OpenAI is introducing image generation directly within ChatGPT. Powered by its flagship multimodal model, GPT-4o, the chatbot can now create visuals straight from the chat interface.
The feature will initially be available to ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Team, and free users. Enterprise and Education tier users will get access soon.
Today we have one of the most fun, cool things we have ever launched . . . native images in ChatGPT, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said at the beginning of a video stream Tuesday. Altman acknowledged that the feature had been highly anticipatedespecially since competitors like Google Gemini have offered integrated image generation for some time.
ChatGPT now allows users to generate images based on prompts, conversations, and uploaded files. Users can create brand new images or transform existing images. OpenAI says the world knowledge trained into the GPT-4o model allows ChatGPT to better understand the contexts in which images are used. It is also better at following prompts rendering text within images, OpenAI says.
Users can refine images by prompting the model with natural language. For instance, when designing a video game character, the model can maintain visual consistency across multiple iterations as the user makes adjustments.
OpenAI says it expects people to use the tool work-related visuals that require precision (such as diagrams, infographics, branded content), text-heavy images (instruction posters, business cards), photorealistic images with accurate lighting and textures, and visuals that benefit from conversation context.
By simplifying the process with a single multimodal model that handles all image generation tasks, OpenAI is positioning ChatGPT as a go-to tool for both personal and professional image generation.
A once-every-four-years report card on the upkeep of America’s infrastructure gave it a C grade on Tuesday, up slightly from previous reports, largely due to investments made during former President Joe Biden’s administration.
The report from the American Society of Civil Engineers, which examined everything from roads and dams to drinking water and railroads, warns that federal funding must be sustained or increased to avoid further deterioration and escalating costs.
We have seen the investments start to pay off, but we still have a lot of work to do out there, said Darren Olson, chair of this years report. He said decrepit infrastructure from poor roads that damage cars to delayed flights to power outages that spoil groceries hurts people and the economy.
By investing in our infrastructure, were making our economy more efficient, were making it stronger (and) were making ourselves globally more competitive, he said.
Its especially critical that infrastructure can handle more extreme weather due to climate change, said Olson, noting hurricanes that devastated the East Coast and parts of Appalachia last year. The U.S. saw 27 weather disasters last year that cost at least $1 billion, second-most since 1980.
The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided $550 billion in new infrastructure investments, but is set to expire in 2026. Another $30 billion came from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, including for projects focused on clean energy and climate change, the engineering group said.
President Donald Trump’s administration has targeted some of Bidens green policies. Public parks improved to a C-minus from a D-plus, for example, thanks in part to significant investments over several years. Recently, however, the Trump administration moved to slash National Park Service staffing.
In 2021, the U.S. earned a C-minus overall. The investments made since then are just a fraction of the $9.1 trillion that the civil engineers group estimates is needed to bring all of the nations current infrastructure into a state of good repair.
Even if current federal infrastructure funding were maintained, there still would be a $3.7 trillion gap over a decade, according to the report.
The bill to upgrade and maintain the nations roughly 50,000 water utilities, for example, is $625 billion over the next two decades, according to the federal government. The grade for drinking water was C-minus, unchanged from four years ago.
Many communities already struggling to maintain old, outdated drinking water systems also face new requirements to replace lead service line s and reduce per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, collectively known as PFAS.
The bipartisan infrastructure bill helped complete or start a lot of really important projects, said Scott Berry, director of policy and governmental affairs at the US Water Alliance. But the gap has widened so much over the last couple of decades that a lot, lot more investment is going to be needed.
The bill also provided billions to help the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers upgrade inland waterways, which move roughly $150 billion in commerce every year, improving the grade from a D-plus to a C-minus.
Barges on the Mississippi River, for example, carry enormous amounts of coal, soybeans, corn and other raw materials to international markets. But critical infrastructure like locks and dams many built more than a half-century ago and requiring regular maintenance and repair is often invisible to the public, making it easy to neglect, said Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition.
And when big projects are funded, it too often comes in stages, he said. That forces projects to pause until more money is appropriated, driving up costs for materials and labor.
If we really want to make the taxpayer dollars stretch further, you have got to be able to bring a greater degree of predictability and reliability in how you fund these projects, he said.
The report’s focus on engineering and money misses the importance of adopting policies that could improve how people use and pay for infrastructure, according to Clifford Winston, a microeconomist in the Brookings Institutions economic studies program.
You fail to make the most efficient use of what you have, said Winston. For example, he noted that congestion pricing like that recently adopted by New York City charging people to drive in crowded areas places the burden on frequent users and can pressure people to drive less, reducing the need for new bridges, tunnels and repairs.
Roads remain in chronically poor shape, receiving a D-plus compared to a D in the last report, despite $591 billion in investments since 2021.
Two categories, rail and energy, received lower grades. Disasters like the derailment of a train carrying dangerous chemicals in East Palestine, Ohio, in 2023 lowered rails previous B mark to a B-minus.
The energy sector, stressed by surging demand from data centers and electric vehicles, got a D-plus, down from C-minus.
Engineers say problems in many sectors have festered for so long that the nation must figure out how to address the shortcomings now or pay for them when systems fail.
On Wednesday, a delegation of engineers will visit Washington to talk to lawmakers about the funding impacts and the importance of continuing that investment, said Olson, who said the needs are a bipartisan issue.
When we talk about it in ways of how better infrastructure saves the American family money, how better infrastructure supports economic growth, were really confident that … there is strong support, he said.
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Tammy Webber and Michael Phillis, Associated Press
The resignation of United States Postmaster General Louis DeJoy on Monday comes just two weeks after he announced plans to cut some 10,000 workers and billions of dollars from the agency as part of the government’s cost-cutting agenda. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has eyed privatizing the nation’s postal service. Trump’s move to give commerce secretary Howard Lutnick authority over the independent agency could be a first step in that direction.
DeJoy said in a statement that while the 250-year-old U.S. Postal Service (USPS) has established “a path toward financial sustainability” and instituted “enormous beneficial change to what had been an adrift and moribund organization,” more work remained.
Deputy Postmaster General Doug Tulino will temporarily head the postal service while the USPS Board of Governors looks for a permanent successor, although the USPS said there is no established timeline for DeJoys replacement.
Louis DeJoy [Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images]
The $78 billion-a-year agency has struggled in recent years as more Americans are replacing paper transactions with online services. However, critics say the U.S. Postal Service is a lot more efficient than is being portrayed, and privatizing it could cause a host of problems nationwide, including interrupting or delaying the crucial delivery of prescription drugs and checks, and threatening guaranteed mail-in election ballots, which have played an increasingly important role in recent presidential elections.
According to those critics, the Trump administration’s meddling in the USPS’s operations could make mail-in voting more difficult for the tens of millions of American voters who used it in the last election. Those most affected would be Americans living in rural areas who depend on the mail service. Trump has repeatedly said hed like to end the practice of mail-in voting.
Taking over the Postal Service just kind of opens up a whole Pandoras box of mischief, said Barbara Smith Warner, executive director of National Vote at Home Institute, a nonprofit which works to increase voters access to and confidence in mail voting. This is a way that the federal government could put a really big thumb on the scale and impact every states ability to run their own elections.”
DeJoy, who headed the U.S. Postal Service since June 2020, has been a controversial figure over the last five years. The former businessman and Republican donor led the agency through the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath, as well as two presidential elections that saw high turnout in mail-in ballots.
Critics have said his efforts to modernize the postal service by consolidating deliveries ultimately backfired, slowing down the mail even further. He also raised prices: A first-class stamp on a standard envelope is currently $0.73, up from $0.55 when DeJoy arrived at the agency, according to CNN.
A survey by the Pew Research Center last July, found the post office has a 72% approval rating, making it one of the most popular government agencies.
A painting of Donald Trump hanging with other presidential portraits at the Colorado state Capitol will be taken down after Trump claimed that his was purposefully distorted, according to a letter obtained by The Associated Press.
House Democrats said in a statement that the oil painting would be taken down at the request of Republican leaders in the Legislature. Colorado Republicans raised more than $10,000 through a GoFundMe account to commission the oil painting, which was unveiled in 2019.
Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen, a Republican, said that he requested for Trump’s portrait to be taken down and replaced by one that depicts his contemporary likeness.”
If the GOP wants to spend time and money on which portrait of Trump hangs in the Capitol, then thats up to them, the Democrats said.
The portrait was installed alongside other paintings of U.S. presidents. Before the installation, a prankster placed a picture of Russian President Vladimir Putin near the spot intended for Trump.
Initially, people objected to artist Sarah Boardman’s depiction of Trump as nonconfrontational and thoughtful” in the portrait, according to an interview with Colorado Times Recorder from the time.
But in a Sunday night post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said he would prefer no picture at all over the one that hangs in the Colorado Capitol. The Republican lauded a nearby portrait of former President Barack Obama also by Boardman saying he looks wonderful.
Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the state Capitol, put up by the Governor, along with all other Presidents, was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before, Trump wrote.
The portraits are not the purview of the Colorado governors office but the Colorado Building Advisory Committee. The ones up to and including President Jimmy Carter were donated as a collection. The others were donated by political parties or, more recently, paid for by outside fundraising.
The Legislature’s executive committee, made up of both Democratic and Republican leadership, signed a letter directing the removal of Trump’s portrait. Lundeen, the Republican senator who requested it, noted that Grover Cleveland, whose presidential terms were separated like Trump’s, had a portrait from his second term.
Boardman did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press. In interviews from the time with The Denver Post, Boardman said it was important that her depictions of both Obama and Trump looked apolitical.
There will always be dissent, so pleasing one group will always inflame another. I consider a neutrally thoughtful, and nonconfrontational, portrait allows everyone to reach their own conclusions in their own time, Boardman told the Colorado Times Recorder in 2019.
Trump’s Sunday night comments had prompted a steady stream of visitors to pose for photos with the painting before the announcement that it would be taken down.
Aaron Howe, visiting from Wyoming on Monday, stood in front of Trumps portrait, looking down at photos of the president on his phone, then back up at the portrait.
Honestly he looks a little chubby,” said Howe of the portrait, but better than I could do.
I don’t know anything about the artist, said Howe, who voted for Trump. It could be taken one way or the other.
Kaylee Williamson, an 18-year-old Trump supporter from Arkansas, got a photo with the portrait.
I think it looks like him. I guess he’s smoother than all the other ones, she said. I think it’s fine.
___
Bedayn is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
Jesse Bedayn, Associated Press/Report for America
eToro Group Ltd has announced that it plans to take itself public in an initial public offering. The company made the announcement in a press release today, in which it confirmed that it had filed its Form F-1 registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). However, there are still many unknowns about eToros IPO. Heres what we do knowand what still needs to be revealed.
What is eToro Group Ltd?
eToro Group Ltd is the name of the company that operates the eToro trading platform. Like other trading platforms, eToro allows investors to buy and sell a number of assets, including stocks and cryptocurrencies. But eToro is slightly different than your more traditional trading platforms like Charles Schwab or Vanguard.
Thats because eToro is what is known as a social trading platform. The phrase signifies a platform that allows its users to see and, if they choose to, mimic the trades of other investors on the platform. This allows more novice investors to piggyback on the expertise of other investors whose decisions they trust.
eToro Group was founded back in 2007. It is based in Tel Aviv, Israel with offices around the world.
eToro by the numbers
According to the companys Form F-1 registration statement, eToro has the following metrics as of December 31, 2024:
A global footprint that spreads across 75 countries.
Approximately 3.5 million Funded Accounts across those countries.
Net Contribution of $787 million (up 41% from $557 million in 2023).
Total Commission of $931 million (up 46% from $639 million in 2023).
Net income of $192 million (up 1,161% from $15 million in 2023).
Adjusted EBITDA of $304 million (up 159% from $187 million in 2023).
eToros F-1 also lists a number of its growth strategies, which the company says focuses on acquiring more users in existing markets, increasing its share of users assets, and moving into new markets. Among the risks the company cites are uncertain legal and regulatory landscapes as well as operating in a highly competitive industry.
When is eToros IPO?
Thats unknown. As of this writing, eToro has not divulged when its IPO may take place. In its press release about its intention to go public, eToro stated that the offering is subject to market conditions, and there can be no assurance as to whether or when the offering may be completed.
What is eToros stock ticker?
eToros stock ticker will be ETOR.
What market will ETOR trade on?
eToro shares will trade on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.
What is the IPO share price of ETOR?
That is unknown. eToro says that the price range for the proposed offering have not yet been determined.
How many ETOR shares are available in its IPO?
That, too, is unknown. The company says that the number of shares it plans to offer has also not yet been determined.
How much will eToro raise in its IPO?
That is something else we do not know at this time. Until eToro announces the number of shares it will offer and the offering price, it cannot be known how much the company plans to raise in its IPO.
The Unification Church in Japan was ordered dissolved by a court Tuesday after a government request spurred by the investigation into the 2022 assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.The South Korea-based church said it was considering an immediate appeal of the Tokyo District Court’s revocation of its legal status, which would take away its tax-exempt privilege and require liquidation of its assets.The order followed a request by Japan’s Education Ministry in 2023 to dissolve the influential South Korea-based sect, citing manipulative fundraising and recruitment tactics that sowed fear among followers and harmed their families.In the ruling, the court said the church’s problems were extensive and continuous, and a dissolution order is necessary because it is not likely it could voluntarily reform, according to NHK television.“We believe our claims were accepted,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters, adding the government will continue efforts to support victims of the church.The Japanese branch of the church had criticized the request as a serious threat to religious freedom and the human rights of its followers.The church called the court order regrettable and unjust and said in a statement the court’s decision was based on “a wrong legal interpretation and absolutely unacceptable.”Tomihiro Tanaka, president of the church’s Japanese branch, accused the government of “fabricating damages.” The church is “not a malicious group that should be dissoloved,” he told a news conference on Tuesday.The investigation into Abe’s assassination revealed links over decades between the church and Japan’s governing Liberal Democratic Party. The church obtained legal status as a religious organization in Japan in the 1960s during an anti-communist movement supported by Abe’s grandfather, former Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi.The man accused of killing Abe resented the church and blamed it for his family’s financial troubles.The church, which officially calls itself the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, is the first religious group subject to a revocation order based on violations of Japan’s civil code. Two earlier case involved criminal charges the Aum Shinrikyo doomsday cult, which carried out a sarin nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway system, and Myokakuji group, whose executives were convicted of fraud.To seek the church’s dissolution, the Education Ministry had submitted 5,000 documents and pieces of evidence to the court, based on interviews with more than 170 people.The church tried to steer its followers’ decision-making, using manipulative tactics, making them buy expensive goods and donate beyond their financial ability and causing fear and harm to them and their families, seriously deviating from the law on religious groups, officials and experts say.The Agency for Cultural Affairs said the settlements reached in or outside court exceeded 20 billion yen ($132 million) and involved more than 1,500 people.Lawyers representing those seeking damages from the church welcomed the court decision as a major first step toward redress.“We must pursue our effort to achieve redress and to prevent future problems,” head lawyer Susumu Murakoshi told reporters, demanding the church accept the dissolution order and offer an apology and compensation to all victims.The church was founded in Seoul in 1954 by the late Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the self-proclaimed messiah who preached new interpretations of the Bible and conservative, family-oriented value systems.Nicknamed the “Moonies,” after its founder, the church developed relations with conservative world leaders including U.S. President Donald Trump, as well as his predecessors Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.The church faced accusations in the 1970s and 1980s of using devious recruitment tactics and brainwashing adherents into turning over huge portions of their salaries to Moon. In Japan, the group has faced lawsuits for offering “spiritual merchandise” that allegedly caused members to buy expensive art and jewelry or sell their real estate to raise donations for the church.The church has acknowledged excessive donations but says the problem has lessened since the group stepped up compliance in 2009.Experts say Japanese followers are asked to pay for sins committed by their ancestors during Japan’s 1910-1945 colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula, and that the majority of the church’s worldwide funding comes from Japan.
Mari Yamaguchi, Associated Press
Tomorrow, NPRs CEO Katherine Maher goes before a DOGE congressional subcommittee to defend the public media outlets case for federal funding. Maher gives a preview to her testimony, sharing how funding cuts would impact Americans broad access to crucial news and information, particularly in rural and local areas. Maher also reveals NPRs strategy for reengaging with their audience, how the organization can better frame its identity as an outlet for all Americans, and more.
This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by the former editor-in-chief of Fast Company Bob Safian. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode.
When you joined NPR last year, the organization faced plenty of business challenges: audience engagement, business model. Since then, the environment just got a whole lot more fraught. There was a high profile criticism about newsroom bias last spring from an editor on the staff. That sounds almost quaint right now though. You’ve been called to testify on Capitol Hill tomorrow to speak before the DOGE subcommittee in a hearing titled “Anti-American Airwaves,” alongside the head of PBS. What do you expect from that? What should we all expect? How do you prepare for that?
Honestly, I view it as an opportunity. I view it as an opportunity to go and talk about all the great work that NPR does, but also the great work that our stations do. I think that that’s something that often gets lost in the conversation about public radio is the overall percentage of funds that go directly to local stations.
The importance of the local station network, and the fact that when people are listening to public radio, they are not listening to us broadcasting from D.C., they’re listening to their local station, which is probably, chances are, attached to a local university.
Or it’s a community nonprofit, and it’s making the choices about what folks hear on the air. It probably has some call-in public affairs show where you can talk about what’s going on that matters to you as a resident of your town, your city, et cetera.
So, just really getting back to that, that feels like such an important part of what I’m there to do.
And, how do you prepare? I mean, you prepare by making sure you know what you’re there to say, and you prepare by making sure you know what it is that you want to be able to communicate about the value of the work, and you prepare by a lot of practice. It’s like trying to go to Carnegie Hall. It’s a lot of practice.
I was talking to a friend about doing this interview. He was telling me a story about talking to a colleague who’s a MAGA republican, and he mentioned an episode, he said, “Oh, I’ll send you this episode of This American Life.” And they were like, “Oh, it’s on NPR. Oh, no.” It almost sounds like there are people who are listening to NPR stations that maybe don’t realize they’re NPR stations, or don’t connect it to this conversation about, I don’t know, it being anti-American.
I really want to rebuff this idea that in any way that public radio is anti-American. For starters, we are a uniquely American model. We are a public-private partnership. For every single federal dollar we get, local stations raise an additional seven. They rely on their communities, they rely on local businesses. NPR is 25% of what you hear on public radio airwaves on average.
In fact, 75% of stations programming is either other shows that they purchase or local shows that they produce. And, This American Life is a great example. We love This American Life. I heard Glass used to work at NPR. But it’s not an NPR program. It is a public radio program. It’s part of the diverse texture of what is actually available.
There’s 1,300 public radio stations across the country. They represent their local communities in ways that are hyper unique, whether we’re talking about high school basketball, the price of sorghum wheat.
It’s easy to forget about if you’re just listening to the radio in perhaps New York or a D.C., is that all of this is very much in tune with whatever’s going on in American lives at any particular point in time in this enormous nation of ours.
NPR isn’t a federal agency, as you have said. You get money from lots of different places. But, the subtext of this DOGE hearing is the prospect of losing federal funding or some important part of it. What would the practical impact of losing that funding be? I can imagine you’ve been preparing for this possibility even well before this hearing came up.
We have to be prepared for all scenarios all the time. The thing that I would want everyone to know about federal funding is the impact that loss of federal funding would have on local stations.
121.5 million goes to public radio on an annual basis, it’s a lot of money, I want to acknowledge that. And it’s also not a ton of money relative to the total size of the American public budget, right, the federal budget, a 100 million of that goes direct to local stations.
And, disproportionately, the percentage of those funds goes to support stations that serve rural communities, that serve less affluent communities, that serve communities with really large areas of service, where the infrastructure investment in making sure that broadcast airwaves reach the country is significant.
I think about my colleagues in Eastern Kentucky who have to put repeaters and hollers in order for Eastern Kentuckians to be able to hear those radio broadcasts. The loss of federal funding would directly impact the ability for stations to provide coverage, which currently 99.7% of the nation has access to airwaves.
It would directly affect our ability to be part of the emergency broadcast system, and it would directly affect the ability of local stations to be able to continue to support commission and purchase programming about their communities.
That’s where the harm would be. The harm would be for the local stations, and that’s what we’re trying to avoid, because it’s very easy, again, in D.C. to forget that we’ve lost a third of newspapers across the country in the last 20 years.
One fifth of Americans live in a news desert. Public radio, public broadcasting, your local newsroom is often the only news that folks have that actually cares about their community and covers the issues that lsteners care about.
You’re for all Americans, but you had an editor at NPR say, “No, the news has been biased.” The way you talk about COVID, or the Mueller report, or whatever. There is this impression from certain people in America that NPR is not for all Americans, and obviously, that’s what the hearing’s about tomorrow.
Yeah. And that’s one of the reasons that I’m here: I believe very deeply that that is our objective and our responsibility. I had someone come up to me and they said, “I’m a conservative. I grew up on NPR. I love NPR. And I’m just not sure it’s a home for me right now.”
And that struck me. That cut me to the core. I want it to be a home for everyone. I want people to feel as though it’s their home for curiosity, it’s their home for understanding the world. Certainly, that’s the role it played in my life as a young person.
So, for starters, we have really reoriented the organization around audience needs. Broadcast radio is not the greatest way to understand audience needs because we just don’t have that much information about how people are listening.
But as we have more digital data around people who are coming to our websites, or listening to our podcasts, or even just streaming from our app, those linear radio experiences, it starts to be able to help us understand how to better serve audiences.
In the past, the only audience research that we did was with people with college degrees, but only 35% of Americans have a college degree, which meant that we were not listening to the needs of all Americans. How do you run a media organization and say, “65% of my potential audience, I’m not going to ask them what they want.” So we’re doing that, which I think makes a really big difference.
The thing that we’ve identified in terms of our audiences is that curiosity is the most common characteristic. And the great news is that curiosity is not a partisan trait. Curiosity exists in every demographic, every age group, every political persuasion. And so, that’s a great place for us to hone in on our curiosity.
What’s going on in the world? How do we explain it? How do we give people the information to go a little bit deeper, give them that context that helps them situate themselves? And I think it’s time for us to reintroduce ourselves as if this is what we’re here to do, and yes, we’re here to do it for everyone.
How’s the mood and morale on your team these days?
They’re here to go to work. I just walked through the newsroom to get here to the studio, and everyone’s heads down, they’re working, they’re reporting, they’re producing, they’re getting ready to file their story for All Things Considered, or they’re getting ready for whatever band is coming in for Tiny Desk next.
I think that the overall environment right now is that people really want to do the work. There’s a lot of news in the world today, whether we’re thinking about the transformative administration, whether we’re thinking about questions of space exploration.
I think people feel as though, of course, this is a different moment in time, and it is really important that we show up and are responsive to people’s questions about the value of our work.
I come back to the fact that when we talk about efficiency, public radio is remarkably efficient. The cost per public media per American is $1.60. It’s basically when you go to check out at CVS and you’re asked to round up to a good cause, that’s us.
That’s what we cost. Public radio costs less than $1.60, the public media as a whole is $1.60 per American per year. As I said, for every dollar of federal funding, $7 of private funding.
We’ve got a good story to tell, and 75% of Americans want to see public media maintain or increase its current funding levels. So, again, I think that’s the story we’re here to tell.
A private European aerospace company scrubbed its attempt on Monday to launch the first test flight of its orbital launch vehicle from Norway.Unfavorable winds meant that the Spectrum rocket couldn’t be launched from the island of Andya in northern Norway, Munich-based Isar Aerospace said.The launch is subject to various factors, including weather and safety. The company said it could also conduct the test flight later in the week. Another date hasn’t yet been set.The 28-meter (91-foot) Spectrum is a two-stage launch vehicle designed for small and medium-size satellites.The company has largely ruled out the possibility of the rocket reaching orbit on its first complete flight, saying that it would consider a 30-second flight a success. Isar Aerospace aims to collect as much data and experience as possible on the first integrated test of all the systems on its in-house-developed launch vehicle.The startup, which says it has raised more than 400 million euros ($435 million) in capital, hopes to build up to 40 launch vehicles per year in the future at a plant outside of Munich. The launch vehicles are all to be used for putting satellites into orbit.Isar Aerospace is separate from the European Space Agency, or ESA, which is funded by its 23 member states.ESA has been launching rockets and satellites into orbit for years, but mainly from French Guianaan overseas department of France in South Americaand from Cape Canaveral in Florida.
Described as the worst U.S. security breach in a generation, the leak is an unprecedented failure for the White House. For several days, a journalist from The Atlantic had unrestricted access to a private Signal group chat involving the highest levels of governmentdiscussing, in real time, an imminent U.S. military strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen. And no one in the administration had a clue.
Investigations are already underway to determine how such a blunder could happen. But the core issue requires no deep forensic analysis: the failure was human.
According to reports, The Atlantics Jeffrey Goldberg was mistakenly added to a Signal chat that included the presidents national security adviser and the secretary of defenseapparently because National Security Adviser Michael Waltz misidentified Goldberg (whose display name was simply J.G.) as a government official.
Its a pretty egregious failing, says Robert Pritchard, a former deputy head of the U.K.s Cyber Security Operations Center. While apps like Signal or WhatsApp offer strong encryption and are widely used for coordination, Pritchard notes that such tools are not appropriate for sensitive or classified communicationnot because the apps themselves are insecure, but because the devices and, crucially, the users are.
Or, to put it more bluntly: the problem is the people using them.
Signal is no substitute for good operational security, says Alan Woodward, a cybersecurity professor at the University of Surrey. Invite someone to your chat group, and of course they can read everything.
The potential fallout is enormous. It may sound extreme, but this is the sort of failure that could get people killed, warns Woodward. Its fortunate the journalist chose not to share all the information and waited until after the relevant events unfolded.”
Beyond the immediate security risks, the episode reveals a deeper institutional problem: the lack of transparency and proper recordkeeping when government business is conducted on third-party messaging apps with disappearing messages. Even more troubling to some experts is the likelihood of it happening again. Human mistakes happenand they will continue to happen, says Lukasz Olejnik, an independent cybersecurity consultant and visiting senior research fellow at Kings College London. And policies will be violated.
What comes next is unclear. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has publicly claimed no war or attack plans were shared in the chatsomething The Atlantic‘s Goldberg disputes, calling the statement a lie.
I would imagine there is a big clean-up operation ongoing right now, says Pritchard, the former Cyber Security Operations Center deputy. “All those devices need to be wiped, including any secondary devices that have the same Signal account accessible on them, and there need to be investigations into what else has gone on on Signal.”
But cleanup may be to little, too late. After all, the leaked chats are a goldmine for adversaries. Among the damage is a leak of fragments of information potentially allowing people to compose a psychological profile of U.S. leaders, says Kings College London’s Olejnikfrom their emoji use to the vice presidents candid feelings about Donald Trump.
In the end, this wasnt a failure of technologyit was a failure of judgment. And it may take more than a wiped device to repair the damage.
South Korea’s Hyundai Steel will invest $5.8 billion along with Hyundai Motor Group to build a steel plant in the U.S. state of Louisiana with an annual capacity of 2.7 million tonnes, the company said in a regulatory filing on Tuesday.
Hyundai Steel shares initially jumped more than 5% on the news but reversed early gains to end 7% lower as U.S. President Donald Trump praised the company’s plan.
Hyundai Steel’s proposed new U.S. steel plant is part of Hyundai Motor Group’s plan to invest $21 billion in the United States, which was announced by the South Korean company’s chairman with Trump at the White House on Monday.
The move is seen as an effort by Hyundai to shield itself from U.S. tariffs on steel and cars, but it is not clear whether this will help secure exemptions for Hyundai and South Korea.
Trump has threatened to impose reciprocal tariffs on numerous countries on April 2, potentially targeting South Korea that has a large trade surplus with the United States.
Shares of Hyundai Motor and affiliate Kia Corp, which are expected to source steel from the proposed factory, rallied. Hyundai Motor shares ended up 3.3% after rising as much as 7.5% to their highest since October 2024. Kia closed up 2.1%.
Analysts have, however, expressed concerns about how Hyundai Steel, which has billions of dollars in debt, would fund the construction of the factory. There are also execution risks associated with the new technology of using electric furnaces to produce automotive steel, they said.
“It is not clear whether the investment will benefit Hyundai Steel in the future,” said Lee Tae-hwan, an analyst at Daishin Securities.
Hyundai Steel said it will cover half the costs, with the remainder invested by its parent company and other investors.
The factory, which will make automotive steel, will be constructed from 2026 to 2029, the company said.
Hyundai Steel is an affiliate of automakers Hyundai Motor and Kia Motors which have factories in the United States.
Hyunjoo Jin and Jihoon Lee, Reuters
