Збирач потоків

AXT Inc of Fremont, CA, USA — which makes gallium arsenide (GaAs), indium phosphide (InP) and germanium (Ge) substrates and raw materials at plants in China — has closed its underwritten public offering of 8,163,265 shares of common stock at a price to the public of $12.25 per share, including the full exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase an additional 1,064,773 shares. The firm received total gross proceeds of about $100m, before deducting the underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering expenses...

Got a table saw recently so I went a little overboard with the French cleats. I also made a scope cart from the remains of my last desk. Fume extraction is a work in progress and I think I need a bigger flare on the hood. Next steps are better parts storage and filling out the relay rack with test gear. If anyone has any test lead/ cable storage suggestions, I’d love to hear them submitted by /u/jellzey [link] [comments]

From ancient compasses to modern smartphones, magnetometers have quietly shaped how we sense and navigate the world. Let us explore the fundamentals behind these field-detecting devices.

Magnetic fields are all around us, yet invisible to the eye. Magnetometers turn those hidden forces into measurable signals, guiding everything from navigation systems to consumer electronics. Well, let us dive into the principles that allow a simple sensor to translate invisible forces into actionable data.

A magnetometer is a device that measures magnetism: the direction, strength, or relative change of a magnetic field at a given location. Measuring the magnetization of a magnetic material, such as a ferromagnet, is one example. A compass is a simple magnetometer: it detects the direction of the ambient magnetic field, in this case the Earth’s.

The Earth’s magnetic field can be approximated as a dipole, offset by about 440 kilometers from the planet’s center and inclined roughly 11 degrees to its rotational axis. At the surface, its strength averages around 0.4 to 0.5 gauss, about 40–50 microtesla, which is quite small compared to laboratory magnetic fields.

Only a few types of magnetometers are sensitive enough to detect such weak fields, including mechanical compasses, fluxgate sensors, Hall-effect devices, magnetoelastic instruments, and magneto resistive sensors.

One of the landmark magnetoresistive sensors from the 1990s was KMZ51 from Philips. Released in 1996, it offered high sensitivity by exploiting the magnetoresistive effect of thin-film permalloy. At its core, the device integrated a Wheatstone bridge structure, which converted changes in magnetic resistance into measurable signals.

To enhance stability and usability, Philips added built-in compensation and set/reset coils: the compensation coil provided feedback to counter drift, while the set/reset coil re-aligned the sensor’s magnetic domains to maintain accuracy. These design features made KMZ51 particularly effective for electronic compasses, current sensing, and detecting the Earth’s weak magnetic field—applications where precision and reliability were essential. KMZ51 remains a classic example of how clever sensor design can make the invisible measurable.

Figure 1 Simplified circuit diagram of KMZ51 illustrates its Wheatstone bridge and integrated compensation and set/reset coils. Source: Philips

On a related side note, deflection, compass, and fluxgate magnetometers represent three distinct stages in the evolution of magnetic sensing. The deflection magnetometer, essentially a large compass box with a pivoted needle, measures the Earth’s horizontal field by observing how an external magnet deflects the needle under the tangent law. The familiar compass magnetometer, in its simplest form, aligns a magnetic needle with the ambient field to indicate direction, a principle that has been carried forward into modern electronic compasses.

Fluxgate magnetometers, by contrast, employ a soft magnetic core driven into alternating saturation; the resulting signal in a sense coil reveals both the magnitude and direction of the external field with far greater sensitivity. Together, these instruments illustrate the progression from basic mechanical deflection to precise electronic detection, each expanding the engineer’s ability to measure and interpret the invisible lines of magnetism.

Tangent law and Tan B position in compass deflection magnetometers

In the Tan B position, the bar magnet is oriented so that the magnetic field along its equatorial line is perpendicular to the Earth’s horizontal magnetic field component. Under this arrangement, the suspended magnetic needle deflects through an angle β, and the tangent law applies:

Tanβ= B/BH

B is the magnetic field produced at the location of the needle by the bar magnet.

BH is the horizontal component of the Earth’s magnetic field, which tends to align the needle along the geographic north–south direction.

This relationship shows that the deflection angle β depends on the ratio of the magnet’s equatorial field to the Earth’s horizontal field. This simple geometric relationship makes the Tan B position a fundamental method for determining unknown magnetic field strengths, bridging classroom demonstrations with practical magnetic measurements.

Figure 2 The image illustrates magnetometer architectures—from pivoted needle to fluxgate core—across design generations. Source: Author

Quick take: Magnetometers on the workbench

Magnetometers range from fluxgate arrays orbiting in satellites to quantum sensors probing in research labs—but this session is just a quick take. The spotlight here leans toward today’s DIY enthusiasts and benchtop builders, where Hall-effect sensors and MEMS modules serve as practical entry points. Think of it as a wake-up call, sprinkled with a few lively detours, all pointing toward the components that make magnetometers accessible for everyday projects.

Hall-effect sensors remain the most approachable entry point, translating magnetic fields into voltage shifts that DIY-ers can easily measure with a scope or microcontroller. MEMS magnetometers push things further, offering compact three-axis sensing in modules that drop straight into maker projects or wearables.

These devices not only simplify experimentation but also highlight how magnetic sensing has become democratized—no longer confined to aerospace or geophysics labs but are available in breakout boards and low-cost modules.

For the benchtop builder, this means magnetometers can be explored alongside other familiar sensors, integrated into Arduino or Raspberry Pi projects, or used to probe the invisible magnetic environment around everyday circuits. In short, the practical face of magnetometers today is accessible, modular, and ready to be wired into experiments without demanding a physics lab.

Getting started with magnetometers is straightforward, thanks to readily available pre-wired modules. Popular options often incorporate ICs such as the HMC5883L, LIS3MDL, and TLV493D, among others.

Although not for the faint-hearted, it’s indeed possible to build fluxgate magnetometers from scratch. The process, however, demands precision winding of coils, careful core selection, stable drive electronics, and meticulous calibration—all of which can be daunting for DIY enthusiasts. These difficulties often make home-built designs prone to noise, drift, and inconsistent sensitivity.

For those who want reliable results without the engineering overhead, ready-made fluxgate magnetometer modules are a practical choice, offering calibrated performance and ease of integration straight out of the box. A good example is the FG-3+ fluxgate magnetic field sensor from FG Sensors, which provides compact and sensitive measurement capabilities for hobbyist and applied projects.

FG-3+ is a high-sensitivity fluxgate magnetic field sensor capable of measuring Earth’s magnetic field with up to 1,000-fold greater precision than conventional integrated IC solutions. Its output is a stable 5-volt rectangular pulse, with the pulse period directly proportional to the magnetic field strength.

Figure 3 The FG-3+ fluxgate magnetic field sensor integrates seamlessly into both experimental and applied projects. Source: FG Sensors

Closing thoughts

This marks the end of this quick-take post on magnetometers, presented in a deliberately unconventional style. We have only scratched the surface; the field is rich with subtleties and deflections that deserve deeper exploration. If this overview piqued your interest, I encourage you to experiment with sensor modules, study fluxgate designs, and share your findings with the engineering community.

And while magnetometers probably will not help you track UFOs, at least not yet, they remain a fascinating gateway into sensing the invisible forces all around us. The more we build, test, and exchange ideas, the stronger our collective understanding becomes. Onward to the next signal.

T. K. Hareendran is a self-taught electronics enthusiast with a strong passion for innovative circuit design and hands-on technology. He develops both experimental and practical electronic projects, documenting and sharing his work to support fellow tinkerers and learners. Beyond the workbench, he dedicates time to technical writing and hardware evaluations to contribute meaningfully to the maker community.

Related Content

• Tiny magnetometer ups sensitivity
• Fundamentals of digital magnetic sensors
• Differential Magnetic Current and Position Sensing
• Magnetometer basics for mobile phone applications
• Deliberate diamond defect yields ultrasensitive magnetometer

The post Magnetometers: Sensing the invisible fields appeared first on EDN.

Що відкрили для себе студенти КПІ в Національному музеї літератури України kpi ср, 12/31/2025 - 13:00

Space Forge of Cardiff, UK (which has operations on Florida’s Space Coast) has generated plasma aboard its ForgeStar-1 satellite, marking a world-first for commercial in-space manufacturing and a step toward producing a new class of high-performance semiconductor materials on orbit...

submitted by /u/SpecialistRare832 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/canadianchasers [link] [comments]

NUBURU Inc of Centennial, CO, USA — which was founded in 2015 and developed and previously manufactured high-power industrial blue lasers — has given an update outlining multiple near-term strategic execution milestones expected to be achieved in January. These reflect continued progress across the firm’s previously announced defense platform expansion, financial strengthening initiatives, and transformation into an integrated Defense & Security Hub...

submitted by /u/Life-Name3309 [link] [comments]

Пам'яті Звезди Дмитра Володимировича kpi вт, 12/30/2025 - 17:36

Co-packaged optics (CPO) technology, a key enabler for next-generation data center architectures, promises unprecedented bandwidth density and power efficiency by tightly integrating optical engines with switch silicon. But after nearly a decade of existence, where does this next-generation optical interconnect technology stand in terms of broad commercial realization?

But before we delve into CPO’s technology roadmap and its future deployment prospects, here is a brief introduction to this silicon photonics architecture and how it empowers artificial intelligence (AI), high-performance computing (HPC), and high-speed networking applications where electrical signaling over copper wires is reaching its limits.

Figure 1 CPO integrates optical transceivers directly with switch ASICs or processors to enable low-power, high-bandwidth links. Source: Broadcom

CPO, which integrates optical components directly into a single package, minimizes the electrical path length, significantly reducing signal loss, enhancing high-speed signal integrity, and containing latency. In other words, CPO enhances data throughput by leveraging high-bandwidth optical engines that deliver higher data transfer rates and are less susceptible to electromagnetic interference (EMI) than traditional copper connections.

Moreover, this silicon-photonics integration improves power efficiency by reducing the need for high-power electrical drivers, repeaters, and retimers. Case in point: by shortening the copper trace, CPO could improve the link budget enough to remove digital signal processor (DSP) or retimer functionality. That significantly reduces the overall power per bit, a key metric in AI data center management.

Below is a sneak peek at major CPO activities during 2025; it offers a glimpse of product launches and the actual readiness of CPO’s basic building blocks.

CPO’s 2025 progress report

In January 2025, Marvell announced advances in its custom XPU architecture integrated with CPO technology. The company showcased how its custom AI accelerator architecture combines XPU compute silicon, HBM, and other chiplets with its 3D SiPho engines on the same substrate using high-speed SerDes, die-to-die interfaces, and advanced packaging technologies.

That eliminates the need for electrical signals to leave the XPU package into copper cables or across a PCB. Furthermore, connections between XPUs can achieve faster data transfer rates and distances that are 100x longer than electrical cabling. Marvell’s 3D SiPho engine supports 200 Gbps electrical and optical interfaces.

Figure 2 XPU with integrated CPO enhances AI server performance by increasing XPU density from tens within a rack to hundreds across multiple racks. Source: Marvell

“AI scale-up servers require connectivity with higher signaling speeds and longer distances to support unprecedented XPU cluster sizes,” said Nick Kucharewski, senior VP and GM of the Network Switching Business Unit at Marvell. “Integrating co-packaged optics into custom XPUs is the logical next step to scale performance with higher interconnect bandwidths and longer reach.”

Four months later, in May 2025, Broadcom offered a glimpse of its third-generation 200G per lane CPO technology. The company’s CPO journey began in 2021 with the Tomahawk 4-Humboldt chipset, and the second-generation Tomahawk 5-Bailly chipset became the industry’s first volume-production CPO solution.

“Broadcom has spent years perfecting our CPO platform solutions, as evidenced by the maturity of our second-generation 100G/lane products and the ecosystem readiness,” said Near Margalit, VP and GM of the Optical Systems Division at Broadcom. The company also claims that, in addition to edge switch ASICs and optical-engine technology, it offers a comprehensive ecosystem of passive optical components, interconnects, and system solutions partners.

Figure 3 CPO offers a sustainable path forward by addressing the power constraints and physical limitations of traditional pluggable optics. Source: Broadcom

In October 2025, Broadcom claimed that Meta has tested its CPO solutions for one million link hours without a single link flap in a high-temperature lab characterization environment. A link flap is a brief connectivity disruption; it’s a critical reliability metric in high-performance data center networks.

Besides CPO heavyweights like Broadcom and Marvell, there are notable startups in the silicon photonics realm, striving to overcome electrical I/O bottlenecks. For instance, Ayar Labs, a supplier of optical interconnect solutions, has incorporated its TeraPHY optical engines into ASIC design services of Global Unichip Corp. (GUC), a Hsinchu, Taiwan-based chip developer.

In November 2025, Ayar Labs announced that it has integrated its optical engines into GUC’s advanced packaging and ASIC workflow, a critical step toward future CPO deployment. The joint design effort helps address key challenges of CPO integration: architectural, power and signal integrity, mechanical, and thermal.

Figure 4 In this CPO, two TeraPHY optical engine chiplets (left) are shown with a customer FPGA (center) within the same SoC package. Source: Ayar Labs

“The future of AI and data center scale-up will not be possible without optics to overcome the electrical I/O bottleneck,” said Vladimir Stojanovic, CTO and co-founder of Ayar Labs. “Working with GUC on advanced packaging and silicon technologies is an important step in demonstrating how our optical engines can accelerate the implementation of co-packaged optics for hyperscalers and AI scale-up.”

CPO in 2026 and beyond

While CPO proponents are eager to claim that the CPO revolution is at our doorstep, industry watchers like Yole Group see large-scale deployments between 2028 and 2030. Meanwhile, pluggable modules—inserted into the front panel of a switch sitting at the edge of the PCB—will remain competitive.

Market research firm LightCounting also predicts that optical modules will continue to account for the majority of optical links in data centers throughout the decade. At the same time, however, optical transceiver technology will continue to steadily shift toward placing the optics closer to the ASIC.

That’s because traditional pluggable optical modules are increasingly constrained by signal loss, power consumption, and latency due to long electrical traces between the switch ASIC and the optical engine. CPO overcomes these limitations by placing the optical engine much closer to the switching silicon.

The migration of the optical engine closer to the switch ASIC shortens the length of copper trace used for electrical signalling, thereby improving electrical performance. However, the seamless attachment of optical engines to switch ASICs or XPUs requires a range of packaging approaches, including 2.5D interposers, through-silicon vias (TSVs), fan-out wafer-level packaging, and 3D integration enabled by hybrid bonding.

These advanced packaging technologies are steadily evolving, and so is CPO deployment. IDTechEx projects that the CPO market will exceed $20 billion by 2036, growing at a robust CAGR of 37% from 2026 to 2036.

Related Content

• The Rise of Co-Packaged Optics
• AI Clusters Spur Optical Connectivity
• The advent of co-packaged optics (CPO) in 2025
• Global Insights into the Co-Packaged Optics Technology Platform
• AI Performance Now Depends on Optics (and CPO is the Front Line)

The post Where co-packaged optics (CPO) technology stands in 2026 appeared first on EDN.

The first hits from a Google search of the term “guard circuit” produce a series of references to the National Guard on some security circuit. Deep in the list is a printed circuit board company that touts that they design guard rings on critical circuits. So just what are they?

Wow the engineering world with your unique design: Design Ideas Submission Guide

Guard circuit

Analog Devices references guard shields around their op amps as well as the printed circuit traces [1]. These traces are called guard rings; they circle and shield critical circuits. Another well-known reference on electromagnetic interference (EMI) discusses guard shields in the early edition [2]. The use of op amp shields, together with shielded pairs, and grounded so as to eliminate differential input noise. This is accomplished by connecting the cable shield to the op amp shield. Another section discusses guarded meters.

In this example, the recommended connection should be made so as not to cause current flow through any measuring leads. The term “guard shield” is missing from the author’s subsequent book on the same topic [3].

High-power active devices can use guard shields, in the form of a thin conductive strip placed between two electrical insulating yet thermal conductive gaskets, used to mount the device to a heat sink [4]. The guard shield is returned to the circuit common. This results in lower leakage capacitance between the device case and the heat sink, and lower parasitic currents.

Active circuit guard wiring techniques

Guarding can be done using active circuit devices such as an operational amplifier, as shown in Figure 1. The amplifier is wired as a coupler or isolator; the feedback is between the output and the positive input. The coaxial shield is connected to that output, which is the active shield, a low impedance source equal to the input voltage. A large leakage resistor is shown to complete the Spice simulation. The center wire is connected to the measured devices or circuit.

Figure 1 An active circuit guarding with op amps wired as a coupler or isolator and the feedback is between the output and positive input. 

Guard circuit applications

Another possible application for the guard technique is interfacing a pulse signal. A pulse signal’s Fourier transform has a fundamental and odd harmonics. For high-frequency signal transmission, twisted pairs such as Cat 5 are frequently used. The source and load impedance should be equal to prevent reflections. But what if this is not the case? If a guarded circuit is used, the source is connected to the operational amplifier input, which has a high input impedance, and the wire is guarded from the return path.

An example where this circuit could be employed is interfacing industrial or process fluid flow meters. A variety of meters, such as positive displacement, which uses oval gears, and a pickup circuit to count revolutions. This includes turbine meters, which have blades internal to the meter and rotate proportionally to the flow rate.

The vortex flow meter is based on the Von Karman effect. As the fluid flows around a fixed body or blunt object, vorticity is shed alternately. The frequency of this vortex shedding is proportional to the fluid velocity. This signal can be sensed in several ways and is a pulse signal.

The Coriolis mass flow meters make use of two vibrating tubes. Flow through the tubes causes Coriolis forces to twist the tubes, resulting in a phase shift. The time difference between the waves is measured and is directly proportional to the mass flow rate.

All these meters have a calibration factor or K, which is a constant relating to the calibration, for example, K= 800 pulses per gallon. The pulses, electrical circuits, and internal resistances can vary depending on the meter. There are a variety of signal levels as well as input and output resistances between these meters and the input circuit cards.

A frequent application for these meters is to charge a known fluid volume in a tank. An accurate method is to count up or down pulses in an industrial controller. It is more accurate to measure the signal as a pulse, adding interface circuitry such as an analog flow rate signal, and integrating that signal will be subject to circuit inaccuracies and, assuming the operation is done in an industrial controller, be subject to scan sampling errors.

Figure 2 Active circuit guarding, pulse interface circuit based on 200 feet RG-58 coax cable with distributed capacitance and resistance.

Test circuit

This proposed circuit was tested based on a pulse waveform based on a typical meter as discussed. The pulse assumed is 1-ms wide with a 3-ms period. The pulse is generated by a LMC555 wired in astable operation with a 1-kΩ pull up load to a 5-V supply.

The isolation operational amplifier is 1/4 LM324 wired such that the output is a non inverting unity amplifier. The guard circuit is a 40 foot RG-58 coaxial cable. The amplifier is powered by its own 9-V battery. The only connection between both supplies is the single conductor wire parallel to the coax.

The results are shown in Figure 3, the circuit was able to provide an output the same as the input, and able to interface with any input impedance.

Figure 3 Pulse waveforms where yellow is the output and green is the input.

These waveforms agreed with the Spice simulation. The output closely followed the input.

Note the output waveform when expanded time scale when rising. The rapid increase followed by a ramp to the steady state is because the op amp has a very high gain, and is charging based on its supply voltage. However when the outer coax is charged to a point below the steady state output, the RC equivalent circuit is still charging expecting that the steady state at supply voltage. However when input difference is zero, the ramp ceases.

Figure 4 The pulse waveforms where yellow is the output and green is the input. The time scale 1/100 the previous figure (Figure 3).

Because almost all these flow signal transmitters have isolated electronics, the third wire, signal common, may be the same wire as the power supply return. This supply power is typically supplied from the pulse sensing electronics.

If so, that conductive path or reference is already available, usually in the same pair as the supply wire, in the form of a twisted, shielded cable. This provides magnetic and electric field EMI protection. The user only needs to provide the coaxial cable to the flow meter.

More than a shield

A guard shield is more than just a shield, either a solid conductive surface or braided cylinder, it is in concert with thoughtful wiring techniques to both active and passive components that result in mitigating EMI.

Related Content

• Power Supply Guard Circuit
• Telephone Guard Circuit
• Understanding grounding, shielding, and guarding in high-impedance applications
• Analog layout: Why wells, taps, and guard rings are crucial

References

1. Sheingold, Daniel H., Transducer Interfacing Handbook, Analog Devices, Inc., Norwood, MA., 1980.
2. Ott, H. W., Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, 1988.
3. Ott, H. W., Electromagnetic Compatibility Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, 2009.
4. Morrison, R., Grounding and Shielding Circuits and Interference, fifth edition, IEEE Press, John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, 2007.

Bob Heider worked as an electrical and controls engineer for a large chemical company for over 30 years. This was followed by several years in academic and research roles with Washington University, St. Louis, MO. He is continuing to work part-time as well as mentor some student groups.

The post Guard circuit provides impedance matching appeared first on EDN.

AXT Inc of Fremont, CA, USA — which makes gallium arsenide (GaAs), indium phosphide (InP) and germanium (Ge) substrates and raw materials at plants in China — has announced the pricing of an underwritten public offering of 7,098,492 shares of common stock at a price of $12.25 per share...

📋 Для українських науковців продовжено безкоштовний доступ до міжнародних наукових ресурсів kpi вт, 12/30/2025 - 10:28

I've been buying stuff from thrift stores to learn more about electronics. I took this apart and found it had a broken circuit board. It took a couple hours and it's not pretty but it works! submitted by /u/jacobthejones [link] [comments]

Відкриття виставки кераміки «П'ять чаш» в Українсько-Японському центрі kpi пн, 12/29/2025 - 23:35

Move2Thz – Sustainable Indium Phosphide (InP) platform and ecosystem upscaling, enabling future mass market (sub-)THz applications – is a collaborative project to address existing indium phosphide (InP) shortcomings and build a mature European ecosystem to obtain a commercially and industry-viable platform for use in various mass-market applications utilizing the higher-frequency spectrum towards THz and beyond...

19 років Інституту спеціального зв’язку та захисту інформації – історія, яку творять люди kpi пн, 12/29/2025 - 17:57

Read on for our intrepid engineer’s latest set of predictions for the year(s) to come.

As has been the case the last couple of years, we’re once again flip-flopping what might otherwise seemingly be the logical ordering of this and its companion 2025 look-back piece. I’m writing this 2026 look-ahead for December publication, with the 2025 revisit to follow, targeting a January 2026 EDN unveil. While a lot can happen between now and the end of 2025, potentially affecting my 2026 forecasting in the process, this reordering also means that my 2025 retrospective will be more comprehensive than might otherwise be the case.

Without any further ado, and as usual, ordered solely in the cadence in which they initially came out of my cranium…

AI-based engineering

Likely unsurprisingly, as will also be the case with the subsequent 2025 retrospective-to-come, AI-related topics dominate my forecast of the year(s) to come. Take “vibe coding”, which entered the engineering and broader public vernacular only in February and quickly caught fire. Here’s Wikipedia’s introduction to the associated article on the subject:

Vibe coding is an artificial intelligence-assisted software development technique popularized by Andrej Karpathy in February 2025. The term was listed on the Merriam-Webster website the following month as a “slang & trending” term. It was named Collins Dictionary‘s Word of the Year for 2025.

Vibe coding describes a chatbot-based approach to creating software where the developer describes a project or task to a large language model (LLM), which generates code based on the prompt. The developer does not review or edit the code, but solely uses tools and execution results to evaluate it and asks the LLM for improvements. Unlike traditional AI-assisted coding or pair programming, the human developer avoids examination of the code, accepts AI-suggested completions without human review, and focuses more on iterative experimentation than code correctness or structure.

Sounds great, at least in theory, right? Just tell the vibe coding service and underlying AI model what you need your software project to do; it’ll as-needed pull together the necessary code snippets from both open-source and company-proprietary repositories all by itself. If you’re already a software engineer, it enables you to crank out more code even quicker and easier than before.

And if you’re a software or higher-level corporate manager, you might even be able to lay off (or at least pay grade-downscale) some of those engineers in the process. Therein explaining the rapid rollout of vibe coding capabilities from both startups and established AI companies, along with evaluations and initial deployments that’ll undoubtedly expand dramatically in the coming year (and beyond). What could go wrong? Well…

Advocates of vibe coding say that it allows even amateur programmers to produce software without the extensive training and skills required for software engineering. Critics point out a lack of accountability, maintainability, and the increased risk of introducing security vulnerabilities in the resulting software.

Specifically, a growing number of companies are reportedly discovering that any upfront time-to-results benefits incurred by AI-generated code end up being counterbalanced by the need to then reactively weed out resulting bugs, such as those generated by hallucinated routines when the vibe coding service can’t find relevant pre-existing examples (assuming the platform hasn’t just flat-out deleted its work, that is).

To that point, I’ll note that vibe coding, wherein not reviewing the resultant software line-by-line is celebrated, is an extreme variant of the more general AI-assisted programming technology category.

But even if a human being combs through the resultant code instead of just compiling and running it to see what comes out the other end, there’s still no guarantee that the coding-assistance service won’t have tapped into buggy, out-of-date software repositories, for example. And there’s always also the inevitable edge and corner cases that won’t be comprehended upfront by programmers relying on AI engines instead of their own noggins.

That all said, AI-based programming is already having a negative impact on both the job prospects for university students in the computer science curriculum and the degree-selection and pursuit aspirations of those preparing to go to college, not to mention (as already alluded to) the ongoing employment fortunes of programmers already in the job market.

And for those of you who are instead focused on hardware, whether that be chip- or board-level design, don’t be smug. There’s a fundamental reason, after all, why a few hours before I started writing this section, NVIDIA announced a $2B investment in EDA toolset and IP provider Synopsys.

Leveraging AI to generate optimized routing layouts for the chips on a PCB or the functional blocks on an IC is one thing; conventional algorithms have already been handling this for a long time. But relying on AI to do the whole design? Call me cynical…but only cautiously so.

Memory (and associated system) supply and prices

Speaking of timely announcements, within minutes prior to starting to write this section (which, to be clear, was also already planned), I saw news that Micron Technology was phasing out its nearly 30-year old Crucial consumer memory brand so that it could redirect its not-unlimited fabrication capacity toward more lucrative HBM (high bandwidth memory) devices for “cloud” AI applications.

And just yesterday (again, as I’m writing these words), a piece at Gizmodo recommended to readers: “Don’t Build a PC Right Now. Just Don’t”. What’s going on?

Capacity constraints, that’s what. Remember a few years back, when the world went into a COVID-19 lockdown, and everyone suddenly needed to equip a home office, not to mention play computer games during off-hours?

Device sales, with many of them based on DRAM, mass storage (HDDs and/or SSDs), and GPUs, shot through the roof, and these system building blocks also then went into supply constraints, all of which led to high prices and availability limits.

Well, here we go again. Only this time, the root cause isn’t a pandemic; it’s AI. In the last few years’ worth of coverage on Apple, Google, and others’ device announcements, I’ve intentionally highlighted how much DRAM each smartphone, tablet, and computer contains, because it’s a key determinant of whether (and if so, how well) it can run on-device inference. 

Now translate that analogy to a cloud server (the more common inference nexus) and multiply both the required amount and performance of memory by multiple orders of magnitude to estimate the demand here. See the issue? And see why, given the choice to prioritize either edge or datacenter customers, memory suppliers will understandably choose the latter due to the much higher revenues and profits for a given capacity of HBM versus conventional-interface DRAM?

Likely unsurprising to my readers, nonvolatile memory demand increases are pacing those of their volatile memory counterparts. Here again, speed is key, so flash memory is preferable, although to the degree that the average mass storage access profile can be organized as sequential versus random, the performance differential between SSDs and lower cost-per-bit HHDs (which, mind you, are also increasingly supply-constrained by ramping demand) can be minimized.

Another traditional workaround involves beefing up the amount of DRAM—acting as a fast cache—between the mass storage and processing subsystems, although per the prior paragraph it’s a particularly unappealing option this time around.

I’ve still got spare DRAM DIMMs and M.2 SSD modules, along with motherboards, cases, PSUs, CPUs, and graphics cards, and the like sitting around, left over from my last PC-build binge.

Beginning over the upcoming holidays, I plan to fire up my iFixit toolkits and start assembling ‘em again, because the various local charities I regularly work with are clearly going to be even more desperate than usual for hardware donations.

The same goes for smartphones and the like, and not just for fiscally downtrodden folks…brace yourselves to stick with the devices you’ve already got for the next few years. I suspect this particular constraint portion of the long-standing semiconductor boom-and-bust cadence will be with us even longer than usual.

Electricity rates and environmental impacts

Not a day seemingly goes by without me hearing about at least one (and usually multiple) new planned datacenter(s) for one of the big names in tech, either being built directly by that company or in partnership with others, and financed at least in part by tax breaks and other incentives from the municipalities in which they’ll be located (here’s one recent example).

And inevitably that very same day, I’ll also see public statements of worry coming from various local, state, and national government groups, along with public advocacy organizations, all concerned about the environmental and other degrading impacts of the substantial power and water needs demanded by this and other planned “cloud” facilities (ditto, ditto, and ditto).

Truth be told, I don’t entirely “get” the municipal appeal of having a massive AI server farm in one’s own back yard (and I’m not alone). Granted, there may be a short-duration uptick in local employment from construction activity.

The long-term increase in tax revenues coming from large, wealthy tech corporations is an equally enticing Siren’s Song (albeit counterbalanced by the aforementioned subsidies). And what politician can’t resist proudly touting the outcome of his or her efforts to bring Alphabet (Google)/Amazon/Apple/ Meta/Microsoft/[insert your favorite buzzy company name here] to his or her district?

Regarding environmental impacts, however, I’ll “showcase” (for lack of a better word) one particularly egregious example: Elon Musk’s xAI Colossus 1 and 2 data centers in Memphis, Tennessee.

The former, a repurposed Electrolux facility, went online in September 2024, only 122 days after construction began. The latter, for which construction started this March, is forecasted, when fully equipped, to be the “First Gigawatt Datacenter In The World”. Sounds impressive, right? Well, there’s also this, quoting from Wikipedia:

At the site of Colossus in South Memphis, the grid connection was only 8 MW, so xAI applied to temporarily set up more than a dozen gas turbines (Voltagrid’s 2.5 MW units and Solar Turbines’ 16 MW SMT-130s) which would steadily burn methane gas from a 16-inch natural gas main. However, according to advocacy groups, aerial imagery in April 2025 showed 35 gas turbines had been set up at a combined 422 MW. These turbines have been estimated to generate about “72 megawatts, which is approximately 3% of the (TVA) power grid”. According to the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), the higher number of gas turbines and the subsequent emissions requires xAI to have a ‘major source permit’, however, the emissions from the turbines are similar to the nearby large gas-powered utility plants.

In Memphis, xAI was able to sidestep some environmental rules in the construction of Colossus, such as operating without permits for the on-site methane gas turbines because they are “portable”. The Shelby County Health department told NPR that “it only regulates gas-burning generators if they’re in the same location for more than 364 days. In the neighborhood of South Memphis, poor air quality has given residents elevated asthma rates and lower life expectancy. A ProPublica report found that the cancer risk for those living in this area already have four times the risk of cancer than what the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers to be an acceptable risk. In November 2024, the grid connection was upgraded to 150 MW, and some turbines were removed.

Along with high electricity needs, the expected water demand is over five million gallons of water per day in “… an area where arsenic pollution threatens the drinking water supply.” This is reported by the non-profit Protect Our Aquifer, a community organization founded to protect the drinking water in Memphis. While xAI has stated they plan to work with MLGW on a wastewater treatment facility and the installation of 50 megawatts of large battery storage facilities, there are currently no concrete plans in place aside from a one-page factsheet shared by MLGW.

Geothermal power

Speaking of the environment, the other night I watched a reality-calibrating episode of The Daily Show, wherein John Stewart interviewed Elizabeth Kolbert, Pulitzer Prize-winning author and staff writer at The New Yorker:

I say “calibrating” because it forced me to confront some uncomfortable realities regarding global warming. As regular readers may already realize, either to their encouragement or chagrin, I’m an unabashed believer in the following:

1. Global warming is real, already here, and further worsening over time
2. Its presence and trends are directly connected to human activity, and
3. Those trends won’t automatically (or even quickly) stop, far from reversing course, even if that causational human activity ceases.

What I was compelled to accept after watching Stewart and Kolbert’s conversation, augmenting my existing opinion that human beings are notoriously short-sighted in their perspectives, frequently to their detriment (both near- and long-term), were conclusions such as the following:

1. Expecting humans to willingly lower (or even flatline, versus constantly striving to upgrade) their existing standards of living for the long-term good of their species and the planet they inhabit is fruitless
2. And given that the United States (where I live, therefore the innate perspective) is currently the world’s largest supplier of fossil fuel—specifically, petroleum and natural gas—energy sources, powerful lobbyists and other political forces will preclude serious consideration of and responses to global warming concerns, at least in the near term.

In one sense, those in the U.S. are not alone with their heads-in-the-sand stance. Ironically, albeit intentionally, the photo I included at the beginning of the prior section was of a coal-burning power plant in China.

That said, at the same time, China is also a renewable energy leader, rapidly becoming the world’s largest implementer of both wind and solar cell technology, both of which are now cheaper than fossil fuels for new power plant builds, even after factoring out subsidies. China also manufactures the bulk of the world’s lithium-based batteries, which enable energy storage for later use whenever the sun’s not shining and the wind’s not blowing.

To that latter point, though, while solar, wind, and many other renewable energy sources, such as tidal power, have various “green” attributes both in an absolute sense and versus carbon-based alternatives, they’re inconsistent in output over time. But there’s another renewable option, geothermal power, that doesn’t suffer from this impermanence, especially in its emerging “enhanced” variety. Traditional geothermal techniques were only limited-location relevant, with consequent challenges for broader transmission of any power generated, as Wikipedia explains:

The Earth’s heat content is about 1×1019 TJ (2.8×1015 TWh). This heat naturally flows to the surface by conduction at a rate of 44.2 TW and is replenished by radioactive decay at a rate of 30 TW. These power rates are more than double humanity’s current energy consumption from primary sources, but most of this power is too diffuse (approximately 0.1 W/m2 on average) to be recoverable. The Earth’s crust effectively acts as a thick insulating blanket which must be pierced by fluid conduits (of magma, water or other) to release the heat underneath.

Electricity generation requires high-temperature resources that can only come from deep underground. The heat must be carried to the surface by fluid circulation, either through magma conduits, hot springs, hydrothermal circulation, oil wells, drilled water wells, or a combination of these. This circulation sometimes exists naturally where the crust is thin: magma conduits bring heat close to the surface, and hot springs bring the heat to the surface.

To bolster the identification of such naturally geothermal-friendly locations (the photo at the beginning of this section was taken in Iceland, for example), companies such as Zanskar are (cue irony) using AI to locate previously unknown hidden sources. I’m admittedly also pleasantly surprised that the U.S. Department of Energy just announced geothermal development funding.

And, to even more broadly deploy the technology, other startups like Fervo Energy and Quaise Energy are prototyping ultra-deep drilling techniques first pioneered with (again, cue irony) fracking to pierce the crust and get to the constant-temperature, effectively unlimited energy below it, versus relying on the aforementioned natural conduit fractures. That it can be done doesn’t necessarily mean that it can be done cost-effectively, mind you, but I for one won’t ever underestimate the power of human ingenuity.

World models (and other LLM successors)

While the prior section focused on accepting the reality of ongoing AI technology adoption and evolution, suggesting one option (of several; don’t forget about nuclear fusion) for powering it in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner, this concluding chapter is in some sense a counterpoint. Each significant breakthrough to date in deep learning implementations, while on the one hand making notable improvements in accuracy and broader capabilities, has also demanded ever-beefier compute, memory, and other system resources to accomplish its objectives…all of which require more energy to power them, along with more water to remove the heat byproduct of this energy consumption. The AI breakthrough introduced in this section is no exception.

Yann LeCun, one of the “godfathers” of AI whom I’ve mentioned here at EDN numerous times before (including just one year ago), has publicly for several years now been highly critical of what he sees as the inherent AGI (artificial general intelligence) and other limitations of LLMs (large language models) and their transformer network foundations.

A recent interview with LeCun published in the Wall Street Journal echoed many of these longstanding criticisms, adding a specific call-out for world models as their likely successor. Here’s how NVIDIA defines world models, building on my earlier description of multimodel AI:

World models are neural networks that understand the dynamics of the real world, including physics and spatial properties. They can use input data, including text, image, video, and movement, to generate videos that simulate realistic physical environments. Physical AI developers use world models to generate custom synthetic data or downstream AI models for training robots and autonomous vehicles.

Granted, LeCun has no shortage of detractors, although much of the criticism I’ve seen is directed not at his ideas in and of themselves but at his claimed tendency to overemphasize his role in coming up with and developing them at the expense of other colleagues’ contributions.

And granted, too, he’s planning on departing Meta, where he’s managed Facebook’s Artificial Intelligence Research (FAIR) unit for more than a decade, for a world model-focused startup. That said, I’ll forever remember witnessing his decade-plus back live demonstration of early CNN (convolutional neural network)-based object recognition running on his presentation laptop and accelerated on a now-archaic NVIDIA graphics subsystem:

He was right then. And I’m personally betting on him again.

Happy holidays to all, and to all a good night

I wrote the following words a couple of years ago and, as was also the case last year, couldn’t think of anything better (or even different) to say this year, given my apparent constancy of emotion, thought, and resultant output. So, once agai,n with upfront apologies for the repetition, a reflection of my ongoing sentiment, not laziness:

I’ll close with a thank-you to all of you for your encouragement, candid feedback and other manifestations of support again this year, which have enabled me to once again derive an honest income from one of the most enjoyable hobbies I could imagine: playing with and writing about various tech “toys” and the foundation technologies on which they’re based. I hope that the end of 2025 finds you and yours in good health and happiness, and I wish you even more abundance in all its myriad forms in the year to come. Let there be Peace on Earth.

p.s…let me (and your fellow readers) know in the comments not only what you think of my prognostications but also what you expect to see in 2026 and beyond!

—Brian Dipert is the Principal at Sierra Media and a former technical editor at EDN Magazine, where he still regularly contributes as a freelancer.

Related Content

• 2025: A technology forecast for the year ahead
• 2024: A technology forecast for the year ahead
• 2023: A technology forecast for the year ahead
• 2022 tech themes: A look ahead
• A tech look back at 2022: We can’t go back (and why would we want to?)
• A 2021 technology retrospective: Strange days indeed

The post 2026: A technology forecast for AI’s ever-evolving bag of tricks appeared first on EDN.