�����oE����)�dh� ��)

�����oE����)�dh� ��)HOUSTON, Dec. 03, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Intuitive Machines, Inc. (Nasdaq: LUNR, LUNRW) ("Intuitive Machines” or the "Company”), a leading space exploration, infrastructure, and services company, announced today that it has commenced an underwritten public offering of $65.0 million of shares of its Class A common stock ("Class A Common Stock”) (the "Offering”). The Company and a selling stockholder intend to grant the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional $8,872,500 and $877,500 of shares of Class A Common Stock from the Company and such selling stockholder, respectively. The Offering is subject to market and other conditions, and there can be no assurance as to whether or when the Offering may be completed, or as to the actual size or terms of the Offering. Additionally, on December 2, 2024, the Company entered into an agreement with Boryung Corporation (together with its affiliates, "Boryung”), an accredited investor, pursuant to which the Company will sell to Boryung $10.0 million of shares of Class A Common Stock in a concurrent private placement (the "Private Placement”) at a purchase price per share equal to the public offering price per share in the Offering. The offer and sale of the Company's Class A Common Stock pursuant to the Private Placement will be made in reliance upon the exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (the "Securities Act”) provided by Section 4(a)(2) thereunder. The Private Placement is contingent upon the consummation of the Offering and the satisfaction of certain other customary closing conditions. The consummation of the Offering is not contingent on the consummation of the Private Placement. The Company intends to use the net proceeds it receives from the Offering and the Private Placement, together with its existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balance, to acquire an equivalent number of newly-issued common units of Intuitive Machines, LLC ("Intuitive Machines OpCo”) from Intuitive Machines OpCo, which Intuitive Machines OpCo will in turn use for general corporate purposes, including operations, research and development and potential mergers and acquisitions. In the event the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares, the Company will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of any shares of Class A Common Stock being sold by the selling stockholder. Intuitive Machines will bear the costs associated with the sale of such shares, other than the underwriting discounts and commissions payable by the selling stockholder. BofA Securities, Cantor, Barclays and Stifel are acting as the lead joint book-running managers for the Offering. Roth Capital Partners is acting as a book-running manager for the Offering. The offer and sale of the securities pursuant to the Offering is being made pursuant to an effective shelf registration statement that was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC”) and became effective on April 3, 2024. The Offering will be made only by means of a prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus forming part of the effective registration statement relating to these securities. A copy of the prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus relating to these securities may be obtained, when available, from the website of the SEC at www.sec.gov. Alternatively, copies of the prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus may be obtained, when available, from BofA Securities, NC1-022-02-25, 201 North Tryon Street, Charlotte, NC 28255-0001, Attention: Prospectus Department, or by email at [email protected] ; Cantor, 110 East 59th St., 6th Floor, New York, NY 10022, Attention: Capital Markets, or by email at [email protected] ; Barclays, c/o Broadridge Financial Solutions, 1155 Long Island Avenue, Edgewood, NY 11717, by telephone at (888) 603-5847 or by email at [email protected] ; or Stifel, One Montgomery Street, Suite 3700, San Francisco, California 94104, Attention: Syndicate, by telephone at (415) 364-2720 or by email at [email protected] . The securities to be offered and sold in the Private Placement have not been registered under the Securities Act or any state's securities laws. Accordingly, the securities may not be offered or sold in the United States, except pursuant to an effective registration statement or an applicable exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act. The prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus related to the Offering are not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities in connection with the Private Placement. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation, or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction. About Intuitive Machines Intuitive Machines is a diversified space exploration, infrastructure, and services company focused on fundamentally disrupting lunar access economics. In 2024, Intuitive Machines successfully landed the Company's Nova-C class lunar lander, Odysseus, on the Moon, returning the United States to the lunar surface for the first time since 1972. The Company's products and services are offered through its four in-space business units: Lunar Access Services, Orbital Services, Lunar Data Services, and Space Products and Infrastructure. For more information, please visit intuitivemachines.com. Forward-Looking Statements This press release includes "forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. These statements that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward looking. These forward-looking statements generally are identified by words such as "anticipate,” "believe,” "continue,” "could,” "estimate,” "expect,” "intend,” "may,” "might,” "plan,” "possible,” "potential,” "predict,” "project,” "should,” "strive,” "would,” "strategy,” "outlook,” the negative of these words or other similar expressions, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. These forward-looking statements include but are not limited to statements regarding: our anticipated use of net proceeds from the Offering and the Private Placement; the terms and size of the Offering and the timing and manner of the Offering; the satisfaction of closing conditions related to the Private Placement; our expectations and plans relating to our lunar missions, including the expected timing of launch and our progress and preparation thereof; our expectations with respect to, among other things, demand for our product portfolio, our submission of bids for contracts; our expectations regarding revenue for government contracts awarded to us; our operations, our financial performance and our industry; our business strategy, business plan, and plans to drive long-term sustainable shareholder value; and our expectations on revenue and cash generation. These forward-looking statements reflect the Company's predictions, projections, or expectations based upon currently available information and data. Our actual results, performance or achievements may differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. The following important factors and uncertainties, among others, could cause actual outcomes or results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements in this press release: our reliance upon the efforts of our key personnel and board of directors to be successful; our limited operating history; our failure to manage our growth effectively and failure to win new contracts; competition from existing or new companies; unsatisfactory safety performance of our spaceflight systems or security incidents at our facilities; failure of the market for commercial spaceflight to achieve the growth potential we expect; any delayed launches, launch failures, failure of our satellites or lunar landers to reach their planned orbital locations, significant increases in the costs related to launches of satellites and lunar landers, and insufficient capacity available from satellite and lunar lander launch providers; our customer concentration; our reliance on a single launch service provider; risks associated with commercial spaceflight, including any accident on launch or during the journey into space; risks associated with the handling, production and disposition of potentially explosive and ignitable energetic materials and other dangerous chemicals in our operations; our reliance on a limited number of suppliers for certain materials and supplied components; failure of our products to operate in the expected manner or defects in our sub-systems; counterparty risks on contracts entered into with our customers and failure of our prime contractors to maintain their relationships with their counterparties and fulfill their contractual obligations; failure to successfully defend protest from other bidders for government contracts; failure to comply with various laws and regulations relating to various aspects of our business and any changes in the funding levels of various governmental entities with which we do business; our failure to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, and unpatented know how; our failure to comply with the terms of third-party open source software our systems utilize; our ability to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, and to address and remediate material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting; the U.S. government's budget deficit and the national debt, as well as any inability of the U.S. government to complete its budget process for any government fiscal year, and our dependence on U.S. government contracts and funding by the government for the government contracts; our failure to comply with U.S. export and import control laws and regulations and U.S. economic sanctions and trade control laws and regulations; uncertain global macro-economic and political conditions (including as a result of a failure to raise the "debt ceiling”) and rising inflation; our history of losses and failure to achieve profitability in the future or failure of our business to generate sufficient funds to continue operations; the cost and potential outcomes of potential future litigation; our public securities' potential liquidity and trading; the sufficiency and anticipated use of our existing capital resources to fund our future operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements and needs for additional financing, including the Offering and the Private Placement; and other public filings and press releases other factors detailed under the section titled Part I, Item 1A. "Risk Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023 filed with the SEC, the section titled Part I, Item 2. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the section titled Part II. Item 1A. "Risk Factors” in our most recently filed Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, our Current Reports on Form 8-K and in our subsequent filings with the SEC, which are accessible on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. These forward-looking statements are based on information available as of the date of this press release and current expectations, forecasts, and assumptions, and involve a number of judgments, risks, and uncertainties. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date, and we do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date they were made, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws. Contacts For investor inquiries: [email protected] For media inquiries: [email protected] This press release was published by a CLEAR® Verified individual.Woman majority is new norm for Nevada Legislature. So now what?

The rise of renewable energy – paired with smart technology – offers an extraordinary opportunity to empower communities, enhance sustainability and reduce costs, writes Paul Budde . BACK IN 2006, I established the Smart Grid Australia Association . Here, we brought together organisations involved in the development of smart energy, working collaboratively to build smarter communities. Our major success was the government’s decision in 2010 to launch a $100 million Smart City Smart Grid pilot in the Newcastle area. Unfortunately, this initiative was immediately cancelled when the Coalition Government came to power in 2013. For the next ten years, energy policies remained in limbo under that government. On the positive side, the pilot propelled Newcastle to become one of the leading smart cities in Australia. But as is often the case - for such smart grid smart city projects on a larger scale - many more ducks need to be aligned to establish real, large-scale commercial projects. With the latest developments in smart grids, smart meters, and batteries, we are now getting closer to realising the benefits of such complex systems. As someone who has written extensively about the transformative power of smart grids and localised energy systems, I believe we are standing at a pivotal moment in energy innovation. The rise of renewable energy – paired with smart technology – offers an extraordinary opportunity to empower communities, enhance sustainability and reduce costs. However, as I’ve observed in both Australia and internationally, achieving this vision requires not only technological solutions but also robust regulatory frameworks to protect consumers and foster fair competition. I was triggered to revisit these issues after reading this recent ABC article . The Netherlands: Europe’s digital powerhouse The Netherlands has become a global juggernaut in terms of broadband, AI and cybersecurity. A Smarter, Cleaner Future Smart grids have the potential to revolutionise how we produce, store, and consume electricity. These systems enable real-time communication between utilities and consumers — optimising energy distribution and reducing waste. Neighbourhood energy systems take this concept further by allowing communities to manage energy collectively, leveraging shared infrastructure — such as community batteries. I’ve highlighted examples in the past, such as Australia’s Hornsdale Power Reserve (2017), which shows how large-scale battery storage can stabilise the grid and support renewable energy integration. But even more exciting is the potential for neighbourhood-level systems where shared batteries or virtual power plants could provide resilience and cost savings. Imagine a street or suburb pooling solar energy and storage to weather peak demand or blackouts — a vision that is becoming increasingly achievable. Learning from International examples Over the years, I’ve also drawn attention to international models that inspire us to think bigger. In 2016, I wrote about blockchain opportunities , a prime example here is the Kitakyushu Smart Community project in Japan. This initiative integrates renewable energy, storage, and demand-response systems to create a sustainable urban energy model. Similarly, the Brooklyn Microgrid Project in the United States demonstrates the power of decentralisation, where residents generate, store, and trade energy locally using blockchain technology. These examples prove that the localised energy systems we advocated for more than a decade ago here in Australia are not only viable but also scalable. Newcastle: Leading the way for Australian smart cities Newcastle's transformation into one of Australia's leading smart cities should be an inspiration for others to follow suit. Challenges and the need for regulation Thanks to party politics, Australia suffers from a knowledge and experience gap of more than a decade — and we must catch up to avoid repeating the mistakes highlighted in the ABC article. While the potential is immense, I’ve often warned that regulatory gaps could undermine these advancements. The control of energy data by metering companies – as seen in Australia – creates monopolistic "walled gardens", restricting access to critical information and stifling competition. Consumers are left unable to fully leverage their energy systems — and third-party innovators are shut out. Smart energy can deliver lower costs, but we need to ensure those benefits flow to the consumers. This is why I strongly advocate for transparent regulations that prioritise consumer rights to data access. Without these safeguards, the energy transition risks becoming more expensive and less equitable. I’ve seen how these challenges play out globally, and it’s clear that without intervention, the benefits of smart grids and localised systems could remain out of reach for many. The role of ISP-like resellers in energy innovation In my earlier work, I’ve drawn parallels between energy systems and the internet. Just as internet service providers (ISPs) aggregate bandwidth to serve multiple customers, energy resellers could combine distributed energy resources like solar panels and batteries to create neighbourhood-scale virtual power plants. This model could stabilise local grids, reduce reliance on centralised power plants, and democratise access to renewable energy benefits. I’ve long argued that this ISP-like approach can lower barriers for communities that lack resources for individual systems. By coordinating energy generation and consumption at the local level, such systems could unlock significant savings while enhancing grid reliability. Unlocking the path toward a sustainable energy future Grid flexibility measures and distributed energy resources are key elements for creating a more sustainable and reliable energy system. My Vision for the Future Reflecting on the lessons from Australia and international examples, I firmly believe that we can pick up where we left off in 2013 and accelerate progress based on new knowledge and global developments. We can and should build a smarter, cleaner, and more equitable energy future. Policymakers must step up to address the regulatory void in smart meter markets and ensure fair access to energy data. This is not just about technology — it’s about empowering individuals and communities to take control of their energy destiny. The success of projects like Kitakyushu and Brooklyn shows us what is possible when innovation meets thoughtful regulation. I believe we can apply these principles to create resilient neighbourhood energy systems that not only reduce costs but also enhance sustainability. By embracing these ideas, we can ensure that the energy transition benefits everyone, not just a select few. This is the future I’ve envisioned and championed throughout my work, and I remain committed to seeing it realised. Paul Budde is an Independent Australia columnist and managing director of Paul Budde Consulting , an independent telecommunications research and consultancy organisation. You can follow Paul on Twitter @PaulBudde . This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA. BUSINESS CONSUMERS TECHNOLOGY SMART GRID smart meters renewable energy technology batteries large scale battery Paul Budde Hornsdale Power Reserve Kitakyushu Smart Community Brooklyn Microgrid Project Share ArticleBGBA-445 is under clinical development by BeiGene and currently in Phase II for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. According to GlobalData, Phase II drugs for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer have a 38% phase transition success rate (PTSR) indication benchmark for progressing into Phase III. GlobalData tracks drug-specific phase transition and likelihood of approval scores, in addition to indication benchmarks based off 18 years of historical drug development data. Attributes of the drug, company and its clinical trials play a fundamental role in drug-specific PTSR and likelihood of approval. BGBA-445 overview BGBA-445 is under development for the treatment of advanced malignancies, metastatic solid tumors, recurrent head and neck cancer squamous cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, squamous non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic urothelial carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), bladder cancer and melanoma. The drug candidate is administered through intravenous route. It acts by targeting OX40 (CD134) receptor. BeiGene overview BeiGene is a biotechnology company. It specializes in the development and commercialization of immuno-oncology medicines to treat cancers. The company offers Zanubrutinib, a small molecule inhibitor to treat various blood cancers and Sonrotoclax, a small molecule Bcl-2 inhibitor for treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia. BeiGene also provides Tislelizumab (BGB-A317), a monoclonal antibody targeting solid tumors and hematologic cancer; and Pamiparib (BGB-290) against solid tumor malignancies. The company has operations in the US, Australia, Germany, Spain, Canada, Switzerland and Italy. BeiGene is headquartered in the Cayman Islands. For a complete picture of BGBA-445’s drug-specific PTSR and LoA scores, This content was updated on 12 April 2024 From Blending expert knowledge with cutting-edge technology, GlobalData’s unrivalled proprietary data will enable you to decode what’s happening in your market. You can make better informed decisions and gain a future-proof advantage over your competitors. , the leading provider of industry intelligence, provided the underlying data, research, and analysis used to produce this article. GlobalData’s Likelihood of Approval analytics tool dynamically assesses and predicts how likely a drug will move to the next stage in clinical development (PTSR), as well as how likely the drug will be approved (LoA). This is based on a combination of machine learning and a proprietary algorithm to process data points from various databases found on GlobalData’s .

Coastal Carolina 48, Georgia St. 27Kelly Loeffler Expected As Trump's Agricultural Secretary Pick—After Spending Millions To Help Him Get Elected

The Union Government’s amendment to the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, on Saturday, has sparked a heated debate, with political leaders voicing strong opposition. The amendment, introduced after recommendations from the Election Commission of India (ECI), restricts the public’s access to documents such as CCTV footage and other election materials unless specifically listed by the ECI. Congress and other opposition parties have expressed strong opposition, with some warning of legal challenges to the amendment. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge called the amendment “another assault in [the Modi government’s] systematic conspiracy to destroy the institutional integrity of the Election Commission of India”. He said, “Modi Govt’s calibrated erosion of ECI’s integrity is a frontal attack on the Constitution and Democracy and we will take every step to safeguard them.” Kharge also highlighted the government’s previous actions, such as removing the Chief Justice of India from the panel responsible for appointing Election Commissioners, as part of an allegedly coordinated assault on the integrity of the ECI. He accused the government of resorting to stonewall electoral information, even after a high court order. He further added, “Every time the Congress party wrote to the ECI, regarding specific poll irregularities such as voter deletions and lack of transparency in EVMs, the ECI has responded in a condescending tone and chosen not to even acknowledge certain serious complaints. This again proves that the ECI, even though a quasi-judicial body, is not behaving independently.” The Communist Party of India (CPI) expressed concerns about the impact of the amendment on electoral integrity. CPI lader D Raja argued, “This government deosn’t believe in a democratic way of functioning. Whenever certain changes are proposed, ECI used to have an all-political-parties meeting and place the proposals. Now they think parties can be taken for granted. Without political parties, what is the electoral system?” He added that India is a multi-party democracy, and political parties are the real players in our electoral politics. He condemned the government’s approach, calling it ‘unilateral’ and a move that would ‘destroy the electoral system’ and could harm the fairness of elections. He added, “Without having a proper discussion with political parties and without evolving a consensus, such unilateral decisions will destroy the electoral system, and we will not be able to have free and fair elections.” The Communist Party of India (Marxist) or the CPI(M)’s Politbureau also issued a statement strongly objecting to the proposed amendments. The CPI(M) demanded the “immediate withdrawal of the proposed amendments”. The party’s statement argued, “The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) expresses its strong objection to the Modi government’s move to amend the Conduct of Election Rules to restrict the access of political parties and candidates to electronic records, including video and other digital trails, which were initially introduced by the Election Commission in consultation with political parties to ensure greater transparency.” The CPI(M) further noted that the amendment was made without adequate consultation with political parties, calling it “contrary to the established precedents over the years”. The party highlighted the importance of video records in exposing election malpractices, referencing incidents in Tripura where video evidence led to repolls during the Lok Sabha Elections. The party stated, “In this era, where technology is an integral part of the electoral process, the government’s move represents a retrograde step.” Manoj Kaka, spokesperson of the Samajwadi Party (SP), echoed concerns about the amendment’s impact on electoral transparency. Kaka emphasised that the amendment would undermine the fairness of elections, saying, “We want the Election Commission and all procedures to be fair, transparent, and unbiased—that is when elections will have a stronger relevance.” He also pointed to the use of EVMs in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, alleging that “over 5.38 Lakh votes were not counted in the final tally”, and reiterated the party’s demand for a return to paper ballots. Kaka also strongly criticised the BJP for its alleged actions against Dalits and backward classes. He stated, “The BJP is the largest dictatorship of the era that has insulted Babasaheb and Dalits. A chief minister like Akhilesh Yadav’s house is washed because he comes from a backward class. Babasaheb is insulted because he comes from a backward class.” In contrast to the widespread opposition, Gopal Agarwal, spokesperson of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), defended the amendment, emphasising that it is just an “enabling provision where the Election Commission will come out with a list of documents that can be accessed by the public”. Agarwal dismissed Opposition claims, stating, “The way some of the opposition parties try to derail the process of election and create confusion in the mind of the public saying the election process is compromised - this is not good for the democracy.” The BJP leader reassured that the Election Commission remains an independent body with the responsibility to oversee elections. He added, “Every institution, particularly democratic institutions like the Election Commission, the judiciary, etc, are independent bodies and they are the watchdogs of our democratic ecosystem. Apprehending everything to the central government and attaching intentions to it is not good.” He added, “It is for the Election Commission to decide. Whatever the Election Commission, which is responsible for holding elections, requires for the way forward on the electoral reforms, the central government does it.” Agarwal assured that “all candidates have access to all the documents, and “legal process of going to courts, etc is open for the public”. He concluded, “There is nothing compromising on the transparency of this order.” The Union government amended the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, restricting public access to certain election materials such as CCTV footage, in response to recommendations from the Election Commission of India (ECI). The amendment to Rule 93(2)(a) narrows the scope of election documents available for public inspection, limiting access only to those specifically listed in the rules. This change follows a case where the Punjab and Haryana high court ordered the ECI to provide certain election materials to a lawyer, leading the ECI to propose the amendment to avoid similar requests in the future. Critics argue that the amendment undermines transparency, as it could prevent citizens from accessing key election records like Form 17C and CCTV footage, without a court order. The ECI will release a list of election materials that can be accessed.Google's recent announcement of the arrival of Willow , a quantum chip that has reduced the error tendencies of some of its predecessors, is a milestone in the effort to bring quantum computing into the real world, and in the years ahead, it could change the way we think about the risk in cryptocurrencies. > Philadelphia news 24/7: Watch NBC10 free wherever you are Willow's speed is almost incomprehensible — according to Google , it's able to perform a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today's fastest supercomputers 10 septillion years to solve. Ten septillion is 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. But the accuracy of quantum computing has, until now, also been a big issue, with quantum like a garden hose on full blast with no one holding it: the water is coming out fast, but its aim is not consistently accurate. Willow's combination of speed and accuracy could theoretically provide hackers with the tools to unlock the algorithms that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are built upon. If you don't understand (not many people do) what makes up quantum computing — qubits — security company DigiCert's industry technology strategist, Tim Hollebeek, has a simplified way of thinking about the breakthrough. He says imagine a maze and how a classical computer would try to find its way through the maze from start to finish. It would try one potential path at a time. "A quantum computer would be able to try each path at the same time, resulting in a much faster solution," Hollebeek said. While Willow may not be ready for real-world applications yet, Willow's speed and accuracy will help pave the way for larger-scale quantum computers. "Part of the issue with qubits is that they are unstable and produce errors. This chip has significant error correction capabilities, which mitigates some of the qubit issues," Hollebeek said. That means chips improving upon Willow's breakthrough will be able to help hackers target crypto — but at least for the moment, the concern is only theoretical. "Quantum computers can theoretically solve this much faster and pose a threat to today's cryptographic algorithms if a quantum computer with sufficient qubits could be developed," Hollebeek said. But he added that the real-world reason for breathing easier today if you own crypto is simple. "None exist today and are not expected for at least another 5, 10, 15 years," he said, with the fastest five-year timeline contingent on some unforeseen technological breakthrough. A Google spokesman told CNBC that Willow and crypto can coexist. "The Willow chip is incapable of breaking modern cryptography," he said, adding that it is also the view of Google that quantum technology with that capability is still years off. In fact, according to Park Feierbach, an expert in decentralized finance technology who is CEO of Radiant Commons, even if Willow can drastically increase the speed at which crypto could be broken, it would still take several times the age of the universe for the quantum chip to do it. According to NASA, the universe is 13.7 billion years old. "There's almost no reason to deploy Willow on this technology in a way that could make tractable progress. It would simply still take too long," Feierbach said. "Estimates are we're at least 10 years out from breaking RSA, and that around 4 million physical qubits would be required to do this," the Google spokesman said. RSA is an encryption system used in cryptocurrencies. For reference, Google's processors are now on the scale of about 100 physical qubits. The Google spokesman stressed that the timeline for quantum breakthroughs has been widely shared and Willow has not changed it. "Google is on track with our planned roadmap," he said. "The security community has long been aware of the projected timeline to break asymmetric encryption, and has been working on defining standards and collaboratively implementing new algorithms that will resist attacks by both classical and quantum computers," the spokesman added. Indeed, Hollebeek says that the crypto industry is working on "quantum-safe" crypto. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released several quantum-safe algorithms that are resistant to attacks by future quantum computers, Hollebeek said, and NIST has a timeline for governments and industry to deploy these algorithms to ensure the safety of the nation's and businesses secrets. "Google and other industry leaders have supported standardization and experimented with the algorithms in their draft form," the Google spokesman said. Despite how efficient quantum is at unlocking algorithms (traditional crypto equations based on factoring huge prime numbers), it isn't infallible, and that is where the promise lies in quantum-safe crypto. "They're really, really good at some things, but not everything," Hollebeek said, noting that breaking conventional asymmetric cryptography just happens to be one of the things they are really good at. "Luckily, there are other hard math problems they are bad at, and asymmetric cryptography can be updated to use those hard math problems instead of factoring," he said. Taqi Raza , assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, said existing cryptos will have to evolve to ward off qubits. "As the potential for quantum computers to break existing cryptography becomes more of a concern, new cryptocurrencies specifically designed to be quantum-safe could be developed. These new quantum cryptos would integrate PQC, cryptographic algorithms that are resistant to the computational power of quantum computers," Raza said. Jeremy Allaire, co-founder, chairman & CEO of digital currency company Circle, told CNBC in an interview last week that the risk is real, but his view of the future remains focused on the opportunities that will evolve. "The bottom line is quantum crypto means that you can both unlock things more easily, things that had bad old locks, but you can also create better locks," Allaire said. "So quantum crypto – this quantum is going to be actually a huge turbocharge to crypto computing, to crypto applications, and to crypto money." Raza thinks that ultimately the more sweeping changes wrought by quantum computing will occur beyond crypto. Breakthroughs will make devices and software faster, revolutionize AI, and improve data security with ultra-secure encryption methods. In everyday life, there will be advances in computing, healthcare, energy, and security, Raza said, and as a result, it is not the crypto industry we should be thinking about in isolation while these changes are still developing. "They will likely transform industries," he said.

Immigration and Economy Dominate as Iceland Voters Head to PollsThe local Cook Islands community’s sincere welcome, music, drumming and refreshments were very much appreciated. Unfortunately, the consultation had its fair share of logistical hiccups, with an event originally advertised to be from 5pm – 8pm, ending up being 6.45pm to well after 11pm. The unexpected change to the start time, the Prime Minister’s late arrival (due to peak hour traffic) and drawn-out schedule tested patience, with at least half (if not more) of the attendees leaving before the end of the presentation. It’s tough when a meeting meant to engage and inform, ends up being a test of endurance. My son, Jonny, noted that the Prime Minister’s three pillars (church, government, traditional leaders) pretty much said the same thing; i.e. we need to diversify, get rich, have new job opportunities, and assist the transition to clean energy. However, we don’t have enough locals to fill jobs already and people are finding other ways to diversify in business and career paths. As for the clean energy transition – if life is lost and ecosystems destroyed, can anyone claim this is clean energy? The PM Mark Brown mentioned that technology is advancing, so the metals may not be needed in the future, which is why he wants to harvest the nodules while they’re still valuable. In Maori, he concluded that we can choose to take this opportunity... or miss out. This FOMO (fear of missing out) thinking causes panic, less care and patience for the research process, and collaborative consultation over the results. Recently I was at a Blue Planet Alliance (BPA) forum with Government representatives. BPA’s aim is 100 per cent clean energy (for electricity) by 2045. They made it clear that they do not believe Deep Sea Mining (DSM) is needed for the clean energy transition. My son found the science portion interesting, but when Te Ipukarea’s director was mentioned, he jumped up to question why John Parianos of Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Authority hadn’t reflected TIS’s stance against DSM in his talk. John replied that TIS is not against DSM, but for getting it done properly. The following excerpts from director Alanna Smith, speaking during the WISE expedition, I trust clarifies TIS’s position: “Supporting deep ocean research does not mean supporting deep sea mining. It is important to have trained observers onboard to ensure transparency, making sure that the data being collected is shared, but also ensuring that there is good science and good questions ... for example a mining company’s research could be sided towards mineral quality and where the nodules are most dense .... having little attention to what life is in these spaces ... To reiterate, participation on this expedition does not mean support for DSM.” The 45 minutes (approx.) Q&A had only one question relating to the environment. After seeing the slides and listening to a recording of the night, I would say this is because risks to the environment were just glanced over, not explained, so people still don’t know enough to form questions. My son posed a pointed question about environmental impact – One of the slides shows an approximation of the effect three operations over thirty years would have (approximately 1.2 per cent of the EEZ). Is there a reality where enough operations could, over one generation (30 years) destroy the entire EEZ? John Parianos replied that hypothetically yes, which is why we need to get things right to have only an acceptable level of damage (Paraphrased). Clearly both sides agree there will be long-term implications for ecosystems. As one attendee said, in Maori, at the end of the night ... fulfil your dream. If it works out well, it’s ours. If it turns bad, it’s yours. But it isn’t that simple, if for example, fish stocks are depleted because of linked ecosystems in the chain being destroyed, then everyone who relies on fish suffers. The recounting from family is not just a summary of events, but a reflection on the need for better planning, engagement, and transparency. When these ‘consultations’ are about such a significant and potentially life changing move, why have the NGOs not been included? It is at best a road show, at worst a propaganda tour, but without all parties present, it is not a consultation. E te au tangata Kuki Airani, akamanako o’onu. Consider what level of damage to our ocean is acceptable. Our answers will shape our future, our way of life and our Marae Moana.

Josh Allen passed for two touchdowns and rushed for one more as the Buffalo Bills clobbered the New York Jets 40-14 on Sunday afternoon in Orchard Park, N.Y. The Bills clinched the No. 2 seed in the AFC with the victory. Allen was showered with "M-V-P" chants after putting the game away with a pair of third-quarter touchdown passes -- a 30-yard connection with Amari Cooper and a 14-yard strike to a leaping Keon Coleman with 12 seconds left in the frame. Those scores sandwiched a 1-yard touchdown run by James Cook. Buffalo (13-3) took a 33-0 lead into the fourth quarter thanks to its 21-point third. Allen, who turned things over to backup quarterback Mitchell Trubisky for the final 15 minutes, finished with 182 yards on 16-for-27 passing. Trubisky hit Tyrell Shavers for a 69-yard TD on his first pass of the contest to make it 40-0 with 12:37 to go. It marked Shavers' first career catch. The Bills' defense was in the spotlight just as much as Allen, forcing three turnovers and racking up four sacks. Aaron Rodgers struggled under center for New York (4-12), completing 12 of 18 passes for 112 yards. He was picked off twice. Second-string signal-caller Tyrod Taylor broke the shutout with a 9-yard touchdown pass to Garrett Wilson with 6:59 left in the game. The Jets proceeded to convert a two-point try to trim their deficit to 40-8. Wilson hauled in seven receptions for 66 yards and the TD. Tyler Conklin grabbed a 20-yard touchdown with 1:55 remaining to complete the scoring. Taylor ended up with 83 yards and the two TDs on 11-of-14 passing. A.J. Epenesa gave the Bills a boost just before the break, sacking Rodgers for a safety that put Buffalo up 9-0 with 2:31 remaining in the second quarter. Tyler Bass extended the Bills' lead with a 39-yard field goal as time expired in the first half. The teams combined for five penalties on the game's first drive, with a 5-yard defensive pass interference call setting Buffalo up at the Jets 1. Allen then got pushed into the end zone for his franchise-record-tying 65th rushing touchdown. --Field Level MediaIsro to launch 24 experiments to space with PSLV Spadex missionCoastal Carolina 48, Georgia St. 27

DETROIT (AP) — For a second time, a Delaware judge has nullified a pay package that Tesla had awarded its CEO, Elon Musk, that once was valued at $56 billion. On Monday, Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick turned aside a request from Musk’s lawyers to reverse a ruling she announced in January that had thrown out the compensation plan. The judge ruled then that Musk effectively controlled Tesla’s board and had engineered the outsize pay package during sham negotiations . Lawyers for a Tesla shareholder who sued to block the pay package contended that shareholders who had voted for the 10-year plan in 2018 had been given misleading and incomplete information. In their defense, Tesla’s board members asserted that the shareholders who ratified the pay plan a second time in June had done so after receiving full disclosures, thereby curing all the problems the judge had cited in her January ruling. As a result, they argued, Musk deserved the pay package for having raised Tesla’s market value by billions of dollars. McCormick rejected that argument. In her 103-page opinion, she ruled that under Delaware law, Tesla’s lawyers had no grounds to reverse her January ruling “based on evidence they created after trial.” What will Musk and Tesla do now? On Monday night, Tesla posted on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, that the company will appeal. The appeal would be filed with the Delaware Supreme Court, the only state appellate court Tesla can pursue. Experts say a ruling would likely come in less than a year. “The ruling, if not overturned, means that judges and plaintiffs’ lawyers run Delaware companies rather than their rightful owners — the shareholders,” Tesla argued. Later, on X, Musk unleashed a blistering attack on the judge, asserting that McCormick is “a radical far left activist cosplaying as a judge.” What do experts say about the case? Legal authorities generally suggest that McCormick’s ruling was sound and followed the law. Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, said that in his view, McCormick was right to rule that after Tesla lost its case in the original trial, it created improper new evidence by asking shareholders to ratify the pay package a second time. Had she allowed such a claim, he said, it would cause a major shift in Delaware’s laws against conflicts of interest given the unusually close relationship between Musk and Tesla’s board. “Delaware protects investors — that’s what she did,” said Elson, who has followed the court for more than three decades. “Just because you’re a ‘superstar CEO’ doesn’t put you in a separate category.” Elson said he thinks investors would be reluctant to put money into Delaware companies if there were exceptions to the law for “special people.” What will the Delaware Supreme Court do? Elson said that in his opinion, the court is likely to uphold McCormick’s ruling. Can Tesla appeal to federal courts? Experts say no. Rulings on state laws are normally left to state courts. Brian Dunn, program director for the Institute of Compensation Studies at Cornell University, said it’s been his experience that Tesla has no choice but to stay in the Delaware courts for this compensation package. Tesla has moved its legal headquarters to Texas. Does that matter? The company could try to reconstitute the pay package and seek approval in Texas, where it may expect more friendlier judges. But Dunn, who has spent 40 years as an executive compensation consultant, said it’s likely that some other shareholder would challenge the award in Texas because it’s excessive compared with other CEOs’ pay plans. “If they just want to turn around and deliver him $56 billion, I can’t believe somebody wouldn’t want to litigate it,” Dunn said. “It’s an unconscionable amount of money.” Would a new pay package be even larger? Almost certainly. Tesla stock is trading at 15 times the exercise price of stock options in the current package in Delaware, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note to investors. Tesla’s share price has doubled in the past six months, Jonas wrote. At Monday’s closing stock price, the Musk package is now worth $101.4 billion, according to Equilar, an executive data firm. And Musk has asked for a subsequent pay package that would give him 25% of Tesla’s voting shares. Musk has said he is uncomfortable moving further into artificial intelligence with the company if he doesn’t have 25% control. He currently holds about 13% of Tesla’s outstanding shares.