DJ Henderson

OpenAI says dead teen violated TOS when he used ChatGPT to plan suicide

AI, chatbot, chatgpt, Mental Health, online child safety, openai, Policy, suicide / DJ Henderson / November 26, 2025

Use chatbots at your own risk

OpenAI’s response to teen suicide case is “disturbing,” lawyer says.

Matt Raine is suing OpenAI for wrongful death after losing his son Adam in April. Credit: via Edelson PC

Facing five lawsuits alleging wrongful deaths, OpenAI lobbed its first defense Tuesday, denying in a court filing that ChatGPT caused a teen’s suicide and instead arguing the teen violated terms that prohibit discussing suicide or self-harm with the chatbot.

The earliest look at OpenAI’s strategy to overcome the string of lawsuits came in a case where parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine accused OpenAI of relaxing safety guardrails that allowed ChatGPT to become the teen’s “suicide coach.” OpenAI deliberately designed the version their son used, ChatGPT 4o, to encourage and validate his suicidal ideation in its quest to build the world’s most engaging chatbot, parents argued.

But in a blog, OpenAI claimed that parents selectively chose disturbing chat logs while supposedly ignoring “the full picture” revealed by the teen’s chat history. Digging through the logs, OpenAI claimed the teen told ChatGPT that he’d begun experiencing suicidal ideation at age 11, long before he used the chatbot.

“A full reading of his chat history shows that his death, while devastating, was not caused by ChatGPT,” OpenAI’s filing argued.

Allegedly, the logs also show that Raine “told ChatGPT that he repeatedly reached out to people, including trusted persons in his life, with cries for help, which he said were ignored.” Additionally, Raine told ChatGPT that he’d increased his dose of a medication that “he stated worsened his depression and made him suicidal.” That medication, OpenAI argued, “has a black box warning for risk of suicidal ideation and behavior in adolescents and young adults, especially during periods when, as here, the dosage is being changed.”

All the logs that OpenAI referenced in its filing are sealed, making it impossible to verify the broader context the AI firm claims the logs provide. In its blog, OpenAI said it was limiting the amount of “sensitive evidence” made available to the public, due to its intention to handle mental health-related cases with “care, transparency, and respect.”

The Raine family’s lead lawyer, however, did not describe the filing as respectful. In a statement to Ars, Jay Edelson called OpenAI’s response “disturbing.”

“They abjectly ignore all of the damning facts we have put forward: how GPT-4o was rushed to market without full testing. That OpenAI twice changed its Model Spec to require ChatGPT to engage in self-harm discussions. That ChatGPT counseled Adam away from telling his parents about his suicidal ideation and actively helped him plan a ‘beautiful suicide,’” Edelson said. “And OpenAI and Sam Altman have no explanation for the last hours of Adam’s life, when ChatGPT gave him a pep talk and then offered to write a suicide note.”

“Amazingly,” Edelson said, OpenAI instead argued that Raine “himself violated its terms and conditions by engaging with ChatGPT in the very way it was programmed to act.”

Edelson suggested that it’s telling that OpenAI did not file a motion to dismiss—seemingly accepting ” the reality that the legal arguments that they have—compelling arbitration, Section 230 immunity, and First Amendment—are paper-thin, if not non-existent.” The company’s filing—although it requested dismissal with prejudice to never face the lawsuit again—puts the Raine family’s case “on track for a jury trial in 2026. ”

“We know that OpenAI and Sam Altman will stop at nothing—including bullying the Raines and others who dare come forward—to avoid accountability,” Edelson said. “But, at the end of the day, they will have to explain to a jury why countless people have died by suicide or at the hands of ChatGPT users urged on by the artificial intelligence OpenAI and Sam Altman designed.”

Use ChatGPT “at your sole risk,” OpenAI says

To overcome the Raine case, OpenAI is leaning on its usage policies, emphasizing that Raine should never have been allowed to use ChatGPT without parental consent and shifting the blame onto Raine and his loved ones.

“ChatGPT users acknowledge their use of ChatGPT is ‘at your sole risk and you will not rely on output as a sole source of truth or factual information,’” the filing said, and users also “must agree to ‘protect people’ and ‘cannot use [the] services for,’ among other things, ‘suicide, self-harm,’ sexual violence, terrorism or violence.”

Although the family was shocked to see that ChatGPT never terminated Raine’s chats, OpenAI argued that it’s not the company’s responsibility to protect users who appear intent on pursuing violative uses of ChatGPT.

The company argued that ChatGPT warned Raine “more than 100 times” to seek help, but the teen “repeatedly expressed frustration with ChatGPT’s guardrails and its repeated efforts to direct him to reach out to loved ones, trusted persons, and crisis resources.”

Circumventing safety guardrails, Raine told ChatGPT that “his inquiries about self-harm were for fictional or academic purposes,” OpenAI noted. The company argued that it’s not responsible for users who ignore warnings.

Additionally, OpenAI argued that Raine told ChatGPT that he found information he was seeking on other websites, including allegedly consulting at least one other AI platform, as well as “at least one online forum dedicated to suicide-related information.” Raine apparently told ChatGPT that “he would spend most of the day” on a suicide forum website.

“Our deepest sympathies are with the Raine family for their unimaginable loss,” OpenAI said in its blog, while its filing acknowledged, “Adam Raine’s death is a tragedy.” But “at the same time,” it’s essential to consider all the available context, OpenAI’s filing said, including that OpenAI has a mission to build AI that “benefits all of humanity” and is supposedly a pioneer in chatbot safety.

More ChatGPT-linked hospitalizations, deaths uncovered

OpenAI has sought to downplay risks to users, releasing data in October “estimating that 0.15 percent of ChatGPT’s active users in a given week have conversations that include explicit indicators of potential suicidal planning or intent,” Ars reported.

While that may seem small, it amounts to about 1 million vulnerable users, and The New York Times this week cited studies that have suggested OpenAI may be “understating the risk.” Those studies found that “the people most vulnerable to the chatbot’s unceasing validation” were “those prone to delusional thinking,” which “could include 5 to 15 percent of the population,” NYT reported.

OpenAI’s filing came one day after a New York Times investigation revealed how the AI firm came to be involved in so many lawsuits. Speaking with more than 40 current and former OpenAI employees, including executives, safety engineers, researchers, NYT found that OpenAI’s model tweak that made ChatGPT more sycophantic seemed to make the chatbot more likely to help users craft problematic prompts, including those trying to “plan a suicide.”

Eventually, OpenAI rolled back that update, making the chatbot safer. However, as recently as October, the ChatGPT maker seemed to still be prioritizing user engagement over safety, NYT reported, after that tweak caused a dip in engagement. In a memo to OpenAI staff, ChatGPT head Nick Turley “declared a ‘Code Orange,” four employees told NYT, warning that “OpenAI was facing ‘the greatest competitive pressure we’ve ever seen.’” In response, Turley set a goal to increase the number of daily active users by 5 percent by the end of 2025.

Amid user complaints, OpenAI has continually updated its models, but that pattern of tightening safeguards, then seeking ways to increase engagement could continue to get OpenAI in trouble, as lawsuits advance and possibly others drop. NYT “uncovered nearly 50 cases of people having mental health crises during conversations with ChatGPT,” including nine hospitalized and three deaths.

Gretchen Krueger, a former OpenAI employee who worked on policy research, told NYT that early on, she was alarmed by evidence that came before ChatGPT’s release showing that vulnerable users frequently turn to chatbots for help. Later, other researchers found that such troubled users often become “power users.” She noted that “OpenAI’s large language model was not trained to provide therapy” and “sometimes responded with disturbing, detailed guidance,” confirming that she joined other safety experts who left OpenAI due to burnout in 2024.

“Training chatbots to engage with people and keep them coming back presented risks,” Krueger said, suggesting that OpenAI knew that some harm to users “was not only foreseeable, it was foreseen.”

For OpenAI, the scrutiny will likely continue until such reports cease. Although OpenAI officially unveiled an Expert Council on Wellness and AI in October to improve ChatGPT safety testing, there did not appear to be a suicide expert included on the team. That likely concerned suicide prevention experts who warned in a letter updated in September that “proven interventions should directly inform AI safety design,” since “the most acute, life-threatening crises are often temporary—typically resolving within 24–48 hours”—and chatbots could possibly provide more meaningful interventions in that brief window.

If you or someone you know is feeling suicidal or in distress, please call the Suicide Prevention Lifeline number, 1-800-273-TALK (8255), which will put you in touch with a local crisis center.

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

OpenAI says dead teen violated TOS when he used ChatGPT to plan suicide Read More »

China launches an emergency lifeboat to bring three astronauts back to Earth

china, human spaceflight, long march, long march 2f, shenzhou, Space, tiangong / DJ Henderson / November 25, 2025

The rapid turnaround offers a “successful example for efficient emergency response in the international space industry,” the space agency said. “It vividly embodies the spirit of manned spaceflight: exceptionally hardworking, exceptionally capable, exceptionally resilient, and exceptionally dedicated.”

The Shenzhou 22 spacecraft glides to an automated docking with the Tiangong space station early Tuesday. Credit: China Manned Space Agency

Now, 20 days after the saga began, the Tiangong outpost again has a lifeboat for its long-term residents. Astronauts Zhang Lu, Fu Wei, and Zhang Hongzhang will return to Earth on the Shenzhou 22 spacecraft next year, soon after the arrival of their three replacements.

While this crew is just one month into their planned six-month expedition, an emergency could force them to leave the station and return home at any time. Although remote, another collision with space junk, a major systems failure, or a medical emergency involving one of the astronauts could trigger an evacuation. That’s why Chinese officials wanted to quickly launch Shenzhou 22 to give the crew a ticket home.

The International Space Station follows the same policy, with SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft and Russian Soyuz ships serving as lifeboats until their crews’ scheduled return to Earth.

The situation with the damaged Shenzhou 20 spacecraft is a reminder of two recent incidents on the ISS. First, in 2022, a Soyuz crew ship that was docked at the ISS sprang a coolant leak—also due to a suspected space debris strike—spraying a shower of frozen ammonia crystals into space and rendering it unsafe to bring its crew home. Russia launched an empty replacement Soyuz two months later, and the damaged Soyuz MS-22 craft ultimately made a successful landing without a crew.

And then, last year, Boeing’s Starliner crew capsule suffered a series of helium leaks and propulsion problems that made NASA managers uncomfortable with its ability to safely return to Earth with astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. The two astronauts remained on the ISS as Starliner made a successful uncrewed landing in September 2024, while SpaceX launched an already-scheduled Crew Dragon mission to the station with two of its four seats unoccupied. The Dragon spacecraft brought Wilmore and Williams home in March.

China launches an emergency lifeboat to bring three astronauts back to Earth Read More »

Rivals object to SpaceX’s Starship plans in Florida—who’s interfering with whom?

cape canaveral space force station, Kennedy Space Center, launch, military space, NASA, new glenn, Space, spacex, starship, united launch alliance, US Space Force / DJ Henderson / November 25, 2025

“We’re going to continue to treat any LOX-methane vehicle with 100 percent TNT blast equivalency.”

Artist’s illustration of Starships stacked on two launch pads at the Space Force’s Space Launch Complex 37 at Cape Canaveral, Florida. Credit: SpaceX

The commander of the military unit responsible for running the Cape Canaveral spaceport in Florida expects SpaceX to begin launching Starship rockets there next year.

Launch companies with facilities near SpaceX’s Starship pads are not pleased. SpaceX’s two chief rivals, Blue Origin and United Launch Alliance, complained last year that SpaceX’s proposal of launching as many as 120 Starships per year from Florida’s Space Coast could force them to routinely clear personnel from their launch pads for safety reasons.

This isn’t the first time Blue Origin and ULA have tried to throw up roadblocks in front of SpaceX. The companies sought to prevent NASA from leasing a disused launch pad to SpaceX in 2013, but they lost the fight.

Col. Brian Chatman, commander of a Space Force unit called Space Launch Delta 45, confirmed to reporters on Friday that Starship launches will sometimes restrict SpaceX’s neighbors from accessing their launch pads—at least in the beginning. Space Launch Delta 45, formerly known as the 45th Space Wing, operates the Eastern Range, which oversees launch safety from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and NASA’s nearby Kennedy Space Center.

Chatman’s unit is responsible for ensuring all personnel remain outside of danger areas during testing and launch operations. The range’s responsibility extends to public safety outside the gates of the spaceport.

“There is no better time to be here on the Space Coast than where we are at today,” Chatman said. “We are breaking records on the launch manifest. We are getting capability on orbit that is essential to national security, and we’re doing that at a time of strategic challenge.”

SpaceX is well along in constructing a Starship launch site on NASA property at Kennedy Space Center within the confines of Launch Complex-39A, where SpaceX also launches its workhorse Falcon 9 rocket. The company wants to build another Starship launch site on Space Force property a few miles to the south.

“Early to mid-next year is when we anticipate Starship coming out here to be able to launch,” Chatman said. “We’ll have the range ready to support at that time.”

Enter the Goliath

Starship and its Super Heavy booster combine to form the largest rocket ever built. Its newest version stands more than 400 feet (120 meters) tall with more than 11 million pounds (5,000 metric tons) of combustible methane and liquid oxygen propellants. That will be replaced by a taller rocket, perhaps as soon as 2027, with about 20 percent more propellant onboard.

While there’s also risk with Starships and Super Heavy boosters returning to Cape Canaveral from space, safety officials worry about what would happen if a Starship and Super Heavy booster detonated with their propellant tanks full. The concern is the same for all rockets, which is why officials evacuate predetermined keep-out zones around launch pads that are fueled up for flight.

But the keep-out zones around SpaceX’s Starship launch pads will extend farther than those around the other launch sites at Cape Canaveral. First, Starship is simply much bigger and uses more propellant than any other rocket. Second, Starship’s engines consume methane fuel in combination with liquid oxygen, a blend commonly known as LOX/methane or methalox.

And finally, Starship lacks the track record of older rockets like the Falcon 9, adding a degree of conservatism to the Space Force’s risk calculations. Other launch pads will inevitably fall within the footprint of Starship’s range safety keep-out zones, also known as blast danger areas, or BDAs.

SpaceX’s Starship and Super Heavy booster lift off from Starbase, Texas, in March 2025. Credit: SpaceX

The danger area will be larger for an actual launch, but workers will still need to clear areas closer to Starship launch pads during static fire tests, when the rocket fires its engines while remaining on the ground. This is what prompted ULA and Blue Origin to lodge their protests.

“They understand neighboring operations,” Chatman said in a media roundtable on Friday. “They understand that we will allow the maximum efficiency possible to facilitate their operations, but there will be times that we’re not going to let them go to their launch complex because it’s neighboring a hazardous activity.”

The good news for these other companies is that Eastern Range’s keep-out zones will almost certainly get smaller by the time SpaceX gets anywhere close to 120 Starship launches per year. SpaceX’s Falcon 9 is currently launching at a similar cadence. The blast danger areas for those launches are small and short-lived because the Space Force’s confidence in the Falcon 9’s safety is “extremely high,” Chatman said.

“From a blast damage assessment perspective, specific to the Falcon 9, we know what that keep-out area is,” Chatman said. “It’s the new combination of new fuels—LOX/methane—which is kind of a game-changer as we look at some of the heavy vehicles that are coming to launch. We just don’t have the analysis on those to be able to say, ‘Hey, from a testing perspective, how small can we reduce the BDA and be safe?’”

Methane has become a popular fuel choice, supplanting refined kerosene, liquid hydrogen, or solid fuels commonly used on previous generations of rockets. Methane leaves behind less soot than kerosene, easing engine reusability, and it’s simpler to handle than liquid hydrogen.

Aside from Starship, Blue Origin’s New Glenn and ULA’s Vulcan rockets use liquified natural gas, a fuel very similar to methane. Both rockets are smaller than Starship, but Blue Origin last week unveiled the design of a souped-up New Glenn rocket that will nearly match Starship’s scale.

A few years ago, NASA, the Space Force, and the Federal Aviation Administration decided to look into the explosive potential of methalox rockets. There had been countless tests of explosions of gaseous methane, but data on detonations of liquid methane and liquid oxygen was scarce at the time—just a couple of tests at less than 10 metric tons, according to NASA. So, the government’s default position was to assume an explosion would be equivalent to the energy released by the same amount of TNT. This assumption drives the large keep-out zones the Space Force has drawn around SpaceX’s future Starship launch pads, one of which is seen in the map below.

This map from a Space Force environmental impact statement shows potential restricted access zones around SpaceX’s proposed Starship launch site at Space Launch Complex-37. The restricted zones cover launch pads operated by United Launch Alliance, Relativity Space, and Stoke Space. Credit: SpaceX

Spending millions to blow stuff up

Chatman said the Space Force is prepared to update its blast danger areas once its government partners, SpaceX, and Blue Origin complete testing and analyze their results. Over dozens of tests, engineers are examining how methane and liquid oxygen react to different kinds of accidents, such as impact velocity, pressure, and mass ratio, or how much propellant is in the mix.

“That is ongoing currently,” Chatman said. “[We are] working in close partnership with SpaceX and Blue Origin on the LOX/methane combination and the explicit equivalency to identify how much we can … reduce that blast radius. Those discussions are happening, have been happening the last couple years, and are looking to culminate here in ’26.

“Until we get that data from the testing that is ongoing and the analysis that needs to occur, we’re going to continue to treat any LOX-methane vehicle with 100 percent TNT blast equivalency, and have a maximized keep-out zone, simply from a public safety perspective,” Chatman said.

The data so far shows promising results. “We do expect that BDA to shrink,” he said. “We expect that to shrink based on some of the initial testing that has been done and the initial data reviews that have been done.”

That’s imperative, not just for Starship’s neighbors at the Cape Canaveral spaceport, but for SpaceX itself. The company forecasts a future in which it will launch Starships more often than the Falcon 9, requiring near-continuous operations at multiple launch pads.

Chatman mentioned one future scenario in which SpaceX might want to launch Starships in close proximity to one another from neighboring pads.

“At that point in the future, I do anticipate the blast damage assessments to shrink down based on the testing that will have been accomplished and dataset will have been reviewed, [and] that we’ll be in a comfortable set to be able to facilitate all launch operations. But until we have that data, until I’m comfortable with what that data shows, with regards to reducing the BDA, keep-out zone, we’re going to continue with the 100 percent TNT equivalency just from a public safety perspective.”

SpaceX has performed explosive LOX/methane tests, including the one seen here, at its development facility in McGregor, Texas. Credit: SpaceX

The Commercial Space Federation, a lobbying group, submitted written testimony to Congress in 2023 arguing the government should be using “existing industry data” to inform its understanding of the explosive potential of methane and liquid oxygen. That data, the federation said, suggests the government should set its TNT blast equivalency to no greater than 25 percent, a change that would greatly reduce the size of keep-out zones around launch pads. The organization’s members include prominent methane users SpaceX, Blue Origin, Relativity Space, and Stoke Space, all of which have launch sites at Cape Canaveral.

The government’s methalox testing plans were expected to cost at least $80 million, according to the Commercial Space Federation.

The concern among engineers is that liquid oxygen and methane are highly miscible, meaning they mix together easily, raising the risk of a “condensed phase detonation” with “significantly higher overpressures” than rockets with liquid hydrogen or kerosene fuels. Small-scale mixtures of liquid oxygen and liquified natural gas have “shown a broad detonable range with yields greater than that of TNT,” NASA wrote in 2023.

SpaceX released some basic results of its own methalox detonation tests in September, before the government draws its own conclusions on the matter. The company said it conducted “extensive testing” to refine blast danger areas to “be commensurate with the physics of new launch systems.”

Like the Commercial Space Federation, SpaceX said government officials are relying on “highly conservative approaches to establishing blast danger areas, simply because they lack the data to make refined, accurate clear zones. In the absence of data, clear areas of LOX/methane rockets have defaulted to very large zones that could be disruptive to operations.”

More like an airport

SpaceX said it has conducted sub-scale methalox detonation tests “in close collaboration with NASA,” while also gathering data from full-scale Starship tests in Starbase, Texas, including information from test flights and from recent ground test failures. SpaceX controls much of the land around its South Texas facility, so there’s little interruption to third parties when Starships launch from there.

“With this data, SpaceX has been able to establish a scientifically robust, physics-based yield calculation that will help ‘fill the gap’ in scientific knowledge regarding LOX/methane rockets,” SpaceX said.

The company did not disclose the yield calculation, but it shared maps showing its proposed clear areas around the future Starship launch sites at Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center. They are significantly smaller than the clear areas originally envisioned by the Space Force and NASA, but SpaceX says it uses “actual test data on explosive yield and include a conservative factor of safety.”

The proposed clear distances will have no effect on any other operational launch site or on traffic on the primary north-south road crossing the spaceport, the company said. “SpaceX looks forward to having an open, honest, and reasonable discussion based on science and data regarding spaceport operations with industry colleagues.”

SpaceX will have that opportunity next month. The Space Force and NASA are convening a “reverse industry day” in mid-December during which launch companies will bring their ideas for the future of the Cape Canaveral spaceport to the government. The spaceport has hosted 101 space launches so far this year, an annual record dominated by SpaceX’s rapid-fire Falcon 9 launch cadence.

Chatman anticipates about the same number—perhaps 100 to 115 launches—from Florida’s Space Coast next year, and some forecasts show 300 to 350 launches per year by 2035. The numbers could go down before they rise again. “As we bring on larger lift capabilities like Starship and follow-on large launch capabilities out here to the Eastern Range, that will reduce the total number of launches, because we can get more mass to orbit with heavier lift vehicles,” Chatman said.

Blue Origin’s first recovered New Glenn booster returned to the company’s launch pad at Cape Canaveral, Florida, last week after a successful launch and landing. Credit: Blue Origin

Launch companies have some work to do to make those numbers become real. Space Force officials have identified their own potential bottlenecks, including a shortage of facilities for preparing satellites for launch and the flow of commodities like propellants and high-pressure gases into the spaceport.

Concerns as mundane as traffic jams are now enough of a factor to consider using automated scanners at vehicle inspection points and potentially adding a dedicated lane for slow-moving transporters carrying rocket boosters from one place to another across the launch base, according to Chatman. This is becoming more important as SpaceX, and now Blue Origin, routinely shuttle their reusable rockets from place to place.

Space Force officials largely attribute the steep climb in launch rates at Cape Canaveral to the launch industry’s embrace of automated self-destruct mechanisms. These pyrotechnic devices have largely replaced manual flight termination systems, which require ground support from a larger team of range safety engineers, including radar operators and flight control officers with the authority to send a destruct command to the rocket if it flies off course. Now, that is all done autonomously on most US launch vehicles.

The Space Force mandated that launch companies using military spaceports switch to autonomous safety systems by October 1 2025, but military officials issued waivers for human-in-the-loop destruct devices to continue flying on United Launch Alliance’s Atlas V rocket, NASA’s Space Launch System, and the US Navy’s ballistic missile fleet. That means those launches will be more labor-intensive for the Space Force, but the Atlas V is nearing retirement, and the SLS and the Navy only occasionally appear on the Cape Canaveral launch schedule.

Listing image: SpaceX

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

Rivals object to SpaceX’s Starship plans in Florida—who’s interfering with whom? Read More »

UK government will buy tech to boost AI sector in $130M growth push

AI, Biz & IT, Financial Times, syndication / DJ Henderson / November 24, 2025

“Our particular strengths as a country lie in areas like life sciences, financial services, the defense sector, and the creative sector. And where we will really lead the world is where we can use the power of AI in those sectors,” Kendall told the Financial Times.

The plans came as part of a wider AI package designed to upgrade Britain’s tech infrastructure and convince entrepreneurs and investors that Labour is backing the sector ahead of next week’s Budget, which is expected to raise taxes on the wealthy.

The UK has sought to attract investment from US AI companies such as OpenAI and Anthropic.

The government has signed several “strategic partnerships” with American groups in a bid to attract foreign investment in UK AI infrastructure and talent, in exchange for adopting their technology in the public sector.

Sue Daley, of lobby group TechUK, said the plan showed “real ambition” but warned: “Advanced market commitments of this kind must be designed carefully to avoid unintentionally distorting competition.”

The government also announced that James Wise, a venture capitalist at Balderton, would chair the government’s 500 million pound sovereign AI unit, which has been set up to back AI startups alongside the British Business Bank.

Additional reporting by Ivan Levingston.

UK government will buy tech to boost AI sector in $130M growth push Read More »

Rocket Lab chief opens up about Neutron delays, New Glenn’s success, and NASA science

pete beck, rocket lab, Space / DJ Henderson / November 24, 2025

“In the end of the day, NASA has to capture the public’s imagination.”

Peter Beck, founder and chief executive officer of Rocket Lab, during TechCrunch Disrupt in San Francisco on October 28, 2024. Credit: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The company that pioneered small launch has had a big year.

Rocket Lab broke its annual launch record with the Electron booster—17 successful missions this year, and counting—and is close to bringing its much larger Neutron rocket to the launch pad.

The company also expanded its in-space business, including playing a key role in supporting the landing of Firefly’s Blue Ghost mission on the Moon and building two small satellites just launched to Mars.

Overall, it has been quite a ride for the company founded nearly two decades ago in New Zealand by Peter Beck. A new book about the company’s origins and aspirations, The Launch of Rocket Lab, tells the story of the company’s rise in words and grand images.

Ars recently spoke with Beck about Rocket Lab’s past, present, and future. This interview has been edited lightly for clarity.

Ars: In reading through the book and considering the history of Rocket Lab, I’m continually amazed that a handful of engineers in the country with no space program, no space heritage, built the world’s second most accomplished commercial launch company. What do you attribute that success to?

Peter Beck: It’s hard to know. But there’s a few elements within Rocket Lab that have always remained steadfast, no matter what we do or how big we get. And I think a lot of space companies have tried to see how much they can get away with. And it turns out, in this industry, you just can’t get away with taking very many shortcuts at all. So I think that’s part of it. The attitude of our organization is like, nothing’s too big, nothing’s too hard. We just make it happen. The team works extremely hard. If you drive past the Rocket Lab car park on a Sunday, it looks just like the SpaceX car park on a Sunday. And, you know, the team is very mission-driven. They’re always fighting for a goal, which I think is important. And then, above anything, I just think we can never outspend Elon (Musk) and Jeff (Bezos). We have to out-hustle. And that’s just the reality. The Rocket Lab hustle comes down to just not accepting no as an answer. If a barrier comes up a lot of space companies, or a lot of companies in general, whether its regulatory or technical, it’s easy to submit to the problem, rather than just continue to attack it.

Ars: Electron keeps going. In fact, you’ve just flown a record 17th mission this year, and you continue to sign large deals. How has Electron survived the era of rideshare missions on the Falcon 9?

Beck: We’ve always had the thesis that there is a need for a dedicated small launch. You can put as many Bandwagons and as many Transporters as you want, and you can reduce the price to unsustainably low levels as long as you want. It doesn’t make any difference to us, because it’s a totally different product. As folks are building out constellations, it’s no use just getting dumped out in one orbit. So a lot of Electrons these days are just building out constellations for folks where they have optimized for a specific altitude and inclination and so forth. And we can hit those every time. And if you amortize the cost of launch over the actual lifetime of that constellation and the service that it can provide, it’s cheap, and it’s something rideshares can never deliver.

Ars: It’s surprising to me that after so many years and so many startups, there really isn’t a viable competitor in Electron’s class anywhere in the world.

Beck: It’s pretty hard to build a small rocket. I call it the pressure transducer equilibrium. A pressure transducer on a little rocket is a meaningful amount of mass. A pressure transducer on Neutron is totally irrelevant. Just throw 10 at them, and who cares? But on Electron, if you throw 10 pressure transducers at a problem, then you know, you’ve added a kilo. That’s a meaningful portion of the lift capacity of the vehicle. And there’s no super-magic store where you can go and buy a pressure transducer that scales with the size of the rocket. So you end up with a bunch of stuff that just doesn’t scale, that contributes meaningful mass to the vehicle. If you look at Electron’s payload performance, it’s really high for the size of that rocket. So that’s really hard to do because in an instance where you would throw 10 pressure transducers at a problem, we can only afford to throw one at Electron, but we still want the same redundancy and the same reliability and all of those kinds of things. So that just drives really, really difficult engineering solutions.

And then from a financial standpoint, it’s got a sticker price of $8.5 million, let’s call it. Your flight safety team doesn’t care if it’s a big rocket or a little rocket. Your range team doesn’t care if they’re opening a 12-inch valve or a 2-inch valve. All those teams just have to become ruthlessly efficient at doing that work. So if you go to a big rocket, you might have a flight safety team of 20 people. You come here, it has to be like three. So you have to find ways of really streamlining all those processes. And every little person and dollar and gram has to be ringed out.

Rocket Lab launches an Electron booster with a previously flown engine on Thursday. Credit: Rocket Lab

Ars: What’s going on with the Electron reuse program? My sense is that you’ve kind of learned what you needed to know and are moving on.

Beck: Yeah, that’s pretty much it. It was a hugely valuable learning tool, but if you look at an Electron recovery, we might recover sort of a million dollars worth of stage one booster. And of course, the more we make, the cheaper they get, because we’re continuing to scale so that it’s ever decreasing that return. Quite frankly, and honestly, it’s just like, do we have reusability and recovery teams working on something that returns a million dollars every time it flies? Or, do we have them working on Neutron, where it’s tens of millions of dollars every time you fly? So it’s just about, you know, directing the resource for the biggest bang for the buck.

Ars: I listened to your recent earnings call where you discussed Neutron’s development and delay into 2026. What are the biggest issues you face in getting Neutron over the finish line?

Beck: It would be actually easier if there was an issue, because then I could just say something blew up, or this is a problem. But there’s no real issues. It’s just that we’re not going to put something on the pad that doesn’t meet kind of the standard that’s made us successful. Say something might pass the qualification test, but if we see something in a strain gauge on the back of the panel, or something that we don’t understand, we just don’t move on. We’re not going to move on unless we understand every little element of what’s going on. Maybe I’m on some kind of spectrum for details, but that’s what’s kept us successful. It’s just a bigger rocket, and it’s got more unique features like hungry hippo (the payload fairing opening mechanism) and giant carbon structures. So, you know, it’s not like anything has shit the bed. It’s just a big machine, and there’s some new stuff, and we want to make sure we don’t lose the magic of what we created. A little bit of time now can save a huge amount of heartbreak later on.

Ars: Toward the end of the book, you say that Rocket Lab is best positioned to compete with SpaceX in medium-lift launch, and break up the Falcon 9 monopoly. What is your sense of the competitive landscape going forward? We just saw a New Glenn launch and land, and that was really impressive—

Beck: Bloody impressive. Jeff (Bezos) laid down a new bar. That was incredible. People forget that he’s been working on it for 22 years, but even so, that was impressive.

Ars: Yes, it’s been a journey for them. Anyway, there’s also Vulcan, but that’s only flown one time this year, so they’ve got a ways to go. Then Stoke and Relativity are working at it. What’s your view of your competition going forward?

Beck: I hate comparing it to aviation, but I call medium-class lifters the Boeing 737 of the industry. Then you got your A380s, which are your Starships and your New Glenns. And then you’ve got your Electrons, which are your private jets. And you know, if you look at the aviation sector, nobody comes in and just brings an airplane in and wipes everybody out, because there’s different needs and different missions. And just like there’s a 737 there’s an A320 and that’s kind of what Neutron is intending to be. We had a tremendous pull from our customers, both government and commercial, for alternatives to what’s out there.

The other thing to remember is, for our own aspirations, we need a high-cadence, reusable, low-cost, multi-ton lift capability. I think I’ve been clear that I think the large space companies of the future are going to be a little bit blurry. Are they a space company, or are they something else? But there’s one thing that is absolutely sure, that if you have multi-ton access to orbit in a reusable, low-cost way, it’s going to be very, very difficult to compete with if you’re someone who doesn’t have that capability. And if you look at our friends at SpaceX, yeah, Starlinks are great satellites and all the rest of it. But what really enabled Starlink was the Falcon 9. Launch is a difficult business. It’s kind of lumpy and deeply complex, but at the end of the day, it is the access to orbit. And, you know, having multi-ton access to orbit is just critical. If you’re thinking that you want to try and build one of the biggest space companies in the world, then you just have to have that.

Ars: Rocket Lab has expressed interest in Mars recently, both the Mars Telecommunications Orbiter and a Mars Sample Return mission. As Jared Isaacman and NASA think about commercial exploration of Mars, what would you tell them about what Rocket Lab could bring to the table?

Beck: I’m a great believer that government should do things for which it makes no sense for commercial entities to do, and commercial should do the things that it makes no sense for governments to do. Consider Mars Sample Return, we looked at that, and the plan was $11 billion and 20 years? It’s just, come on. It was crazy. And I don’t want to take the shine off. It is a deeply technical, deeply difficult mission to do. But it can be done, and it can be done commercially, and it can be done at a fraction of the price. So let industry have at it.

And look, Eric, I love planetary science, right? I love exploring the planets, and I think that if you have a space company that’s capable of doing it, it’s almost your duty for the knowledge of the species to go and do those sorts of things. Now, we’re a publicly traded company, so we have to make margin along the way. We’ve proven we can do that. Look at ESCAPADE. All up, it was like $50 million cost, launched, and on its way to Mars. I mean, that’s the sort of thing we need to be doing, right? That’s great bang for your buck. And you know, as you mentioned, we’re pushing hard on the MTO. The reality is that if you’re going to do anything on Mars, whether it’s scientific or human, you’ve got to have the comms there. It’s just basic infrastructure you’ve got to have there first. It’s all very well to do all the sexy stuff and put some humans in a can and send them off to Mars. That’s great. But everybody expects the communication just to be there, and you’ve got to put the foundations in first. So we think that’s a really important mission, and something that we can do, and something we can contribute to the first humans landing on Mars.

Rocket Lab’s Neutron rocket is shown in this rendering delivering a stack of satellites into orbit. Credit: Rocket Lab

Ars: You mentioned ESCAPADE. How’s your relationship with Jeff Bezos? I heard there was some tension last year because Rocket Lab was being asked to prepare the satellite for launch, even when it was clear New Glenn was not going to make the Mars window.

Beck: I know you want me to say yes, there is, but the honest truth is absolutely zero. I know David (Limp, Blue Origin’s CEO) super well. We’re great friends. Jeff and I were texting backwards and forwards during the launch. There’s just honestly none. And you know that they gave us a great ride. They were bang on the numbers. It was awesome. Yeah, sure, it would have been great to get there early. But it’s a rocket program, right? Nobody can show me a rocket program that turned up exactly on time. And yep, it may have been obvious that it might not have been able to launch on the first (window), but we knew there’s always other ways. Worst-case scenario, we have to go into storage for a little bit. These missions are years and years long. So what’s a little bit longer?

Ars: Speaking of low-cost science missions, I know Isaacman is interested in commercial planetary missions. Lots of $4 billion planetary missions just aren’t sustainable. If NASA commits to commercial development of satellite buses and spacecraft like it did to commercial cargo and crew, what could planetary exploration look like a decade from now?

Beck: I think that’d be tremendously exciting. One of the reasons why we did CAPSTONE was to prove that you can go to the Moon for $10 million. Now, we lost a lot of money on that mission, so that ultimately didn’t prove to be true. But it wasn’t crazy amounts, and we still got there miles cheaper than anybody else could have ever got there. And ESCAPADE, we have good margins on, and it’s just a true success, right? Touch wood to date, like we’ve got a long way to go, but success in the fact that the spacecraft were built, delivered, launched, and commissioned.

This is the thing. Take your billion-dollar mission. How many $50 million missions, or $100 million missions, could you do? Imagine the amount of science you can do. I think part of the reason why the public gets jaded with some of these science missions is because they happen once a decade, and they’ve got billions of dollars of price tags attached to them. It’s kind of transitorily exciting when they happen, but they’re so far apart. In the end of the day, NASA has to capture the public’s imagination, because the public are funding it. So it has to seem relevant, relevant to mum and dad at home. And you know, when mum and dad are home and it’s tough, and then they just hear billions of dollars and, you know, years of overrun and all the rest of it, how can they feel good about that? Whereas, if they can spend much less and deliver it on time and have a constant stream of really interesting missions in science, I think that it’s great for public justification. I think it’s great for planetary science, because obviously you’re iterating on your results, and it’s great for the whole community to just have a string of missions. And also, I think it’s great for US space supremacy to be blasting around the Solar System all the time, rather than just now and again.

Ars: Ok Pete, it’s November 18. How confident should we be in a Neutron launch next year? 50/50?

Beck: Hopefully better than 50/50. That would be a definite fail. We’re taking the time to get it right. I always caveat anything, Eric, that it’s a rocket program, and we’ve got some big tests in front of us. But to date, if you look at the program, it’s been super smooth; like we haven’t exploded tanks, we haven’t exploded engines. We haven’t had any major failure, especially when we’re pushing some new boundaries and some new technology. So I think it’s going really, really smoothly, and as long as it continues to go smoothly, then I think we’re in good shape.

Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.

Rocket Lab chief opens up about Neutron delays, New Glenn’s success, and NASA science Read More »

Why you don’t want to get tuberculosis on your penis

case report, health, mycobacterium, penis, Tuberculosis / DJ Henderson / November 22, 2025

Miliary tuberculosis (MTB) is a severe form of tuberculosis in which the instigating bacteria— Mycobacterium tuberculosis or potentially a relative that infects cows and deer, Mycobacterium bovis—spread widely through the body and create small lesions. The name “miliary” dates back to 1700, when a physician noted that the specks resembled millet seeds.

While Mycobacterium can spread through the air and are often found in the lungs, the bacteria can strike anywhere in the body. Still, penile tuberculosis is exceedingly rare. In fact, it’s uncommon to have tuberculosis erupt anywhere in the urinary and genital tracts. Among the infections that spring up in the region, penile infections account for less than 1 percent.

But, given the man’s lungs and his immunosuppressed status, the unusual presentation became their leading guess—and tests soon confirmed it. Mycobacterium were identified in the man’s respiratory tract, and penile tissue tested also showed the bacteria, though the testing couldn’t identify what species of Mycobacterium.

Treatment for tuberculosis requires a regimen of several antibiotics and takes months. In the man’s case, they customized his treatment with a 12-month, four-drug regimen that wouldn’t interfere with his transplant.

Still, the penile lesion got worse before it got better. He developed a large necrotic ulceration on the side of his penis, and his foreskin began to “break down.” Surgeons had to mechanically cut out the dead tissue. After 10 months, his infection appeared to have cleared, and his penile lesion had improved.

Unexplained exposure

It remains unclear how the man got the infection. He told doctors he wasn’t aware of coming in contact with any tuberculosis patients and wasn’t in settings where the bacteria normally spread, such as prisons. It’s possible that the bacteria had been lurking in his transplanted kidney.

Why you don’t want to get tuberculosis on your penis Read More »

Infant botulism outbreak doubles; ByHeart confirms bacteria in formula

botulism, ByHeart, Formula, health, outbreak / DJ Henderson / November 21, 2025

ByHeart announced on Thursday that its own testing identified the bacterium that causes botulism in its baby formula, which is linked to an ongoing infant botulism outbreak that has doubled since last week.

As of November 19, there have been 31 cases across 15 states—up from 15 cases in 12 states reported last week. All 31 cases so far have been hospitalized. No deaths have been reported.

The outbreak was announced on November 8, and ByHeart was, at first, unusually aggressive in deflecting blame for linked illnesses.

The link between infant botulism cases and ByHeart was first spotted by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The department is the world’s sole source of the infant botulism treatment BabyBIG, and, as such, is contacted when any infant botulism cases arise. CDPH started to notice a pattern of ByHeart exposure among the cases. While ByHeart products account for just 1 percent of infant formula sales, babies fed ByHeart formula accounted for 40 percent of infant botulism cases with dry formula exposure between August 1 and November 10. Soon, preliminary testing by the department identified the bacterium that causes botulism—Clostridium botulinum—in an opened can of ByHeart from one of the sick babies.

Changing tune

However, ByHeart didn’t buy it. In a video posted to social media the day the outbreak was announced, one of ByHeart’s co-founders, Mia Funt, said: “I want to make something really clear: There is no reason to believe that infant formula can cause infant botulism.” Funt claimed that “multiple regulatory bodies” have concluded that formula can’t cause infant botulism, and the US Food and Drug Administration has never found a “direct connection” between formula and infant botulism. She added that no “toxins” have been found in the formula.

Infant botulism outbreak doubles; ByHeart confirms bacteria in formula Read More »

Blue Origin revealed some massively cool plans for its New Glenn rocket

blue origin, new glenn, Space, super heavy lift rocket / DJ Henderson / November 20, 2025

One week after the successful second launch of its large New Glenn booster, Blue Origin revealed a roadmap on Thursday for upgrades to the rocket, including a new variant with more main engines and a super-heavy lift capability.

These upgrades to the rocket are “designed to increase payload performance and launch cadence, while enhancing reliability,” the company said in an update published on its website. The enhancements will be phased in over time, starting with the third launch of New Glenn, which is likely to occur during the first half of 2026.

A bigger beast

The most significant part of the update concerned an evolution of New Glenn that will transform the booster into a super-heavy lift launch vehicle. The first stage of this evolved vehicle will have nine BE-4 engines instead of seven, and the upper stage four BE-4 engines instead of two. In its update, Blue Origin refers to the new vehicle as 9×4 and the current variant as 7×2, a reference to the number of engines in each stage.

“New Glenn 9×4 is designed for a subset of missions requiring additional capacity and performance,” the company said. “The vehicle carries over 70 metric tons to low-Earth orbit, over 14 metric tons direct to geosynchronous orbit, and over 20 metric tons to trans-lunar injection. Additionally, the 9×4 vehicle will feature a larger 8.7-meter fairing.”

The company did not specify a timeline for the debut of the 9×4 variant. A spokesperson for the company told Ars, “We aren’t disclosing a specific timeframe today. The iterative design from our current 7×2 vehicle means we can build this rocket quickly.”

A comparison of New Glenn 7×2, the Saturn V, and New Glenn 7.4 rockets. Credit: Blue Origin

One source familiar with the company’s plans said the internal timeline would allow for the 9×4 variant of New Glenn to take flight as early as 2027.

Such a booster would be a notable vehicle, with a lift capacity nearly on par with NASA’s Space Launch System rocket. However, it would have a fully reusable first stage with a larger payload fairing and would likely cost less than one-tenth the estimated $2.2 billion cost of NASA’s super-heavy rocket.

Blue Origin revealed some massively cool plans for its New Glenn rocket Read More »

Attack, defend, pursue—the Space Force’s new naming scheme foretells new era

Defense Department, military space, Space, Spaceflight, spy satellites, US Military, US Space Force / DJ Henderson / November 20, 2025

A little more than a century ago, the US Army Air Service came up with a scheme for naming the military’s multiplying fleet of airplanes.

The 1924 aircraft designation code produced memorable names like the B-17, A-26, B-29, and P-51—B for bomber, A for attack, and P for pursuit—during World War II. The military later changed the prefix for pursuit aircraft to F for fighter, leading to recognizable modern names like the F-15 and F-16.

Now, the newest branch of the military is carving its own path with a new document outlining how the Space Force, which can trace its lineage back to the Army Air Service, will name and designate its “weapon systems” on the ground and in orbit. Ars obtained a copy of the document, first written in 2023 and amended in 2024.

The changes could ultimately lead to the retirement, or at least the de-emphasis, of bulky bureaucratic acronyms. You might think of it as similar to how the Pentagon’s Joint Strike Fighter program evolved into the F-35 Lightning II.

The memorandum outlining the Space Force’s new nomenclature was signed in 2023 by then-Lt. Gen. Shawn Bratton, who was the branch’s chief strategy and resource officer at the time. Bratton is now a four-star general serving as vice chief of space operations, the No. 2 uniformed position in the Space Force.

The document, titled Space Force Instruction 16-403, covers “Space Force weapon system naming and designations.” It provides guidance for creating new designators. The Space Force says compliance with the instruction is mandatory for new programs, but it does not require an update for existing satellites.

“All new weapon systems developed after the effective date of this instruction will require a designator,” the memorandum says. The new names will have letters identifying each system’s purpose and orbital regime, followed by numbers or letters describing its design number and design series.

Shawn Bratton, then a two-star general, gives remarks as the featured speaker for the 38th Space Symposium Satellite Forum Breakfast in Colorado Springs, Colorado, on April 19, 2023. Credit: US Space Force/Ethan Johnson

John Shaw, a retired Space Force lieutenant-general, was part of internal discussions about revamping the military satellite naming scheme several years ago.

“We were looking at this in 2018, before we had a Space Force, and trying to fit it into the Air Force nomenclature,” Shaw told Ars. “And it sort of hit a dead end because the Air Force just wasn’t set up well for this. You really needed to start over. That wasn’t going to happen very easily. Now that we have a Space Force, we can start over… I’m glad to see that it’s becoming reality.”

Attack, defend, pursue—the Space Force’s new naming scheme foretells new era Read More »

Twin suction turbines and 3-Gs in slow corners? Meet the DRG-Lola.

Cars, Formula E, Lola Cars, Lucas di Grassi, racing / DJ Henderson / November 19, 2025

One advantage of the suction fans is how efficient they are, requiring five times less energy per unit of downforce generated than a conventional rear wing (which creates drag and therefore requires energy to counter). The covered wheels should also help minimize spray during wet races.

The drag coefficient is around 0.48. Lola Cars

“You gain so much time in the low-speed corners that you’re able to have this amazing difference in performance,” he said. How much difference? About 4.3 seconds a lap at Monaco, and with a tenth of the energy per lap as a current F1 car, di Grassi and Lola reckon. Qualifying performance could be even greater, as cars could run with a minimum battery pack for the occasion, making a dent in what should be a 1,100 kg curb weight.

Just don’t expect to see a DRG-Lola race series just yet. For one thing, Formula E has the exclusive rights to the FIA’s single-seat electric championship, and with the Gen4 car due to arrive at the end of 2026, that series won’t be looking for a new car for another few years. But the idea is to inspire race car designers and series organizers, di Grassi said. “This is not a technical challenge anymore; we can do this,” he said.

“This project should serve as an inspiration for the future generations of electric racing cars. The question of whether such cars can be faster than Formula 1 has been answered with data and simulation. My plan is to build this car in the next two years,” he said.

For Lola, the project serves as notice that the marque, which was once well-represented across the motorsports world selling customer cars to numerous series, wants to reclaim those days. “At Lola, we are always looking for new ways to drive innovation through motorsport, and supporting Lucas with this design through utilizing our in-house expertise and state-of-the-art R&D facilities was a perfect project for this. The result is a car which pushes the boundaries of what is possible in electric racing through maximizing technological solutions which are already available,” said Lola Cars technical director Peter McCool.

Twin suction turbines and 3-Gs in slow corners? Meet the DRG-Lola. Read More »

The Analogue 3D is the modern N64 fans have been waiting for

analogue, Emulation, fpga, gaming, HDTV, n64, Nintendo, openFPGA, Upgrade / DJ Henderson / November 18, 2025

Excellent design and display filters, but the lack of OpenFPGA support rankles.

Your Super Mario 64 cartridge has a new home. Credit: Kyle Orland

If you’ve ever tried to hook an old Nintendo 64 up to a modern HDTV, you know the results can be less than ideal. Assuming your original hardware still works and your flatscreen even has the requisite R/F and/or composite inputs to allow for the connection, the N64’s output will probably look like a blurry mess on a flatscreen that wasn’t designed with those old video signals as a priority.

The Analogue 3D solves this very specific problem very well, with a powerful FPGA core that accurately replicates a Nintendo 64 and well-made display filters that do a good job of approximating that cathode-ray tube glow you remember from decades ago. But the lack of easy expandability limits the appeal of this $250 device to all but the most die-hard fans of original N64 hardware.

A beauty to behold

As a piece of physical design, the Analogue 3D is a work of art. The gentle curves of its sleek black shell evoke the original N64 design without copying it, coming in at a slightly smaller footprint and height. Plus, there’s no ugly power brick.

3D COMPUTER GRAPHICS SYSTEM. Kyle Orland

This is a solidly built device, with a nice grippy underside and springy, elegant power and reset buttons. The shell has a lot of small, thoughtful touches, too, like a front power indicator that doubles as a Bluetooth sync button and lights on each controller port to indicate when a wireless controller is connected to that slot (the Hall Effect joysticks on 8bitdo’s wireless “64” controller are a joy compared to the crunchy mechanical sticks on your old N64 controller).

The one downside to this design is that the hardware can get slightly hot after running for a while, and it emits some noticeable fan noise when stressed. The welcome screen when you first boot the system recommends you give the vents adequate space to breathe, so be careful if you plan to place it directly on the carpet or something.

I saw the TV glow

The Analogue 3D’s custom 3DOS software automatically detects the game cartridge you’ve placed into its top-loading slot and displays basic info like player count, developer/publisher, and release date on-screen (you can also load your own custom cartridge images onto an included SD card). The system maintains this info in a scrollable list of every cartridge you’ve ever inserted, allowing for a quick way to browse through your library without the need to dig out your actual cartridges. You do have to plug in the cartridges to actually play the games, though, which limits the usefulness of the on-screen library more than a little bit.

Before you launch a game, you can also configure the Display Mode between five preset options (these can also be swapped during gameplay using controller hotkeys for an on-screen menu). Of these, you’ll generally want to stay away from the “Clean” option, which upscales the N64’s 320×240 image by simply blowing up each individual pixel to fit the display. The result is an incredibly blocky image with lots of jagged edges and blobs of color that refuse to blend well with nearby elements. It’s a look that’s especially unsuited to the low-resolution textures on most N64 games, which exploited the gentle blur of a CRT to create some vivid effects.

Switching over to the “Scanlines” display option helps a bit in rounding out those jagged N64 polygons, but things really start to look better if you activate one of the system’s three different CRT emulation modes. With these, 3DOS does its best to recreate the look of an electron beam actually scanning across the phosphors on an old tube TV. These filters do an admirable job of softening the hard edges of polygons and sprites while subtly and accurately blending the colors on those low-res textures.

A scene from Starfox 64, upscaled with the Analogue 3D’s “Clean” filter (direct capture). Nintendo / Analogue

The Analogue 3D has three tube TV emulation modes, each representing consumer CRTs and the kind of Pro/Broadcast Video Monitors you’d usually only find in TV station control rooms. You can go into the menus for each mode and tinker with settings like “beam convergence” and “edge hardness,” and you can toggle N64 hardware effects like anti-aliasing and de-blurring (you can also stretch the 4:3 image to fill a 16:9 display if you’re a specific kind of monster).

In general, though, I didn’t see much upside in this kind of settings tinkering. Using the system’s default “CRT” settings created a visual experience that was surprisingly authentic to the actual CRT sitting in my home office. The only thing really missing is an option to simulate the curve of a classic CRT; the hard square edges of the Analogue 3D output are a bit lacking on that score. But that’s a minor complaint for a filter that does such a good job mimicking an old TV on new display technology.

Paper Mario with the Analogue 3D’s “Clean” filter (direct capture). Nintendo / Analogue

Open and shut

Like previous Analogue hardware, the Analogue 3D uses FPGA to accurately recreate the inner workings of an N64 at the level of individual logic gates. This time, the Analogue 3D’s Altera Cyclone FPGA sports a whopping 220,000 logic elements. That’s a big step up from the two FPGAs on 2021’s Analogue Pocket, which have just 49,000 and 15,000, respectively.

That powerful FPGA allows for perfectly accurate and lag-free N64 emulation in all of our tests with original cartridges (Analogue’s Christopher Taber warns us that “flash carts and unofficial 3rd party products can be a bit of a wild card”). But players hoping to emulate other gaming systems with that powerful hardware may run into some problems. That’s because the Analogue 3D doesn’t support the OpenFPGA standard that Analogue itself rolled out in 2022 as “the future of video game preservation.”

That standard has allowed a vibrant community of OpenFPGA developers to create dozens of free “cores” that can recreate everything from classic arcade games to 16-bit consoles with amazing fidelity. Currently, though, those cores will only work on the Analogue Pocket and not subsequent hardware like the Analogue 3D or 2023’s Analogue Duo.

That’s a shame because the OpenFPGA community would certainly be happy to get their hands on the new, larger FPGA in the Analogue 3D to build out core support for even more classic gaming consoles. And we’re sure Analogue 3D owners would be happy to use their purchase to play existing OpenFPGA cores on the big screen, complete with 3DOS’ great display options.

The beginning of Goldeneye as seen through Analogue’s CRT filter (photo of the HDTV screen).

“If we wanted to offer Analogue 3D with OpenFPGA (which is not the purpose or focus of the product), it would require not only a second FPGA, but an even more powerful base FPGA, therefore increasing the price to a price that doesn’t suit our goals,” Analogue founder Christopher Taber told Ars when the system was first announced back in 2023.

It seems likely that hackers and tinkerers will be able to expand the Analogue 3D’s emulation capabilities in the future. As it stands, though, it’s hard to recommend the hardware when options like Android-based, emulation-focused handhelds, Raspberry Pi-based emulation consoles, and even (more expensive) MiSTer FPGA boxes offer able support for much more than just N64 games.

If you’re looking for a simple, plug-and-play way to use your original N64 cartridges and accessories on a modern display, the Analogue 3D offers pretty much everything you could hope for. If you want a single device that can handle more, though, you should look elsewhere.

Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, writing primarily about the business, tech, and culture behind video games. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He once wrote a whole book about Minesweeper.

The Analogue 3D is the modern N64 fans have been waiting for Read More »

Benoit Blanc takes on a “perfectly impossible crime” in Wake Up Dead Man trailer

culture, Entertainment, film trailers, netflix, streaming television, Trailers, Wake Up Dead Man / DJ Henderson / November 17, 2025

Wake Up Dead Man garnered early rave reviews after screening at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) in September, and an initial teaser released shortly after showcased Blanc puzzling over a classic locked-room mystery. The new trailer builds out some of the details without giving too much away.

Rev. Jud is the prime suspect in Wicks’ murder, since he loathed the man and hence had a clear motive, but he insists to Blanc that he is innocent. We learn that Wicks was wealthy, and this being a classic whodunit, we know the rest of the characters no doubt have their deep, dark secrets—one of which could have led to murder. And Johnson brings the humor, too, as Blanc, the groundskeeper, and Martha discover the desecration of Wicks’ tombstone with scrawled graffiti penises. “Makes me sick, these kids painting rocket ships all over his sacred resting place,” the unworldly Martha says.

Wake Up Dead Man will be in select theaters on November 26, 2025, and will start streaming on Netflix on December 12, 2o25. We can’t wait.

Benoit Blanc takes on a “perfectly impossible crime” in Wake Up Dead Man trailer Read More »

Author name: DJ Henderson