×
Raleigh One e-bike launches with VanMoof DNA

Raleigh One e-bike launches with VanMoof DNA

The Raleigh One e-bike is now official after The Verge first published details of it last week. It was developed for the Accell Group’s Raleigh brand with help from VanMoof’s cofounders, Ties and Taco Carlier, according to my sources. The announcement never mentions their involvement, which could be viewed as good or bad — good if you view the brothers as innovators, bad if you got burned during the VanMoof bankruptcy or the turmoil that preceded it.

I think everyone can agree, however, that the decision to put several functions behind monthly subscription tiers that start at £6.99 / €7.99 (around $9) per month is annoying, especially for a list price of £2,399 / €2,699 (around $3,000 USD) when Raleigh One sales begin next month in the UK, Germany, and the Netherlands. That’s expensive for a Raleigh, but it’s still close to the €2,681 average for European e-bikes.

The Raleigh One looks very VanMoof-ish but with several features that fans and critics alike have asked for: the 360Wh battery can be removed for easy charging, and it’s fitted with a single-speed belt drive paired to a motor housed in the hub of the rear wheel. If you squint, it could be easily mistaken for a Tenways CGO009.

Available in two colors, one frame size, and a few options for front carry.

When asked about the Carlier brothers’ involvement with the e-bike, Ertu Bilgin, Accell Group brand lead, confirmed that “some former VanMoof team members have brought their experience” to the Raleigh One, but it’s “very much a product of the Accell Group.“

The urban commuter comes with beefy tires to soak up bumps and a few mounts to help haul your gear around the city (with more to come). The integrated lighting adapts to conditions with a “dual-front” light that can be moved off the frame and onto the optional front rack. There’s a simple controller on the bike to adjust power, which can also be set in the Raleigh app. The app lets riders tap into additional features like an integrated alarm system and GPS tracking.

The bike weighs 21 kg (46.3 pounds) and is only available in a single step-over frame model. It ships with a 5A brick that can charge the e-bike to 50 percent in one hour or to full in 2 hours and 20 minutes. Range is estimated at 80 km (50 miles) in eco mode or at 50 km (31 miles) when adding more pedal-assisted power. This is Europe so there’s no throttle here, and there’s no button to provide a temporary boost.

Unlike VanMoofs, the Raleigh One uses a lot of off-the-shelf parts. I’m seeing hydraulic disc brakes from Tektro, a Gates Carbon belt, a 250W Mivice motor, and bike mount from SP Connect. “Built to last and easy to maintain, the Raleigh One delivers on reliability, with high-quality and low maintenance parts, backed up by a comprehensive dealer network,” the announcement promises. Those are important claims given the historical context.

Removable battery.
Image: Raleigh

Mivice motor.
Image: Raleigh

Gates Carbon belt drive.
Image: Raleigh

Tektro brakes.
Image: Raleigh

VanMoof’s downfall under the Carliers’ leadership can be directly attributed to bikes that shipped before they were ready, using custom parts of their own design that were assembled without enough emphasis on durability and serviceability. Concerns that VanMoof’s new owner — McLaren Applied — has addressed with its new S6 e-bikes.

Now, about those subscriptions, or “memberships” in Raleigh vernacular. The Basic tier provides a rider dashboard, basic security, a stolen mode, and updates over Bluetooth for free. You can then pay £6.99 / €7.99 (around $9 USD) per month, or £84 / €96 ($110) per year, to become a Core member, which adds automatic stolen mode activation and smart maintenance alerts. And for a limited time, you’ll also get over-the-air updates, some kind of bike-sharing feature for up to four people, “touch-and-go” functionality, and remote arming — but only until those features are moved to a new, more expensive “Icon” tier sometime in 2026.

Subscriptions have become an unfortunate norm for just about everything we used to own outright, and e-bikes are no different. VanMoof is developing its own €4.99 (about $6) per month or €49 ($57) per year subscription offering, and even industry heavyweight Bosch can’t resist the lure of that recurring revenue stream as the industry continues to grapple with too much inventory and declining demand.

Raleigh’s parent company, Accell — the bicycle giant responsible for brands like Batavus, Sparta, Carqon, and Babboe — has suffered financial troubles of its own in recent years, including recalls and the bankruptcy of its Stella brand. But unlike VanMoof, Cake, and many other mobility companies that have gone bust since the COVID-19 pandemic boom, Accell had the resources to survive the “Bikeaggedon” created by a sudden collapse of the supply chain followed by a period of massive oversupply.

The Carlier brothers are undeniably trailblazers. They introduced sleek, desirable e-bikes to a category of transportation once dominated by bolt-on batteries and septuagenarians. But can they be trusted, even under Accell’s tutelage, after bankrupting the company they founded 16 years ago?

Raleigh has also seen better days since its founding in 1887, its brand sullied by an embrace of mass-market retailers that push its lower-end bicycles. That’s probably why the Raleigh One is launching on a new website — to set it apart from its siblings and mark a new beginning for everyone involved.

Images provided by Raleigh

Source link
#Raleigh #ebike #launches #VanMoof #DNA


The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars">Maul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s ScreamsMaul’s Lightsabers in ‘Shadow Lord’ Are Powered by Sam Witwer’s Screams
                The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them. It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

 Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.  The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot. It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.  Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.      #Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

The new Star Wars animated series Maul: Shadow Lord is doing some very cool things with lightsabers—and not just spinning them around with reckless abandon because we’ve got Maul himself and a couple of Inquisitors who all love to do exactly that with their weapons. They look almost unlike any time we’ve seen the weapons in Lucasfilm’s past output: blades that flicker and snarl like their wielders do, living flames that carve paths of incandescent energy across the screen instead of that typically clean, minimalistic energy we see from them.

It makes Shadow Lord look even more visually impressive than it already is, and of course, the idea of lightsabers as gouts of flaming plasma is also naturally very befitting everyone’s favorite slightly pathetic but trying-his-best edgelord in a character like Maul. But it turns out Shadow Lord‘s lightsabers—Maul’s specifically—are going the extra edgelord mile. Because there’s screaming in the sound mix.

Not just any screaming either, but Sam Witwer’s own howls.

The delightfully silly factoid was revealed by the supervising sound editor for the show, David W. Collins, in a new featurette about the process of creating Shadow Lord, which also shows off Witwer performing some of his own moves for animation reference. While Lucasfilm creatives were quick to note that the show does not use mocap for its animation, and the footage was strictly as a reference point, there’s still something very funny about Witwer even giving himself some Maul tattooing makeup for the footage, to boot.

It’s long been clear that Witwer has put a lot of time and thought into his approach to Maul’s animated legacy over the past decade and a half, but now at least he’s put his vocals into it in a very different manner for Shadow Lord.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Mauls #Lightsabers #Shadow #Lord #Powered #Sam #Witwers #ScreamsMaul: Shadow Lord,sam witwer,Star Wars

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible AdviceMedical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible Advice

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Post Comment