×
The Browser Company launches a monthly subscription for its AI-powered browser | TechCrunch

The Browser Company launches a $20 monthly subscription for its AI-powered browser | TechCrunch

Tech-news , ,

The Browser Company has launched a Pro subscription plan for Dia, its new web browser that heavily integrates AI features. The plan costs $20 per month and provides unlimited access to Dia’s AI-powered chat and skills features.

The introduction of a paid tier means free users will now face usage limits on AI features. While The Browser Company hasn’t specified exact limits, CEO Josh Miller told The New York Times in July that the browser will remain free for those who use AI features “a few times a week.”

Image Credits: Screenshot by TechCrunch

Miller also indicated that the startup plans to offer multiple subscription tiers, ranging from $5 per month to hundreds of dollars monthly. The current $20 plan appears to be one of several options based on different feature sets.

Earlier this week, users on Reddit and Threads noticed that The Browser Company had quietly made the Pro plan available online. However, the company quickly removed the page. Now the subscription option has been restored and can be accessed through Dia’s settings page.

Screenshot

The Browser Company, which previously made the Arc browser, has raised $128 million from investors, including Pace Capital, Next Play Ventures, and notable tech execs like LinkedIn’s Jeff Weiner, Medium’s Ev Williams, Figma’s Dylan Field, Notion’s Akshay Kothari, and GitHub’s Jason Warner. This Pro plan represents the company’s first revenue-generating subscription service.

The startup faces growing competition when it comes to AI-enhanced browsers. Perplexity’s Comet browser is gaining steam, Opera is also prepping its Neon browser, and incumbents like Google and Microsoft are also integrating their AI assistants into their browsers.

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025

Source link
#Browser #Company #launches #monthly #subscription #AIpowered #browser #TechCrunch

Tag

Related Posts

Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today.

Sony Bravia

Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels.

Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured?

Who Makes Sony TVs and Where Are They Manufactured? Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today. Sony Bravia Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels. Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured? Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs. Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs. Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe. Who Supplies Sony TV Panels? Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing. Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels. TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027. Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV. #Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony

Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs.

Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs.

Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe.

Who Supplies Sony TV Panels?

Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing.

Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels.

TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs

TCL

After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027.

Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV.

#Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony">Who Makes Sony TVs and Where Are They Manufactured? Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today. Sony Bravia Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels. Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured? Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs. Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs. Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe. Who Supplies Sony TV Panels? Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing. Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels. TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027. Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV. #Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony

designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today.

Sony Bravia

Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels.

Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured?

Who Makes Sony TVs and Where Are They Manufactured? Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today. Sony Bravia Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels. Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured? Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs. Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs. Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe. Who Supplies Sony TV Panels? Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing. Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels. TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027. Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV. #Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony

Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs.

Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs.

Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe.

Who Supplies Sony TV Panels?

Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing.

Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels.

TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs

TCL

After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027.

Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV.

#Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony">Who Makes Sony TVs and Where Are They Manufactured?

Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today.

Sony Bravia

Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels.

Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured?

Who Makes Sony TVs and Where Are They Manufactured? Sony designs Bravia TVs with premium features and high-quality displays, but many buyers are still unaware of where they are made. Sony uses a global manufacturing network that includes countries such as China, Japan, Malaysia, India, and Mexico. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important components like OLED and QD-OLED panels. Over time, Sony has reduced its own factory operations and started relying more on manufacturing partners, which has changed how and where Bravia TVs are produced today. Sony Bravia Sony Bravia became Sony’s main television brand in 2008 and is now sold in many countries worldwide. These TVs are popular for their premium display quality, color accuracy, and smart image-processing features. Sony develops the software, features, and designs for its TVs, while manufacturing partners produce and assemble the products. The company also depends on outside suppliers for important TV components like display panels. Where Are Sony TVs Manufactured? Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs. Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs. Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe. Who Supplies Sony TV Panels? Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing. Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels. TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027. Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV. #Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony

Sony Bravia TVs are manufactured across different countries as part of Sony’s global production network. Major manufacturing locations include China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Slovakia, and Thailand. China handles a large share of TV assembly and display-related production, while India produces many TVs for regional buyers through Sony’s partnership with Foxconn. Japan and Malaysia still support several electronics manufacturing operations for the company. Different factories are used to serve nearby international markets and reduce supply costs.

Over time, Sony has been able to cut down on the number of factories that it has. This is because it used to manufacture TVs in factories that were in other countries like Brazil, Spain, Vietnam, Mexico, and Slovakia. In 2010, Sony sold the Spain facility, later closed the Brazil factory in 2021, and had previously shut down the Vietnam plant in 2008. It also sold the Mexican and Slovakian plants to Foxconn in its attempt to minimize costs.

Now, Sony emphasizes technology and product development more and relies on other firms in manufacturing. The firm Foxconn is responsible for making Sony TVs that support various markets. Outsourcing production will help Sony cut costs, become more efficient, and manufacture effectively from all corners of the globe.

Who Supplies Sony TV Panels?

Currently, Sony uses TV panels manufactured by other producers rather than creating them through its plants. The OLED panels used by Sony for its products come mostly from LG, while Samsung produces QD-OLED panels. There are a limited number of producers of TV panels; therefore, most TV makers use similar TV panels. Most of Sony’s development efforts focus on software and image processing.

Sony uses its own picture-processing systems and display tuning to improve the quality of Bravia TVs. These technologies help deliver better colors, sharper details, and smoother motion performance. Because of this, Sony delivers excellent image quality in its TVs even when other manufacturers supply the display panels.

TCL’s Role in Sony Bravia TVs

TCL

After acquiring the majority stake in Bravia Inc., TCL is a significant player in determining the future of Sony Bravia television sets. However, Sony will continue to use its imaging technologies and displays in order to create the perfect experience of using Bravia televisions. Given that TCL has a wide manufacturing base in China, there is an expectation that Bravia television manufacturing will increasingly shift to China post 2027.

Today, Sony Bravia TVs are produced using parts and factories from different countries across Sony’s global supply chain. Even so, Sony continues to handle the software and image-processing systems that shape the overall viewing experience. For most customers, Sony’s strong reputation for display quality matters more than the exact factory location of the TV.

#Sony #TVs #Manufacturedsony

Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026.

Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence">A16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech History Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026. Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024. Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic. Turns out that Flux 3 is exceptional at generating historical footage… like elementary school students in the ’90s predicting how we’ll use computers. (the last girl is my favorite!) pic.twitter.com/oH6qJy8AQU — Justine Moore (@venturetwins) July 28, 2026 The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films. “I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately. These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical. “I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote. Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity. What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim? This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action. President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video. I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real. In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point. #A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence">A16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech HistoryA16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech History Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026. Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024. Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic. Turns out that Flux 3 is exceptional at generating historical footage… like elementary school students in the ’90s predicting how we’ll use computers. (the last girl is my favorite!) pic.twitter.com/oH6qJy8AQU — Justine Moore (@venturetwins) July 28, 2026 The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films. “I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately. These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical. “I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote. Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity. What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim? This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action. President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video. I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real. In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point. #A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026.

Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

A SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex">The SpaceX Falcon Lunar Crash Is a Warning for Moon BasesA SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex

crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex">The SpaceX Falcon Lunar Crash Is a Warning for Moon Bases

A SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex

Post Comment