=1b1b1c&progressBgColor=F5F5F5&progressBorderColor=bdbbbb&titleColor=1b1b1c&timeColor=1b1b1c&speedColor=1b1b1c&noaLinkColor=556B7D&noaLinkHighlightColor=FF4B00&feedbackButton=false" style="border: none" width="100%"></iframe></div><p>At the back of the aircraft, the five-blade pusher propeller snaps awake, and the Alia bolts forward. There’s no shriek of a turbofan spooling up, no shudder of a piston engine, and no wait for thrust. Just the low hum of an electric motor and a shove of instant acceleration.</p><p>Within a few seconds, we’re at 85 knots (almost 160 kilometers per hour), and Caputo rotates the nose upward. The runway drops abruptly away as we climb. Gaining speed and altitude, we head northwest over Lake Champlain. Through the wraparound canopy, I watch the hunched shoulders of Vermont’s Green Mountains shrink under the right wing, with New York’s taller Adirondacks to the left.</p><p>Caputo, a former Air Force fighter pilot, flicks the control stick hard left, then right. Despite its 15-meter wingspan, the Alia feels snappy, its fly-by-wire system automatically coordinating aileron and rudder inputs. The machine, he says, is much simpler to manage than the <a href="https://cessna.txtav.com/en/piston/cessna-skylane" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> Cessna 182</a> I flew around Australia in my student-pilot days.</p><p>What’s more, our half-hour flight in the Alia will consume only about US $9 worth of electricity. The same flight in a comparable <a href="https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/caravan" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Cessna 208 Caravan</a> would burn roughly 25 to 30 gallons of Jet A fuel, costing about $210 to $255 at press time. “Even at full throttle, we’re not burning any fuel up here,” says Caputo, as he takes the Alia into a sweeping left turn and heads south over the lake. “We’re not polluting the environment. [There’s] no noise pollution.”</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt="Color photo of three men building the body of a small airplane that\u2019s sitting on a yellow platform." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="36d5d7f2584471d10504b70a2bf1a164" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="2d9ac" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-of-three-men-building-the-body-of-a-small-airplane-that-u2019s-sitting-on-a-yellow-platform.jpg?id=68518111&width=980"/><small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">At Beta’s South Burlington, Vt., facility, workers assemble the body of an Alia A250. The company says it has an order and option-to-buy backlog of nearly 1,000 aircraft.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Beta Technologies</small></p><p><span>This ride is happening during an unusually lively time for electric aviation. The promise of lower operating costs and cleaner flight has pushed electric aircraft from a fringe experiment to one of the aviation industry’s most closely watched frontiers. After years of renderings, prototypes, and overly optimistic timetables, companies are now flying full-size aircraft, submitting hardware to regulators for certification, building factories, and testing routes with prospective customers.</span></p><p>Among the top three U.S. developers of electric planes, <a href="https://www.archer.com/" target="_blank">Archer Aviation</a> and <a href="https://www.jobyaviation.com/" target="_blank">Joby Aviation</a> are concentrating on piloted vertical-takeoff-and-landing air taxis, otherwise known as eVTOLs. <a href="https://beta.team/" target="_blank">Beta Technologies</a> is taking a broader—and in some ways more innovative—path into the market. Rather than betting first on air taxis, Beta is looking to enter electric aviation through short-haul freight planes that use conventional runways, fed by an open charging network that’s designed to make electric aircraft—both Beta’s and its competitors’—part of a working transportation system.</p><p>To that end, the company is developing two variants of its Alia airframe: the runway-based CX300 I’m flying in and the <a href="https://www.beta.team/aircraft" target="_blank">A250</a>, which adds four lift propellers for vertical takeoff and landing. Beta says its test pilots have flown the Alia family more than 300,000 kilometers, including doing multiple U.S. crossings and overseas demonstrations. The company claims an order and option-to-buy backlog of 991 aircraft.</p><p class="ieee-inbody-related"><strong>RELATED: </strong><a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/kyle-clark-profile/kyle-clark" target="_self">From Hockey Enforcer to High-Flying eVTOL CEO</a></p><p><span>“We’re taking a pragmatic stepwise approach for both certification and market entry,” says Beta’s CEO and founder </span><a href="https://investors.beta.team/governance/leadership-team" target="_blank">Kyle Clark</a><span>. “We’re ready to go today with medical and cargo aircraft that fly from airport to airport.” Next up, he says, will be passenger aircraft with conventional takeoff and landing, followed by cargo eVTOLs, and finally passenger eVTOLs.</span></p><h2>Reducing the Risk of FAA Certification</h2><p>Beta’s 17,500-square-meter production facility sits beside the Burlington airport and looks more like a giant sunlit workshop than a conventional airplane factory. Geothermal heat pumps help heat and cool the structure. The roof will eventually hold a megawatt of solar panels. On the floor, technicians make composite structures and join aircraft sections beneath American and Pride flags.</p><h3></h3><br/><table border-collapse:="" border:="" collapse;="" none;="" style="white-space: unset;" width="100%"><tbody><!-- Row 1: Header / Title --><tr><td style="padding: 24px 16px 18px 16px; border-bottom: 0px solid #000; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"><p style="font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2;"><strong>3 Competing Paths to Electric Aviation</strong></p><p>The top three U.S. electric-aircraft makers are taking different approaches to the same challenge: how to make short-hop flight cleaner, quieter, and commercially useful.</p></td></tr><!-- Row 2: Joby Image --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #DFD5C1"><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><span class="shortcode-media-positioning"><a class="shortcode-media-lightbox__toggle shortcode-media-controls__button material-icons" style="background: gray;" title="Select for lightbox">aspect_ratio</a></span><img alt="Illustration of a small airplane viewed from above with 6 propellers." class="rm-shortcode rm-lazyloadable-image" data-rm-shortcode-id="55e60872c085035d08f5578f863d56dc" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" height="537" id="f3a2b" lazy-loadable="true" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/image.png?id=68518506&width=980" width="976"/></p><style class="image-media media-photo-credit">Chris Philpot</style></td></tr><!-- Row 3: Joby Text --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #DFD5C1"><a href="https://www.jobyaviation.com/" target="_blank"><strong>Joby Aviation</strong></a>’s piloted, four-passenger S4 aircraft has six tilting propellers to provide both vertical lift and cruise propulsion. It’s optimized for fast, quiet air-taxi service. The company is also working on <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/joby-air-taxi-2676635230" target="_self">hydrogen fuel cells for longer-range transport</a>. Joby says the S4 is in the final stage of the Federal Aviation Administration’s certification process and has flown trials in <a href="https://www.jobyaviation.com/news/dubai-air-taxi-network-takes-flight-joby-completes-landmark-flight-and-announces-next-vertiport" target="_blank">Dubai</a>, <a href="https://ir.jobyaviation.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/181/joby-brings-electric-air-taxis-to-new-york-city-in" target="_blank">New York</a>, and <a href="https://www.jobyaviation.com/news/joby-launches-eipp-flights-in-texas" target="_blank">Texas</a>.</td></tr><!-- Row 4: Archer Image (Placeholder) --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #E9E3D6"><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img alt="Illustration of a small airplane with 12 propellers, not all of which are visible." class="rm-shortcode rm-lazyloadable-image" data-rm-shortcode-id="484e33c9e0069dd459fc2ac7579752ea" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" height="549" id="02b51" lazy-loadable="true" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/image.png?id=68529864&width=980" width="976"/></p><style class="image-media media-photo-credit">Chris Philpot</style><!-- Insert Beta Image Shortcode Here --></td></tr><!-- Row 5: Archer Text --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #E9E3D6"><a href="https://archer.com/" target="_blank"><strong>Archer Aviation</strong></a>’s piloted, four-passenger Midnight has 12 propellers—six tilting rotors and six stationary rotors. The aircraft, which Archer has been testing in both vertical and conventional takeoffs and landings, is aimed at air-taxi service in urban areas. The company says Midnight is in Phase 4 of the FAA certification process and has completed trial flights.</td></tr><!-- Row 6: Beta Image (Placeholder) --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #DFD5C1"><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img alt="Illustration of two small airplanes, the one in the foreground having propellers and the one in the background having no propellers." class="rm-shortcode rm-lazyloadable-image" data-rm-shortcode-id="5e545723288d28d78b4f5f8d2835f2d8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" height="549" id="16c3b" lazy-loadable="true" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/image.png?id=68529944&width=980" width="976"/></p><style class="image-media media-photo-credit">Chris Philpot</style><!-- Insert Beta Image Shortcode Here --></td></tr><!-- Row 7: Beta Text --><tr><td style="padding: 10px; border: 0px solid #ccc; background-color: #DFD5C1"><a href="https://beta.team/" target="_blank"><strong>Beta Technologies</strong></a>’ piloted Alia aircraft comes in <a href="https://beta.team/aircraft" target="_blank">two flavors</a>: The A250 eVTOL has separate vertical-lift rotors and a rear cruise propeller, while the CX300 is a conventional-takeoff fixed-wing plane. The two models use the same pusher motor, battery pack, flight control computer, and fixed-pitch propeller. The company is initially focusing on cargo and medical transport, regional logistics, and airport-to-airport operations, with passenger service later. Beta expects <a href="https://www.flyingmag.com/beta-technologies-electric-aircraft-media-day/" target="_blank">FAA certification</a> for the CX300 in 2027 and for the A250 a year later.</td></tr></tbody></table><h3></h3><br/><p><a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/kyle-clark-profile/kyle-clark" target="_self">Kyle Clark</a>, a native of Vermont, founded Beta in 2017 to realize his long-held dream of building a hybrid-electric aircraft. (For his bachelor’s thesis at Harvard University, he designed a flight-control system for such an aircraft.) <a href="https://achievement.org/achiever/martine-rothblatt-ph-d/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Martine Rothblatt</a>, CEO of the biotech company <a href="https://www.unither.com/home" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">United Therapeutics</a> and cofounder of <a href="https://www.siriusxm.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">SiriusXM </a>satellite radio, invested $48 million in Beta to fund its first prototype, with the eventual goal of using the aircraft to transport organs for transplantation.</p><p>The company has kept much of its design and manufacturing in-house, partly because the pieces are closely coupled and partly because suitable aviation components didn’t exist when development began. Vertical integration gives Beta’s engineers control over the interfaces and any failure data. But it also means the company must be competent at several businesses simultaneously: airframes, electric motors, inverters, batteries, software, chargers, and aircraft production.</p><p>The production line can build both the fixed-wing CX300 and the vertical-lift A250, which share the same fuselage, wings, pusher motor (for horizontal propulsion), batteries, avionics, and much of the tooling. This results in some one-size-fits-all decisions: The CX300’s twin booms, which connect the wing to the tail surfaces, look superfluous until you see the A250’s four lift propellers mounted on similar structures.</p><p>On the CX300, those booms add weight and drag even though they serve no lift function. But the trade-off—a simpler overall design—is part of Beta’s central strategy: Rather than applying for FAA certification for the more novel and complex eVTOL A250, with its multiple lift systems and transitions between hover and wing-borne flight, the company is bringing the runway version forward first. It’s certifying the motor, batteries, fly-by-wire controls, and much of the airframe in the simpler aircraft; it will then reuse evidence and manufacturing experience when it certifies the A250.</p><p>The other big reason to start with the CX300 is logistical: The United States has more than 5,000 public-use airports, so the CX300 can operate from infrastructure that already exists. The cargo and medical flights that the aircraft will initially tackle offer tightly defined missions in which lower energy and maintenance costs matter more than cabin amenities. Hence the company’s decision to leave cabin air-conditioning off the CX300, at least for now. “Things that don’t exist on an airplane don’t weigh anything,” Clark says. “They can’t break. You don’t have to service them…. You don’t have to certify them.”</p><p><span></span>“This strategy, at the beginning, was seen as a failure of their VTOL,” says analyst <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sergiocecutta/?isSelfProfile=false" target="_blank">Sergio Cecutta</a>, a managing partner at SMG Consulting. “But I think a lot of people were very myopic. It was a way for [Beta] to break up the certification in two pieces, and so they have retired a lot of the risk. [A majority] of the [CX300’s] parts are shared with the VTOL, and that means that a lot of the documentation for certification can be easily reused on the VTOL side when that certification starts.”</p><h2>How Redundancy Enhances Safety</h2><p>A decade and a half after electric cars began making significant inroads into the automotive market, electric airplane technology is advancing rapidly. In some ways, an electric car has more complicated power-engineering requirements than an electric aircraft. An electric car’s power demands change constantly, while an electric aircraft operates in a narrower set of power regimes: takeoff, level flight, and descent.</p><p>But if your car’s drivetrain fails, you can just pull over to the side of the road. That’s not an option for a pilot 1,000 meters up. The hurdle isn’t that electric motors are inherently fragile; it’s that aviation safety standards are extraordinarily demanding. Catastrophic failure conditions generally must be held to roughly one chance in a billion flight hours or less.</p><h3></h3><br/><img alt="Color photo taken from above showing a gray and white small airplane in a high-ceilinged space, being worked on by people on ladders." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7d631a484d9dc840ba3c5ee8aa65a1f2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="9810c" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-taken-from-above-showing-a-gray-and-white-small-airplane-in-a-high-ceilinged-space-being-worked-on-by-people-on-lad.jpg?id=68518124&width=980"><h3></h3><br/><p>Because individual electrical components cannot meet that standard on their own, electric aircraft rely on layered redundancy: duplicate power paths, independent inverters, fault isolation, monitoring, and backup capacity. Each layer helps close the safety gap, but each also adds weight and complexity.</p><p>To close the reliability gap and satisfy regulators who have little experience with electric aircraft, Beta engineers have built redundancy into <a href="https://beta.team/motor" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">the motor</a> itself. When I visit the company’s motor shop, technicians are assembling the H500A pusher motor, which splits up critical components like the inverters and stator sections.</p><p>“You could lose an entire half of the system, and it would still function the same,” says <a href="https://www.flyingmag.com/beta-technologies-electric-aircraft-media-day/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Adam Lowe</a>, Beta’s flight operations lead.</p><p>The H500A’s broad diameter gives the magnetic forces greater leverage, producing high torque at low rotational speed, a useful trait when turning large propellers. The H500A weighs about 75 kilograms and produces about 640 kilowatts of power. The motor achieves 97.5 percent efficiency, based on internal testing; typical conventional turboprops have an efficiency range of 25 to 35 percent.</p><p>Beta had aimed to have its motor certified in the first half of 2026, a deadline that passed without a public announcement. Although the company’s certification strategy is aimed at streamlining the process, getting clearance to fly from the <a href="https://www.faa.gov/" target="_blank">Federal Aviation Administration</a> is probably still its biggest obstacle. For Beta, and any company trying to bring an electric aircraft into service, the FAA must sign off first on the propeller, then the motor, then the aircraft. After that, the manufacturer must pursue a production certificate from the FAA, proving that the company can build the same approved aircraft again and again, with the right tools, records, inspections, quality controls, supplier oversight, training, calibration, and parts tracking.</p><h3></h3><br/><span class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="854a9dbb41782e37cf2b174a42adcea8" style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="auto" lazy-loadable="true" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ohwqxK0BCtM?rel=0" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;" width="100%"></iframe></span><h3></h3><br/><p>Beta has found a narrow on-ramp to get the A250 flying before full certification. Under the <a href="https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/future-aviation-here-trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-and-faa-unveil-eight" target="_blank">FAA’s eVTOL Integration Pilot Program</a>, companies and public agencies can run FAA-supervised, real-world trials to test how advanced air-mobility aircraft might operate in the national airspace. For Beta, that included July flights across a Virginia-to-Maryland corridor carrying, among other things, a manufactured transplantable organ in a medical containment system. Beta has also been chosen for six other FAA-backed trials.</p><p>For the fixed-wing Alia CX300, customer trials are moving in parallel. In March, Beta’s CX300 successfully <a href="https://investors.beta.team/news-events/press-releases/detail/113/loganair-adds-beta-technologies-alia-ctol-aircraft-to-its-fleet-following-successful-demonstrations-in-united-kingdom" target="_blank">completed 23 flights</a> over 10 days on Loganair routes linking six Scottish cities. The airline has since signed a <a href="https://www.loganair.co.uk/news/loganair-adds-beta-technologies-alia-ctol-aircraft-to-its-fleet-following-successful-demonstrations-in-united-kingdom/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">term sheet</a> for five Beta aircraft, with options for five more and service expected to start in 2029.</p><h2></h2><h2>Innovation in eVTOLs</h2><p>Beta is pushing so hard for the A250 because the case for electric flight gets even more interesting with vertical-lift aircraft. Helicopters and other VTOLs have a less orderly life than fixed-wing planes do. They must hover, sidestep, turn in place, settle, climb, and hold themselves in the air by main force. But conventional helicopters are built around a rotor speed that varies only a few percent because the engine, transmission, and rotor system are all designed around one narrow operating point.</p><p>“One of the dreams of vertical flight has been to vary the rotor rpm,” says<a href="https://aero.umd.edu/clark/faculty/525/Anubhav-Datta" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> </a><a href="https://aero.umd.edu/clark/faculty/19/Anubhav-Datta" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Anubhav Datta</a>, an aerospace engineering professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, who studies electric propulsion and vertical flight. Electric motors, he argues, have advanced enough to make that practical. A rotor that can slow down or speed up as conditions change can waste less energy, make less noise, and better match the odd assortment of tasks that vertical flight demands.</p><p>Electric propulsion also lets designers break up the work with multiple motors. The weight of an electric motor is tied closely to its torque. If you spread that torque among several motors, each of the motors can shrink, meaning that their combined weight is less than would be needed for one big engine. This is one reason why so many electric aircraft designs appear to have sprouted propellers wherever an engineer found a place to put one.</p><p>There is a downside to using multiple smaller motors: If one of the motors quits, the rotor it’s driving has little stored energy compared to the inertia in a conventional helicopter’s one large rotor. This inertia can come in handy if the engine dies, because the rotor will continue to spin and allow the pilot to descend under control, in an emergency technique known as autorotation.</p><h3>Beta Technologies, Made in Vermont</h3><br/><img alt="Large group of employees gathered in an aircraft hangar with planes in the background." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b32dbd0a462cdc08f4c34062ac724dc0" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="5f01c" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/large-group-of-employees-gathered-in-an-aircraft-hangar-with-planes-in-the-background.jpg?id=68530775&width=980"><p>According to Beta Technologies founder and CEO Kyle Clark, his native Vermont—known more for its maple syrup and outdoorsy lifestyle than its technological achievements—is a big part of the secret to Beta’s success at attracting talent. “The recruiting strategy is this: You find anybody who has vacationed in Vermont or went to school here. And you say, ‘You can actually live here and have a high-paying job in a mission-driven business, doing something that you care about with great people.’ ” The company currently employs about 1,500 people, most of them in South Burlington, Vt., and is actively hiring for its engineering, manufacturing, software, flight operations, and commercial teams.</p><p>As befits an aviation company, Beta offers flying lessons for all employees—a perk that is intended to give engineers, software developers, pilots, and mechanics a common language. The company also operates a health clinic for employees and their families and is building a day care center. Those programs have an idealistic Vermont flavor that is shaped by Clark and his wife, <a href="https://investors.beta.team/governance/leadership-team" target="_blank">Katie Clark</a>, who is Beta’s head of brand, creative, culture and spaces. But they also serve a practical purpose: attracting and retaining the best people in a small labor market. <em>—T.C.</em></p></img></img><p>Electric-aircraft makers compensate with redundant motors and electrical channels, but most leading designs also have wings to allow gliding. In Beta’s A250, that means that if all else fails, the pilot still has a shot at reaching a suitable landing spot.</p><p>That helps explain the convergence in today’s eVTOL designs. <a href="https://www.jobyaviation.com/aircraft/" target="_blank">Joby Aviation</a>’s S4 uses six propellers that tilt between lift and cruise. <a href="https://www.archer.com/aircraft" target="_blank">Archer Aviation’s Midnight</a> has six tilting propellers and six dedicated lift props. Beta’s A250 keeps its four lift propellers horizontal and uses a separate pusher motor for forward flight.</p><h2>Beta’s Approach to Batteries</h2><p><span><span>In Beta’s home state of Vermont, the electricity produced in the state comes almost entirely from renewable sources. Of course, electric aviation’s climate advantage depends not only on how clean the power grid is, but on how efficiently the aircraft uses energy. The turbines in conventional jet engines are marvelous machines, but they throw away a lot of energy as heat. Plus they need to carry the hardware to manage that heat—inlets, ducts, radiators, oil coolers—and the drag that comes with pulling air through all of it. </span></span></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image rm-float-left rm-resized-container rm-resized-container-25" data-rm-resized-container="25%" style="float: left;"> <img alt="A photo showing a bearded white man wearing a helmet and piloting an aircraft" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="de9c1c1df73c31dfba408a119d8b6f6e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="c7d60" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/a-photo-showing-a-bearded-white-man-wearing-a-helmet-and-piloting-an-aircraft.jpg?id=68518211&width=980"/></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image rm-float-left rm-resized-container rm-resized-container-25" data-rm-resized-container="25%" style="float: left;"> <img alt=" A photo showing a small white plane flying above a shoreline" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="51aab9f28f2a85e3bd828a40cb59c27e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="514ad" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/a-photo-showing-a-small-white-plane-flying-above-a-shoreline.jpg?id=68518209&width=980"/><small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Kyle Clark [in cockpit], founder and CEO of Beta Technologies, pilots the company’s Alia CX300, an electric plane that Beta expects to receive FAA certification in 2027. Clark began designing a hybrid electric plane while still in college.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Beta Technologies</small></p><p><span><span></span>By contrast, an electric design, with no combustion, gearbox, or oil circuits, avoids much of that energy burden. The result is an aircraft that is more than twice as “slippery” in terms of its lift-to-drag ratio. Batteries will never come close to the fuel density of petroleum fuels. But because electric drivetrains are much more efficient than combustion engines, a battery doesn’t necessarily need to match the energy density of petroleum fuel to be useful.</span></p><p>While the motors on an electric aircraft provide the drama at takeoff and landing, the batteries set nearly every boundary: the range, payload, charge time, cooling load, reserve energy, and, ultimately, useful life. For now, the hardest limit on electric aviation is not imagination, software, or even motors. It is the stubborn weight of stored energy.</p><p>“One thing you notice about [electric] airplanes is that they are all small,” says Cecutta, the aviation analyst. “They are not small because someone has done a market study and decided that is the optimal size. They are small because you cannot make them big. This limitation is from the batteries.”</p><p>In a conventional aircraft, fuel accounts for a significant percentage of the takeoff weight. But that weight gradually disappears during flight. In an electric plane, the battery packs also account for a lot of the weight; in Beta’s CX300, they’re close to half the aircraft’s mass. But a drained battery at landing weighs the same as a fully charged one at takeoff. That means the rest of the aircraft must be light enough to lift a power source that never gets lighter, yet strong enough to endure vibration, turbulence, hard landings, and years of fatigue. The more engineers push to save weight, Datta notes, the more flexible the airframe becomes, making the wings and other structures more prone to bending, twisting, and vibration. In that sense, the battery problem becomes a structural problem, too.</p><p>Beta’s CX300 carries five liquid-cooled <a href="https://beta.team/battery" target="_blank">battery packs</a> of about 45 kilowatt-hours each, giving the aircraft roughly 225 kWh of rated capacity, though not all of that may be usable in flight. Each pack weighs 255 kg and contains 2,772 cylindrical cells. Altogether, about 14,000 cells sit beneath the occupied cabin, each one a tiny storehouse of energy, heat, and potential trouble.</p><p>The burden of the battery explains much of what I see elsewhere in Beta’s aircraft: the 15-meter wingspan, the composite structure, and the almost doctrinal effort to leave out every piece of hardware and creature comfort that’s not essential to the mission. The CX300 even does without flaps, which most aircraft use to generate extra lift at low speeds, so it must take off and land unusually fast for an aircraft of its size.</p><p>On Beta’s battery line, commercially supplied standard 21-millimeter-diameter, 70-mm-long cells are tested and assembled. Cells become modules, modules become subpacks, and eleven subpacks become a 45-kWh pack. Cooling plates manage heat during normal operation, while passive barriers and electrical isolation are designed to contain the ugly edge cases that Beta’s testing process intentionally triggers.</p><p>The modular design of the packs will give Beta’s planes a path to better batteries as the cells and battery chemistry improve. Caputo tells me that the company is already evaluating higher-density cells at its battery testing facility in nearby St. Albans, Vt. More watt-hours per kilogram could eventually mean more range, more payload, or both.</p><h2>Beta Technologies’ Electric Ecosystem</h2><p>What sets Beta Technologies apart from its competitors is the breadth of its ambitions: It’s not just building electric aircraft. It’s also cultivating a broader ecosystem to nurture the growth of electric aviation.</p><p>For instance, Beta intends its motor business to extend beyond its own aircraft. The company has delivered lift motors for <a href="https://www.eveairmobility.com/" target="_blank">Eve Air Mobility</a>’s proof-of-concept aircraft and has a contract to supply up to <a href="https://www.eveairmobility.com/eve-air-mobility-selects-beta-technologies-as-pusher-motor-supplier/" target="_blank">$1 billion in pusher motors</a> as Eve’s program develops. In addition, Beta is selling flight-control computers and software to <a href="https://www.horizonaircraft.com/" target="_blank">Horizon Aircraft</a>. It is also producing propulsion systems for the military, as well as the <a href="https://beta.team/defense" target="_blank">MV250</a>, a hybrid-electric autonomous aircraft for defense missions.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt='Color photo of two cubelike structures, one labeled "charge" and the other labeled "thermal."' class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="94f447b0439786defc0c96e106c7ed75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="61648" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/color-photo-of-two-cubelike-structures-one-labeled-charge-and-the-other-labeled-thermal.jpg?id=68518063&width=980"/><small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Beta’s fast-charging stations [left] have been installed at 138 locations. The thermal-management station [right] keeps the battery from overheating during charging. The company uses the open-standard Combined Charging System (CCS) so that other aircraft can use its chargers. </small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Beta Technologies</small></p><p>Further evidence of Beta’s far-ranging plans is visible near the battery line in the South Burlington facility, where workers are readying a few of the company’s 1.5-meter-tall <a href="https://beta.team/charge-cube" target="_blank">Charge Cubes</a> for shipping. Intended for installation at airports, each cube takes 480-volt AC from the grid and can deliver up to 320 kW at as much as 1,000 volts DC. According to Beta, charging either model of its Alia aircraft takes about 35 minutes, from the minimum charge required under visual flight rules to full state. A separate thermal-management cube circulates water-glycol coolant through the aircraft to keep the batteries from overheating during charging.</p><p>The charge cubes use the Combined Charging System <a href="https://www.charin.global/technology/ccs-specification/" target="_blank">(CCS)</a>, an open standard increasingly shared across the electric transportation industry. Beta’s strategy resembles Tesla’s decision to treat <a href="https://www.tesla.com/supercharger" target="_blank">charging</a> as part of the vehicle business, with one important difference: Beta is courting other aircraft makers, airports, and operators to use its technology. Archer,<a href="https://www.signatureaviation.com/" target="_blank"> </a><a href="https://www.atlanticaviation.com/" target="_blank">Atlantic Aviation</a>, <a href="https://www.signatureaviation.com/" target="_blank">Signature Aviation</a>,<a href="https://www.atlanticaviation.com/" target="_blank"> </a>and government agencies have purchased or installed Beta’s charging equipment. As of October, Beta has 138 fast-charge locations, with additional sites in permitting or construction.</p><p>For charging beyond the fixed network, Beta offers a wheeled 40-kW <a href="https://beta.team/mini-cube?hsCtaAttrib=184705145623" target="_blank">Mini Cube</a> and a 65-kW Mini Cube+ that can ride inside an Alia and plug into more modest electrical service. The Mini Cube can also charge cars, buses, and trucks—any vehicle that uses the CCS standard.</p><p>Back above Lake Champlain, the CX300 levels off, and the motor recedes to a faint hum. Then Caputo switches it off, and there’s nothing but the rush of wind around the canopy. The aircraft glides on its long wings while the coasting propeller turns the motor into a generator, feeding about 9 kW back to the battery.</p><p>Then we turn to the east and slip into the landing queue behind a National Guard C-130 Hercules, and Caputo powers and slides the throttle forward. The motor springs to life again, pushing the airplane, and perhaps aviation itself, into the future. <span class="ieee-end-mark"></span></p> Reference: https://ift.tt/4h5rMvq

Tuesday, October 27, 2026

Code-execution flaw in UEFI firmware affects most servers on planet Earth


<p>Defenders across the world face the burden of responding to yet another botched code-execution vulnerability, this time in boot-time firmware used by most of the world’s server vendors and data centers.</p> <p>The vulnerability, with a severity rating of 9.5 out of 10, resides in the TianoCore <a href="https://www.tianocore.org/tianocore-wiki.github.io/reference/external-resources/edk_ii.html">EDK II</a>, an open source codebase that hardware makers and cloud providers use to create the UEFI firmware that runs during the boot-up sequence. Last year, a representative of the UEFI Forum <a href="https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/State%20of%20UEFI_UEFI%202025%20DevCon_Final.pdf">called</a> EDK2 the "preeminent solution / implementation of the UEFI specifications." Virtually all UEFI suppliers (sometimes still called IBVs or independent BIOS vendors), including AMI, Insyde, and Phoenix, use the reference code extensively. Project Mu, Microsoft's hardened EDK2 fork, used the code containing the vulnerable component as well.</p> <p>The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-97631, is a memory-corruption flaw in an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Control_Message_Protocol">ICMP</a> component that attackers can exploit to execute malicious code that runs before the operating system and firmware can implement defenses like <a href="https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Secure_Boot_in_Modern_Computer_Security_Solutions_2019.pdf">Secure Boot</a>, which establishes a chain of trust for all code, including the <a href="https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/work-groups/tpm">Trusted Platform Module</a> (TPM), loaded during boot. While final payloads delivered by CVE-2026-97631 have no persistence—meaning they run only once—they can give attackers a wide opening to install other payloads that also run each time early in the boot process.</p><p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/10/code-execution-flaw-in-uefi-firmware-threatens-most-servers-on-planet-earth/">Read full article</a></p> <p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/10/code-execution-flaw-in-uefi-firmware-threatens-most-servers-on-planet-earth/#comments">Comments</a></p> Reference : https://ift.tt/slNniFe

Your Robot’s Safety Functions Already Work. What If the Input Lies?


<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/humanoid-robot-and-robot-dog-meet-a-woman-on-a-sunny-terrace-at-sunset.jpg?id=68002098&width=1245&height=700&coordinates=0%2C87%2C0%2C87"/><br/><br/><p><em>This article is brought to you by <a href="https://vicone.com/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">VicOne</a>.</em></p><p><em></em><span>A mobile robot slows for someone in a hallway. A collaborative arm eases its movement as a worker approaches. A humanoid pauses to let a person pass. Each response depends on information about the robot or its surroundings: a distance reading, a position estimate, or a stop signal.</span></p><p>But what happens when one of those inputs is wrong, and the robot still responds exactly as designed? The mobile robot reads the hallway as clear while someone is still there. The arm estimates that the worker is farther away. The humanoid does not receive a stop signal as a person crosses its path.</p><p>In each case, a fault could cause that mismatch. So could <a href="https://vicone.com/blog/can-a-robot-do-everything-right-and-still-be-unsafe/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">deliberate manipulation</a>.</p><p>At <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/vicone-lab-r7/posts/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">VicOne LAB R7</a>, we examine how manipulated inputs can change robot behavior — and what that means for the systems meant to keep people safe.</p><h2>How an untrusted input can change a robot’s behavior</h2><p>A robot does more than measure its surroundings. It may interpret what it sees and hears to decide what to do next. Information placed in its environment can therefore influence its actions.</p><p>Published research shows how this can happen. In a <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.13587" target="_blank">study of vision-language-action (VLA) models</a>, a patch in a camera’s view reduced task success in simulated robot tests. <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.19870" target="_blank">FreezeVLA</a> found that an adversarial image could cause tested models to ignore later instructions. Although the studies used different methods, both demonstrate how visual input can interfere with a robot’s intended task.</p><p class="pull-quote">In a robot-dog test using Gemma 4 E4B, text on a poster was treated as an instruction and changed the robot’s movement.</p><p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/vicone-lab-r7/posts/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">VicOne LAB R7</a> also tested how untrusted inputs could change robot behavior. In a robot-dog test using Gemma 4 E4B, text on a poster was treated as an instruction and changed the robot’s movement. In a separate hospital-service-robot simulation using Nemotron on NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin, crafted audio that is inaudible to people changed the robot’s simulated behavior. The assigned tasks did not change; the inputs did.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube"> <span class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9e885263682c422d0384c7463483c867" style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="auto" lazy-loadable="true" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d9lPOKP1mos?rel=0" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;" width="100%"></iframe></span> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">In a VicOne LAB R7 test, text on a poster changed a robot dog’s movement, illustrating how a crafted input can turn an unlikely outcome into a repeatable attack.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">VicOne</small></p><h2>Safety-related decisions have inputs too</h2><p>An independent protective system may still stop a dangerous action. But that system also depends on information: readings, estimates, and messages that tell it when to intervene. What happens if one of those inputs is manipulated?</p><p>At a robotics bug bounty event, VicOne LAB R7 researchers injected a ROS 2/DDS message into a robot that organizers expected to remain still under a safe-control setting. The robot moved.</p><p>A humanoid’s balance controller offers another example. If it relies on a vulnerable gyroscope, sound at the sensor’s resonant frequency could distort its reported rotation. The controller might correct for a tilt that never occurred. <a href="https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity15/technical-sessions/presentation/son" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity15/technical-sessions/presentation/son">Researchers demonstrated</a> the underlying acoustic attack against drones with vulnerable gyroscopes. The research did not demonstrate the same attack chain causing a humanoid to fall.</p><p>Other protections could interrupt either chain. The question for safety and security teams is whether those protections detect the danger independently or depend on the same manipulated information.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"> <img alt="Table comparing AI safety risks (bugs, failures) with security risks (attacks, hijacks)." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3e7e106e37e2bcc689c01dcc811a861b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="571fc" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/table-comparing-ai-safety-risks-bugs-failures-with-security-risks-attacks-hijacks.jpg?id=68002090&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Figure 1. VicOne maps how accidental faults and deliberate cyber manipulation can lead to similar robot safety outcomes, from loss of control to physical harm.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">VicOne</small></p><h2>Deliberate attacks challenge safety assumptions</h2><p>A safety assessment may treat a combination of accidental faults as unlikely. Deliberate manipulation changes that assumption. An attacker can choose when to introduce a false input and repeat the same trigger. That does not make harm inevitable, but it may change how cyber risks should be assessed.</p><p>Redundant sensors also need an adversarial test. If one action can affect both inputs, their agreement may offer less reassurance than expected. In <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.09249" target="_blank">autonomous driving research</a>, a crafted physical object misled a system combining camera and LiDAR perception. The study does not establish a weakness in a particular robot, but it shows why teams should test whether one manipulation can affect several checks at once.</p><p class="pull-quote">Cyber threats add intent to the safety equation, so risk assessments based on accidental faults must be revisited to account for attacks that can be timed and repeated.</p><h2>Security testing strengthens robot safety evidence</h2><p>Safety teams set limits for speed, protective distances, and permitted operating areas. The evidence behind those limits should also show what happens when the information used to enforce them is deliberately manipulated.</p><p>That evidence can also support assessments against applicable requirements. China’s <a href="https://vicone.com/blog/from-perception-to-action-what-gbt-45502-2025-signals-for-service-robot-security/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">GB/T 45502-2025</a> addresses information security for service robots. <a href="https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/69228" target="_blank">IEC TS 63074</a> examines security threats that could affect safety-related control systems. The <a href="https://vicone.com/blog/when-ai-moves-why-the-eu-machinery-regulation-matters-for-physical-ai-security/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">EU Machinery Regulation</a>, which applies from January 20, 2027, includes requirements to protect safety-relevant systems and data against corruption. Each has its own scope, and teams still need evidence for their robot’s design and operating conditions.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image ieee-sidebar-large"> <img alt="Diagram of AI robot security lifecycle from development to operation monitoring" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="77bf57b0d0c4b4d22f15a6f08f08e2ca" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="f3777" loading="lazy" src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/diagram-of-ai-robot-security-lifecycle-from-development-to-operation-monitoring.jpg?id=68002095&width=980"/> <small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">Figure 2. Cybersecurity strengthens robot safety evidence throughout the lifecycle. VicOne helps teams test safety limits against manipulation before deployment and monitor the conditions behind safe behavior in operation.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">VicOne</small></p><p><span>Before deployment, safety and security engineers can compare normal and adversarial scenarios against the same safety limits. During operation, they can monitor for changes to software, models, sensor signals, or behavior that may call earlier results into question. Any response to suspicious behaviors should follow policies approved by the safety team.</span></p><p>VicOne supports that work across the robot lifecycle. Through the <a href="https://robotichackingcommunity.com/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">Robotic Hacking Community</a>, VicOne LAB R7 works with researchers to investigate how cyber threats can change robot behavior. <a href="https://vicone.com/products/radeis/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">VicOne’s Radeis</a> helps teams validate potential effects before deployment, while <a href="https://vicone.com/products/rthena/?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">Rthena</a> provides visibility into risks and behavior during operation.</p><h2>Five questions safety and security teams should answer together</h2><p>The central test is whether a robot’s safeguards still protect people when the information they rely on is manipulated. Safety and security teams can begin by tracing the inputs behind each protective decision, challenging them, and revisiting the evidence as the robot changes. They can start with these five questions:</p><p>1. <strong>What does each protective function read?</strong> Map the readings, estimates, messages, and confirmations. Identify which safeguards operate independently of the robot’s AI decisions.</p><p>2. <strong>How does that information arrive?</strong> Check how inputs are produced, transmitted, authenticated where appropriate, and handled when they are missing or implausible.</p><p>3. <strong>What happens if an input is manipulated?</strong> Test false distances, drifting position estimates, and other relevant scenarios against the robot’s safety limits.</p><p>4. <strong>Can one action mislead several inputs?</strong> Check whether sensor fusion or seemingly independent safeguards share a point of failure.</p><p>5. <strong>When should the evidence be revisited?</strong> Reassess after changes to software, models, sensors, or operating conditions. Agree on bounded responses to suspicious behavior with the safety team in advance.</p><p>The goal is not only to show that a protective function works. Teams also need evidence that it remains protective when the information behind its decision is wrong or deliberately manipulated — and that another safeguard can catch the resulting hazard when needed. As robots change, that evidence needs to change with them.</p><p>For a deeper look how cybersecurity can affect robot safety, download our white paper “<a href="https://info.vicone.com/why-robot-safety-depends-on-cybersecurity-vicone?utm_source=ieee-spectrum&utm_medium=sponsored-content&utm_campaign=2026-10" target="_blank">Why Robot Safety Depends on Cybersecurity: Protecting the Information That Safety Decisions Rely On</a>.”</p> Reference: https://ift.tt/H4eMKSO

When Electric Cars Were for Women

<img src="https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/black-and-white-photo-of-a-woman-standing-in-an-early-20th-century-car-next-to-an...