×
Sam Altman says he doesn’t want the government to bail out OpenAI if it fails | TechCrunch

Sam Altman says he doesn’t want the government to bail out OpenAI if it fails | TechCrunch

Tech-news , , ,

OpenAI execs have been fielding plenty of questions about how they expect to pay for the $1.4 trillion worth of data center build-outs and usage commitments they’ve accrued this year, given that their revenue — while rising rapidly — is a $20 billion annual run rate, CEO Sam Altman said Thursday in a post on X.

Altman’s comments came in response to comments made by Open AI CFO Sarah Friar — which she quickly walked back. Speaking at a Wall Street Journal event on Wednesday, Friar said she wanted the US government to “backstop” her company’s infrastructure loans. This, she explained, would make the company’s loans cheaper and help ensure it could always be using the latest, greatest chip.

A backstopped loan is when the government guarantees it so if the company defaults, taxpayers pick up the bill. Lenders tend to reward low-risk loans like that with better terms.

Friar said that using older chips, which compute-constrained OpenAI must do, makes financing options more affordable, but that the company’s goal is to always put its state-of-the-art models on the latest, greatest chips.

So how to pay for this revolving door of chips? She said the company is looking for an “ecosystem” to help including banks, PE firms and, she hoped, the government.

When asked what she wanted the government to do, she said, “… the backstop, the guarantee that allows the financing to happen. That can really drop the cost of the financing but also increase the loan-to-value, so the amount of debt that you can take on top of an equity portion.”

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 13-15, 2026

She also implied that such talks, particularly in the U.S. were already in the works saying, “I think we’re seeing that. The U.S. government, in particular has been incredibly forward-leaning, has really understood that AI is almost a national strategic asset.”

After the Wall Street journal published the clip of her discussing this desire for a federal backstop, and plenty of X users with big followers scoffed at the idea, Friar quickly walked back her comments.

“I want to clarify my comments earlier today. OpenAI is not seeking a government backstop for our infrastructure commitments. I used the word ‘backstop’ and it muddied the point,” she posted on LinkedIn.

On Thursday, Trump’s AI Czar David Sacks weighed in. Sacks (who is a big Silicon Valley VC himself), wrote on X the US has no plans to bail out any AI company.

“There will be no federal bailout for AI. The U.S. has at least 5 major frontier model companies. If one fails, others will take its place,” he posted, adding that what the government wants to do is make “permitting and power generation easier.” While not naming her, he also forgave Friar for “clarifying” her stance.

In the wake of this, Altman wrote a lengthy post on X echoing Sacks’ sentiments.

“We do not have or want government guarantees for OpenAI datacenters. We believe that governments should not pick winners or losers, and that taxpayers should not bail out companies that make bad business decisions or otherwise lose in the market,” he wrote.

He also clarified that the backstopped loans have been discussed — but not for his company.

“The one area where we have discussed loan guarantees is as part of supporting the buildout of semiconductor fabs in the US, where we and other companies have responded to the government’s call and where we would be happy to help (though we did not formally apply).”

It is hard to fault Friar for floating the idea. She’s right that such a guarantee would make her financing job easier, even if, as Sacks wrote in his string, the idea of asking for a taxpayer-funded bailout is “ridiculous.”

As she’s now heard a resounding public “no” from someone she’d need in her corner for that idea, she and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman can expect plenty more questions about how they expect to pay for their $1 trillion buildout.

Indeed, Altman seems braced for just such a thing.

“We expect to end this year above $20 billion in annualized revenue run rate and grow to hundreds of billion by 2030. We are looking at commitments of about $1.4 trillion over the next 8 years,” he wrote, adding that the company feels good about it’s “prospects” especially its enterprise offering, new consumer devices and robotics.



Source link
#Sam #Altman #doesnt #government #bail #OpenAI #fails #TechCrunch

Tag

Related Posts


Johannes Heidecke, the Head of Safety Systems at OpenAI, is leaving. I know what you’re thinking: Hey, didn’t the head of safety at OpenAI just leave?

In fact, it feels like a head of safety at OpenAI is pretty much always leaving. Working in safety leadership—loosely defined—at OpenAI is a little like working as a drummer in the band Spinal Tap; lots of turnover. I’m not the world’s premier OpenAI Kremlinologist, so I might be missing some details and nuance, but here’s my basic timeline:

According to Wired, those previously reporting to Heidecke’s safety teams will be led by Mia Glaese, who is a VP, and also the head of alignment. However, there does seem to be an other replacement for Heidecke, according to Wired. Saachi Jain, former leader of safety teams, will now be an “interim head of safety systems” under Glaese.

What exactly keeps happening inside OpenAI’s offices is anyone’s guess, but OpenAI research chief Mark Chen did at least give Wired a hint, saying, “The demands on safety continue to increase—we are training models at a much faster cadence, and release cycles have come down greatly in turn,” and added, “As a result, we have bigger coordination challenges around safety today than ever before.”

The generous reading is that this is still an immature industry. The points along the chain where safety considerations are needed genuinely may keep jumping around as OpenAI figures out how best to build its products. Perhaps today’s sensible safety test procedure is tomorrow’s unnecessary bottleneck.

And there’s no actual direct evidence for a less generous reading of Heidecke’s departure—for instance, one in which any such consideration is a post-hoc rationalization for a pruning of safety procedures in service of faster product rollouts.

#Safety #Leader #OpenAI #Leftai alignment,AI safety,OpenAI">Yet Another Safety Leader at OpenAI Has Left Johannes Heidecke, the Head of Safety Systems at OpenAI, is leaving. I know what you’re thinking: Hey, didn’t the head of safety at OpenAI just leave? In fact, it feels like a head of safety at OpenAI is pretty much always leaving. Working in safety leadership—loosely defined—at OpenAI is a little like working as a drummer in the band Spinal Tap; lots of turnover. I’m not the world’s premier OpenAI Kremlinologist, so I might be missing some details and nuance, but here’s my basic timeline: According to Wired, those previously reporting to Heidecke’s safety teams will be led by Mia Glaese, who is a VP, and also the head of alignment. However, there does seem to be an other replacement for Heidecke, according to Wired. Saachi Jain, former leader of safety teams, will now be an “interim head of safety systems” under Glaese. What exactly keeps happening inside OpenAI’s offices is anyone’s guess, but OpenAI research chief Mark Chen did at least give Wired a hint, saying, “The demands on safety continue to increase—we are training models at a much faster cadence, and release cycles have come down greatly in turn,” and added, “As a result, we have bigger coordination challenges around safety today than ever before.” The generous reading is that this is still an immature industry. The points along the chain where safety considerations are needed genuinely may keep jumping around as OpenAI figures out how best to build its products. Perhaps today’s sensible safety test procedure is tomorrow’s unnecessary bottleneck. And there’s no actual direct evidence for a less generous reading of Heidecke’s departure—for instance, one in which any such consideration is a post-hoc rationalization for a pruning of safety procedures in service of faster product rollouts. #Safety #Leader #OpenAI #Leftai alignment,AI safety,OpenAI

working as a drummer in the band Spinal Tap; lots of turnover. I’m not the world’s premier OpenAI Kremlinologist, so I might be missing some details and nuance, but here’s my basic timeline:

According to Wired, those previously reporting to Heidecke’s safety teams will be led by Mia Glaese, who is a VP, and also the head of alignment. However, there does seem to be an other replacement for Heidecke, according to Wired. Saachi Jain, former leader of safety teams, will now be an “interim head of safety systems” under Glaese.

What exactly keeps happening inside OpenAI’s offices is anyone’s guess, but OpenAI research chief Mark Chen did at least give Wired a hint, saying, “The demands on safety continue to increase—we are training models at a much faster cadence, and release cycles have come down greatly in turn,” and added, “As a result, we have bigger coordination challenges around safety today than ever before.”

The generous reading is that this is still an immature industry. The points along the chain where safety considerations are needed genuinely may keep jumping around as OpenAI figures out how best to build its products. Perhaps today’s sensible safety test procedure is tomorrow’s unnecessary bottleneck.

And there’s no actual direct evidence for a less generous reading of Heidecke’s departure—for instance, one in which any such consideration is a post-hoc rationalization for a pruning of safety procedures in service of faster product rollouts.

#Safety #Leader #OpenAI #Leftai alignment,AI safety,OpenAI">Yet Another Safety Leader at OpenAI Has LeftYet Another Safety Leader at OpenAI Has Left Johannes Heidecke, the Head of Safety Systems at OpenAI, is leaving. I know what you’re thinking: Hey, didn’t the head of safety at OpenAI just leave? In fact, it feels like a head of safety at OpenAI is pretty much always leaving. Working in safety leadership—loosely defined—at OpenAI is a little like working as a drummer in the band Spinal Tap; lots of turnover. I’m not the world’s premier OpenAI Kremlinologist, so I might be missing some details and nuance, but here’s my basic timeline: According to Wired, those previously reporting to Heidecke’s safety teams will be led by Mia Glaese, who is a VP, and also the head of alignment. However, there does seem to be an other replacement for Heidecke, according to Wired. Saachi Jain, former leader of safety teams, will now be an “interim head of safety systems” under Glaese. What exactly keeps happening inside OpenAI’s offices is anyone’s guess, but OpenAI research chief Mark Chen did at least give Wired a hint, saying, “The demands on safety continue to increase—we are training models at a much faster cadence, and release cycles have come down greatly in turn,” and added, “As a result, we have bigger coordination challenges around safety today than ever before.” The generous reading is that this is still an immature industry. The points along the chain where safety considerations are needed genuinely may keep jumping around as OpenAI figures out how best to build its products. Perhaps today’s sensible safety test procedure is tomorrow’s unnecessary bottleneck. And there’s no actual direct evidence for a less generous reading of Heidecke’s departure—for instance, one in which any such consideration is a post-hoc rationalization for a pruning of safety procedures in service of faster product rollouts. #Safety #Leader #OpenAI #Leftai alignment,AI safety,OpenAI

Johannes Heidecke, the Head of Safety Systems at OpenAI, is leaving. I know what you’re thinking: Hey, didn’t the head of safety at OpenAI just leave?

In fact, it feels like a head of safety at OpenAI is pretty much always leaving. Working in safety leadership—loosely defined—at OpenAI is a little like working as a drummer in the band Spinal Tap; lots of turnover. I’m not the world’s premier OpenAI Kremlinologist, so I might be missing some details and nuance, but here’s my basic timeline:

According to Wired, those previously reporting to Heidecke’s safety teams will be led by Mia Glaese, who is a VP, and also the head of alignment. However, there does seem to be an other replacement for Heidecke, according to Wired. Saachi Jain, former leader of safety teams, will now be an “interim head of safety systems” under Glaese.

What exactly keeps happening inside OpenAI’s offices is anyone’s guess, but OpenAI research chief Mark Chen did at least give Wired a hint, saying, “The demands on safety continue to increase—we are training models at a much faster cadence, and release cycles have come down greatly in turn,” and added, “As a result, we have bigger coordination challenges around safety today than ever before.”

The generous reading is that this is still an immature industry. The points along the chain where safety considerations are needed genuinely may keep jumping around as OpenAI figures out how best to build its products. Perhaps today’s sensible safety test procedure is tomorrow’s unnecessary bottleneck.

And there’s no actual direct evidence for a less generous reading of Heidecke’s departure—for instance, one in which any such consideration is a post-hoc rationalization for a pruning of safety procedures in service of faster product rollouts.

#Safety #Leader #OpenAI #Leftai alignment,AI safety,OpenAI

Image may contain Adapter Electronics Escooter Transportation and Vehicle

Photograph: Chris Null

Naturally, the AstroRinse also needs a power supply, so if you don’t have a standard electrical outlet near your hose spigot, you’ll need another extension cord solution here. The unit must be level to run properly, and it features adjustable feet and a built-in spirit level to help you achieve that.

All told, you’ll need to carefully consider where you’re going to place the AstroRinse, ensuring you have access to water, power, and drainage—and that the location isn’t too far from the pool. Since the AquaSense X robot itself weighs 29 pounds (and more when freshly pulled from the water), you probably don’t want to haul the thing halfway across the yard to clean and charge it. Unfortunately, given the availability of the above three services in my backyard, that’s exactly what I had to do.

A Familiar Friend in the Water

The Beatbot AquaSense X robot is nearly identical in appearance to the Beatbot AquaSense 2 Ultra except for some changes to the basket design (which is a single piece here instead of two). Setting it up is far simpler than the AstroRinse.

Physical configuration involves installing two side brushes—these are used only by the skimmer function—but this is a fairly quick affair. Once the brushes are attached, the robot must be set on top of the AstroRinse cleaner so the two devices can be wirelessly paired together. (The quick start guide lays out the particular button presses you must do to complete this process; don’t lose it.) Lastly, the system must then be paired to the Beatbot mobile app; you’ll need Bluetooth and a 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi connection to complete this task. One tiny hiccup I encountered: After completing all this work, both devices downloaded firmware updates, which promptly broke their pairing connection. It was easy to reestablish, however, by simply repeating the pairing process.

Video: Chris Null

After a full charge, I put the cleaner through its paces in the pool on both the floor and the surface, and as expected, I saw no real difference in performance against the AquaSense 2 Ultra. During floor testing with both organic and synthetic debris, the device picked up an average of 97 percent of the test material, doing exceptionally well on steps and platforms. On the surface, the unit was predictably middling to awful, collecting less than half of floating debris and sinking most of the rest. The unit is just too slow to collect much material on the surface, even though its spinning side brushes help, to a small extent, to pull leaves into its maw.

On the floor of the pool, maximum running time is about 41/2 hours, courtesy of a 13,400 mAh battery—the same as the battery on the AquaSense 2 Ultra.

Image may contain Electronics Mobile Phone Phone and Text

ScreenshotBeatbot app via Chris Null

As with other AquaSense robots, a bevy of operating modes are available in the Beatbot app, letting you choose from dozens of potential combinations of floor, wall, waterline, and surface cleaning, each with up to two runs per zone and with various running times. An AI Quick Mode activates the onboard camera to allow the robot to actively search for debris instead of encountering it randomly; it’s good for a quick clean when there’s not much to pick up but more than you can easily fetch with a net.

Again, not much of this is any different from how the AquaSense 2 Ultra behaves, and aside from the poor surface performance, it works outstandingly well.

Charging and Cleaning

On to the main event: cleanup. After each run, the AquaSense X parked itself at the waterline to await retrieval, and I dutifully lugged it across the pool deck to where I had the AstroRinse station set up. While it can take a little trial and error to get the robot seated in just the right spot, once you do, the cleaning system kicks in automatically within a few seconds.

Video: Chris Null

As the rinsing system starts up, the top-mounted arm swings into place and connects with the mouth the robot uses for surface skimming. Then, a high-pressure stream of water (sounding quite loud) begins blasting from the arm and into the filter basket, which is positioned directly below this opening. The water spray runs uninterrupted for three minutes before the arm swings back and the system shuts off. (A quick mode, which runs for one minute, can also be selected in the app.) After that, the arm retracts and the unit is done. Debris is captured in a net-covered basket built into the base of the cleaning station. Any remaining water drains out through a mesh screen at the very bottom of the unit.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Photograph: Chris Null

#Pool #Robot #Cleans #Pooland #Cleansshopping,review,reviews,robots,home,outdoors">This Pool Robot Cleans the Pool—and Then Cleans ItselfPhotograph: Chris NullNaturally, the AstroRinse also needs a power supply, so if you don’t have a standard electrical outlet near your hose spigot, you’ll need another extension cord solution here. The unit must be level to run properly, and it features adjustable feet and a built-in spirit level to help you achieve that.All told, you’ll need to carefully consider where you’re going to place the AstroRinse, ensuring you have access to water, power, and drainage—and that the location isn’t too far from the pool. Since the AquaSense X robot itself weighs 29 pounds (and more when freshly pulled from the water), you probably don’t want to haul the thing halfway across the yard to clean and charge it. Unfortunately, given the availability of the above three services in my backyard, that’s exactly what I had to do.A Familiar Friend in the WaterThe Beatbot AquaSense X robot is nearly identical in appearance to the Beatbot AquaSense 2 Ultra except for some changes to the basket design (which is a single piece here instead of two). Setting it up is far simpler than the AstroRinse.Physical configuration involves installing two side brushes—these are used only by the skimmer function—but this is a fairly quick affair. Once the brushes are attached, the robot must be set on top of the AstroRinse cleaner so the two devices can be wirelessly paired together. (The quick start guide lays out the particular button presses you must do to complete this process; don’t lose it.) Lastly, the system must then be paired to the Beatbot mobile app; you’ll need Bluetooth and a 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi connection to complete this task. One tiny hiccup I encountered: After completing all this work, both devices downloaded firmware updates, which promptly broke their pairing connection. It was easy to reestablish, however, by simply repeating the pairing process.Video: Chris NullAfter a full charge, I put the cleaner through its paces in the pool on both the floor and the surface, and as expected, I saw no real difference in performance against the AquaSense 2 Ultra. During floor testing with both organic and synthetic debris, the device picked up an average of 97 percent of the test material, doing exceptionally well on steps and platforms. On the surface, the unit was predictably middling to awful, collecting less than half of floating debris and sinking most of the rest. The unit is just too slow to collect much material on the surface, even though its spinning side brushes help, to a small extent, to pull leaves into its maw.On the floor of the pool, maximum running time is about 41/2 hours, courtesy of a 13,400 mAh battery—the same as the battery on the AquaSense 2 Ultra.ScreenshotBeatbot app via Chris NullAs with other AquaSense robots, a bevy of operating modes are available in the Beatbot app, letting you choose from dozens of potential combinations of floor, wall, waterline, and surface cleaning, each with up to two runs per zone and with various running times. An AI Quick Mode activates the onboard camera to allow the robot to actively search for debris instead of encountering it randomly; it’s good for a quick clean when there’s not much to pick up but more than you can easily fetch with a net.Again, not much of this is any different from how the AquaSense 2 Ultra behaves, and aside from the poor surface performance, it works outstandingly well.Charging and CleaningOn to the main event: cleanup. After each run, the AquaSense X parked itself at the waterline to await retrieval, and I dutifully lugged it across the pool deck to where I had the AstroRinse station set up. While it can take a little trial and error to get the robot seated in just the right spot, once you do, the cleaning system kicks in automatically within a few seconds.Video: Chris NullAs the rinsing system starts up, the top-mounted arm swings into place and connects with the mouth the robot uses for surface skimming. Then, a high-pressure stream of water (sounding quite loud) begins blasting from the arm and into the filter basket, which is positioned directly below this opening. The water spray runs uninterrupted for three minutes before the arm swings back and the system shuts off. (A quick mode, which runs for one minute, can also be selected in the app.) After that, the arm retracts and the unit is done. Debris is captured in a net-covered basket built into the base of the cleaning station. Any remaining water drains out through a mesh screen at the very bottom of the unit.Photograph: Chris Null#Pool #Robot #Cleans #Pooland #Cleansshopping,review,reviews,robots,home,outdoors

Beatbot AquaSense 2 Ultra except for some changes to the basket design (which is a single piece here instead of two). Setting it up is far simpler than the AstroRinse.

Physical configuration involves installing two side brushes—these are used only by the skimmer function—but this is a fairly quick affair. Once the brushes are attached, the robot must be set on top of the AstroRinse cleaner so the two devices can be wirelessly paired together. (The quick start guide lays out the particular button presses you must do to complete this process; don’t lose it.) Lastly, the system must then be paired to the Beatbot mobile app; you’ll need Bluetooth and a 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi connection to complete this task. One tiny hiccup I encountered: After completing all this work, both devices downloaded firmware updates, which promptly broke their pairing connection. It was easy to reestablish, however, by simply repeating the pairing process.

Video: Chris Null

After a full charge, I put the cleaner through its paces in the pool on both the floor and the surface, and as expected, I saw no real difference in performance against the AquaSense 2 Ultra. During floor testing with both organic and synthetic debris, the device picked up an average of 97 percent of the test material, doing exceptionally well on steps and platforms. On the surface, the unit was predictably middling to awful, collecting less than half of floating debris and sinking most of the rest. The unit is just too slow to collect much material on the surface, even though its spinning side brushes help, to a small extent, to pull leaves into its maw.

On the floor of the pool, maximum running time is about 41/2 hours, courtesy of a 13,400 mAh battery—the same as the battery on the AquaSense 2 Ultra.

Image may contain Electronics Mobile Phone Phone and Text

ScreenshotBeatbot app via Chris Null

As with other AquaSense robots, a bevy of operating modes are available in the Beatbot app, letting you choose from dozens of potential combinations of floor, wall, waterline, and surface cleaning, each with up to two runs per zone and with various running times. An AI Quick Mode activates the onboard camera to allow the robot to actively search for debris instead of encountering it randomly; it’s good for a quick clean when there’s not much to pick up but more than you can easily fetch with a net.

Again, not much of this is any different from how the AquaSense 2 Ultra behaves, and aside from the poor surface performance, it works outstandingly well.

Charging and Cleaning

On to the main event: cleanup. After each run, the AquaSense X parked itself at the waterline to await retrieval, and I dutifully lugged it across the pool deck to where I had the AstroRinse station set up. While it can take a little trial and error to get the robot seated in just the right spot, once you do, the cleaning system kicks in automatically within a few seconds.

Video: Chris Null

As the rinsing system starts up, the top-mounted arm swings into place and connects with the mouth the robot uses for surface skimming. Then, a high-pressure stream of water (sounding quite loud) begins blasting from the arm and into the filter basket, which is positioned directly below this opening. The water spray runs uninterrupted for three minutes before the arm swings back and the system shuts off. (A quick mode, which runs for one minute, can also be selected in the app.) After that, the arm retracts and the unit is done. Debris is captured in a net-covered basket built into the base of the cleaning station. Any remaining water drains out through a mesh screen at the very bottom of the unit.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Photograph: Chris Null

#Pool #Robot #Cleans #Pooland #Cleansshopping,review,reviews,robots,home,outdoors">This Pool Robot Cleans the Pool—and Then Cleans Itself
Image may contain Adapter Electronics Escooter Transportation and Vehicle

Photograph: Chris Null

Naturally, the AstroRinse also needs a power supply, so if you don’t have a standard electrical outlet near your hose spigot, you’ll need another extension cord solution here. The unit must be level to run properly, and it features adjustable feet and a built-in spirit level to help you achieve that.

All told, you’ll need to carefully consider where you’re going to place the AstroRinse, ensuring you have access to water, power, and drainage—and that the location isn’t too far from the pool. Since the AquaSense X robot itself weighs 29 pounds (and more when freshly pulled from the water), you probably don’t want to haul the thing halfway across the yard to clean and charge it. Unfortunately, given the availability of the above three services in my backyard, that’s exactly what I had to do.

A Familiar Friend in the Water

The Beatbot AquaSense X robot is nearly identical in appearance to the Beatbot AquaSense 2 Ultra except for some changes to the basket design (which is a single piece here instead of two). Setting it up is far simpler than the AstroRinse.

Physical configuration involves installing two side brushes—these are used only by the skimmer function—but this is a fairly quick affair. Once the brushes are attached, the robot must be set on top of the AstroRinse cleaner so the two devices can be wirelessly paired together. (The quick start guide lays out the particular button presses you must do to complete this process; don’t lose it.) Lastly, the system must then be paired to the Beatbot mobile app; you’ll need Bluetooth and a 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz Wi-Fi connection to complete this task. One tiny hiccup I encountered: After completing all this work, both devices downloaded firmware updates, which promptly broke their pairing connection. It was easy to reestablish, however, by simply repeating the pairing process.

Video: Chris Null

After a full charge, I put the cleaner through its paces in the pool on both the floor and the surface, and as expected, I saw no real difference in performance against the AquaSense 2 Ultra. During floor testing with both organic and synthetic debris, the device picked up an average of 97 percent of the test material, doing exceptionally well on steps and platforms. On the surface, the unit was predictably middling to awful, collecting less than half of floating debris and sinking most of the rest. The unit is just too slow to collect much material on the surface, even though its spinning side brushes help, to a small extent, to pull leaves into its maw.

On the floor of the pool, maximum running time is about 41/2 hours, courtesy of a 13,400 mAh battery—the same as the battery on the AquaSense 2 Ultra.

Image may contain Electronics Mobile Phone Phone and Text

ScreenshotBeatbot app via Chris Null

As with other AquaSense robots, a bevy of operating modes are available in the Beatbot app, letting you choose from dozens of potential combinations of floor, wall, waterline, and surface cleaning, each with up to two runs per zone and with various running times. An AI Quick Mode activates the onboard camera to allow the robot to actively search for debris instead of encountering it randomly; it’s good for a quick clean when there’s not much to pick up but more than you can easily fetch with a net.

Again, not much of this is any different from how the AquaSense 2 Ultra behaves, and aside from the poor surface performance, it works outstandingly well.

Charging and Cleaning

On to the main event: cleanup. After each run, the AquaSense X parked itself at the waterline to await retrieval, and I dutifully lugged it across the pool deck to where I had the AstroRinse station set up. While it can take a little trial and error to get the robot seated in just the right spot, once you do, the cleaning system kicks in automatically within a few seconds.

Video: Chris Null

As the rinsing system starts up, the top-mounted arm swings into place and connects with the mouth the robot uses for surface skimming. Then, a high-pressure stream of water (sounding quite loud) begins blasting from the arm and into the filter basket, which is positioned directly below this opening. The water spray runs uninterrupted for three minutes before the arm swings back and the system shuts off. (A quick mode, which runs for one minute, can also be selected in the app.) After that, the arm retracts and the unit is done. Debris is captured in a net-covered basket built into the base of the cleaning station. Any remaining water drains out through a mesh screen at the very bottom of the unit.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Photograph: Chris Null

#Pool #Robot #Cleans #Pooland #Cleansshopping,review,reviews,robots,home,outdoors

EA Sports announced it will remove all paid progression options from College Football 27‘s Dynasty and Road to Glory modes, reversing a decision that drew significant backlash from fans and content creators following the game’s launch.

In a statement posted to social media during the game’s launch week, the developer acknowledged that player feedback indicated the microtransactions “missed the mark.”

SEE ALSO: ‘EA College Football 27’: Road to Glory review

The studio said the paid options had been “added independent of deeper mode progression with the aim to give players more choice,” but conceded that “what you’ve said is that they’re not adding the value we intended.” EA said the changes would take effect the following morning, though it warned that players with existing College Point balances would lose the ability to apply them to Road to Glory or Dynasty once the features were removed, urging fans to spend their points beforehand.

Our big Guessing Game is back! Enter now for a chance to win an Apple Watch.

The reversal follows a wave of criticism after College Football 27‘s release, with fans organizing around the hashtag #CFBPlayDontPay to voice frustration over microtransactions appearing in the game’s single-player offline modes. The system allowed players to spend real money to instantly boost their coach or player’s development. For example, maxing out a coach in Dynasty from the start could cost as much as $100, more than the price of the game itself.

Compounding the frustration, EA also removed sliders that let players in College Football 25 and 26 manually adjust how much experience they earned, a feature that had let people level up faster without paying. With that option gone, spending money became the only way to speed up progression, which is what drove much of the backlash.

Notably, the statement stopped short of ruling out microtransactions from the franchise going forward. EA said its “goal for live service plans in CFB28 and beyond will be to deliver valuable features and content with greater transparency and communication” — language suggesting paid content will return in some form in next year’s edition, even as the company walks back the current game’s implementation.

Topics Social Good Video Games

#reverses #removes #microtransactions #College #Football">EA reverses course, removes microtransactions from ‘College Football 27’ EA Sports announced it will remove all paid progression options from College Football 27‘s Dynasty and Road to Glory modes, reversing a decision that drew significant backlash from fans and content creators following the game’s launch. In a statement posted to social media during the game’s launch week, the developer acknowledged that player feedback indicated the microtransactions “missed the mark.” SEE ALSO: ‘EA College Football 27’: Road to Glory review The studio said the paid options had been “added independent of deeper mode progression with the aim to give players more choice,” but conceded that “what you’ve said is that they’re not adding the value we intended.” EA said the changes would take effect the following morning, though it warned that players with existing College Point balances would lose the ability to apply them to Road to Glory or Dynasty once the features were removed, urging fans to spend their points beforehand. Mashable Top Stories Our big Guessing Game is back! Enter now for a chance to win an Apple Watch.The reversal follows a wave of criticism after College Football 27‘s release, with fans organizing around the hashtag #CFBPlayDontPay to voice frustration over microtransactions appearing in the game’s single-player offline modes. The system allowed players to spend real money to instantly boost their coach or player’s development. For example, maxing out a coach in Dynasty from the start could cost as much as 0, more than the price of the game itself. Compounding the frustration, EA also removed sliders that let players in College Football 25 and 26 manually adjust how much experience they earned, a feature that had let people level up faster without paying. With that option gone, spending money became the only way to speed up progression, which is what drove much of the backlash. This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed. Notably, the statement stopped short of ruling out microtransactions from the franchise going forward. EA said its “goal for live service plans in CFB28 and beyond will be to deliver valuable features and content with greater transparency and communication” — language suggesting paid content will return in some form in next year’s edition, even as the company walks back the current game’s implementation. Topics Social Good Video Games #reverses #removes #microtransactions #College #Football

statement posted to social media during the game’s launch week, the developer acknowledged that player feedback indicated the microtransactions “missed the mark.”

SEE ALSO: ‘EA College Football 27’: Road to Glory review

The studio said the paid options had been “added independent of deeper mode progression with the aim to give players more choice,” but conceded that “what you’ve said is that they’re not adding the value we intended.” EA said the changes would take effect the following morning, though it warned that players with existing College Point balances would lose the ability to apply them to Road to Glory or Dynasty once the features were removed, urging fans to spend their points beforehand.

Our big Guessing Game is back! Enter now for a chance to win an Apple Watch.

The reversal follows a wave of criticism after College Football 27‘s release, with fans organizing around the hashtag #CFBPlayDontPay to voice frustration over microtransactions appearing in the game’s single-player offline modes. The system allowed players to spend real money to instantly boost their coach or player’s development. For example, maxing out a coach in Dynasty from the start could cost as much as $100, more than the price of the game itself.

Compounding the frustration, EA also removed sliders that let players in College Football 25 and 26 manually adjust how much experience they earned, a feature that had let people level up faster without paying. With that option gone, spending money became the only way to speed up progression, which is what drove much of the backlash.

Notably, the statement stopped short of ruling out microtransactions from the franchise going forward. EA said its “goal for live service plans in CFB28 and beyond will be to deliver valuable features and content with greater transparency and communication” — language suggesting paid content will return in some form in next year’s edition, even as the company walks back the current game’s implementation.

Topics Social Good Video Games

#reverses #removes #microtransactions #College #Football">EA reverses course, removes microtransactions from ‘College Football 27’

EA Sports announced it will remove all paid progression options from College Football 27‘s Dynasty and Road to Glory modes, reversing a decision that drew significant backlash from fans and content creators following the game’s launch.

In a statement posted to social media during the game’s launch week, the developer acknowledged that player feedback indicated the microtransactions “missed the mark.”

SEE ALSO: ‘EA College Football 27’: Road to Glory review

The studio said the paid options had been “added independent of deeper mode progression with the aim to give players more choice,” but conceded that “what you’ve said is that they’re not adding the value we intended.” EA said the changes would take effect the following morning, though it warned that players with existing College Point balances would lose the ability to apply them to Road to Glory or Dynasty once the features were removed, urging fans to spend their points beforehand.

Our big Guessing Game is back! Enter now for a chance to win an Apple Watch.

The reversal follows a wave of criticism after College Football 27‘s release, with fans organizing around the hashtag #CFBPlayDontPay to voice frustration over microtransactions appearing in the game’s single-player offline modes. The system allowed players to spend real money to instantly boost their coach or player’s development. For example, maxing out a coach in Dynasty from the start could cost as much as $100, more than the price of the game itself.

Compounding the frustration, EA also removed sliders that let players in College Football 25 and 26 manually adjust how much experience they earned, a feature that had let people level up faster without paying. With that option gone, spending money became the only way to speed up progression, which is what drove much of the backlash.

Notably, the statement stopped short of ruling out microtransactions from the franchise going forward. EA said its “goal for live service plans in CFB28 and beyond will be to deliver valuable features and content with greater transparency and communication” — language suggesting paid content will return in some form in next year’s edition, even as the company walks back the current game’s implementation.

Topics Social Good Video Games

#reverses #removes #microtransactions #College #Football

Post Comment