Latest news with #ProjectK
Time of India
06-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Deepika Padukone is not making an exit from Nag Ashwin's 'Kalki 2' with Prabhas amid Sandeep Reddy Vanga's 'Spirit' controversy: Report
Reports have been circulating online about being removed from the cast of 's much-awaited film 'Kalki 2', amid the recent alleged cold war with over Spirit. However, insiders have strongly refuted the claims, calling them entirely unfounded. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Deepika is not leaving Kalki 2 behind Social media has been abuzz with speculation about a supposed fallout between Deepika and the team behind Kalki 2898 AD, including co-star . But those close to the production have dismissed the theory, stating there is no truth to the idea that she was ousted. According to NDTV, an insider reacted to the rumours saying, 'Completely baseless.' Kalki 2, the sequel to the much-talked-about 'Kalki 2898 AD', has not even entered production. According to sources, the film remains in its early planning stages. The makers have not even begun approaching actors, as it is still in development. 'There's been no shoot, no interaction, and therefore, no fallout,' the source revealed. Sandeep Reddy Vanga and Deepika Padukone's cold war Kamal Haasan, Prabhas, Deepika Padukone to launch 'Project K' at San Diego Comic-Con; Amitabh Bachchan calls it 'a proud moment' The confusion may have stemmed from earlier controversies surrounding Deepika's reported departure from director Sandeep Reddy Vanga's upcoming film Spirit. Reports claimed the actress had requested shorter shooting hours, higher pay, and a share in the film's profits. The demands reportedly did not go down well with the filmmaker, leading to Deepika's alleged exit. Following the incident, Sandeep Reddy Vanga welcomed actress Triptii Dimri on board and shared a cryptic note on his social media handles. 'When I narrate a story to an actor, I place 100% faith. There is an unsaid NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) between us. But by doing this, you've 'DISCLOSED' the person that you are... Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Putting down a younger actor and ousting my story? Is this what your feminism stands for? As a filmmaker, I put years of hard work behind my craft, and for me, filmmaking is everything. You didn't get it. You won't get it. You will never get it. Aisa karo... Agli baar poori kahani bolna... kyunki mujhe zara bhi farak nahi padta. #dirtyPRgames I like this kahawat very much :-) खुंदक में बिल्ली खंबा नोचे!' he wrote on his X (formerly Twitter) handle. About Kalki 2 'Kalki 2' remains one of the most eagerly anticipated films from Nag Ashwin, especially as the first instalment—starring Prabhas, Amitabh Bachchan, Kamal Haasan, and Deepika Padukone—became a major hit.
1News
04-05-2025
- 1News
Chch students discover resilience, strength after wilderness adventure
Twelve Year 10 students from Christchurch's Hornby High School have just finished a two-week wilderness adventure as part of Project K. The Graeme Dingle Foundation runs the 14-month programme which is designed to help young people deal with the challenges of life. 1News were there as the group returned on mountain bikes, in torrential rain, from the final leg of their journey. They were given a rousing guard of honour by fellow students, and showered in love and hugs by their families. The tears flowed freely. Tania Mulholland greeted her son Toby McLeish with a tight hug. "It's been a really long two weeks without him," she said, becoming emotional. "Very glad he's home. Very proud. Very proud." Kayla Davison was given a similar welcome. Her grandmother, Heather Davison, expressed her pride. "I think it's like more resilience, getting them to achieve things that they've never done before so I think it's great," she said. The teenagers are proud of themselves too. Kayla said she has learnt "to never give up and to keep trying". Toby echoed her words. "The tramping was kind of wet, cold. Felt like I just wanted to go home but I just pushed through. It was really worth it." The teens trekked through native bush and arduous terrain near Otira, in the central South Island, kayaking, abseiling and camping as well. One student said the tasks brought out the best in each of them. "You'll feel scared and lonely and down and you just need to push through because you can do this," they said. The students were nominated by their teachers to take part. Hornby High School principal Ian Murray said those who were chosen had the "best opportunity to grow resilience and character, to help them through the challenges that some of them may have been facing at the time". Their final task was to deliver a speech about what they've learnt. 'On Project K, I pushed myself beyond my limits and realised I had more to me than I thought," Kayla told the audience. The Graeme Dingle Foundation's general manager for the Canterbury region, Sian Neary, said they've seen students flourish after going through the programme. 'We've seen them from students that have got their shoulders down and their heads down, looking at the ground, to shoulders up, chin up and just beaming that they've overcome some amazing obstacles," she said. The Graeme Dingle Foundation supports 27,000 young people to undertake a similar journey of discovery each year.
The Spinoff
30-04-2025
- Business
- The Spinoff
The changes to plans for the streets around the Karanga-a-Hape CRL station, explained
In 2023, Auckland Transport shared and consulted on plans for the streets surrounding the Karanga-a-Hape CRL station. They were well received, yet they've since been subject to major changes. What happened? Many Aucklanders have a dream. A dream that one day they will be able to get from point A to point B without pissing themselves in their car due to being gridlocked in traffic. A dream that one day, cars won't be our overloads, and roads our masters. This would require proper public transport, of course. The City Rail Link – New Zealand's largest transport infrastructure project ever – is expected to open next year. The 3.45km-long tunnels are being billed as ' transformational ' for travel, housing, productivity and revenue. Residents and passersby have either been staring longingly through the peepholes in the fences at the rising stations or getting pissed off by closed roads and road cones. It's happening, but details, like a design of the streetscapes around the stations, are still being debated. Finalising plans around the Karanga-a-Hape Station is proving difficult. They were first revealed in 2023, and though they received wide support at the time, they are still being updated in response to feedback. The plans, which once featured a pedestrian mall (a street or area where using vehicles is prohibited or restricted), shared areas, planter boxes, speed bumps and more footpaths around Mercury Lane and Cross Street, have changed to preserve parking and vehicle thoroughfares. Urbanist commentator Connor Sharp is calling the new proposal a 'disgraceful switcheroo' and councillor Richard Hills says that 'sudden, dramatic' changes to the well-supported plans have prompted 'extreme shock and frustration'. Auckland Transport's director of infrastructure and place, Murray Burt, says that AT is continuing to receive feedback. The agency is 'very conscious' that the CRL construction and economic climate have made it challenging for nearby businesses, so 'we seriously consider feedback that our proposals may further impact businesses' ability to operate'. Though plans were meant to be finalised in November 2023, designs are still being 'refined'. What was in the original proposal? The Karanga-a-Hape Station has two entrances – one in Beresford Square near Pitt Street and another on Mercury Lane. Auckland Transport expects that up to 40,000 people will pass through these entrances every day, mostly arriving by foot or bike. The Karanga-a-Hape Station precinct integration project – often referred to as Project K – began with a proposal from AT to make changes that would improve walking and cycling through the neighbourhood (pedestrian mall, crossings, widening footpaths, cycleways) and adjusted the number of on-street parking and loading zones. In the original plan a pedestrian mall would have stretched from Cross Street to Karangahape Road along Mercury Lane. Renders show planted areas, seats and string lights criss-crossing from posts. The plan for the lower end of Mercury Lane had wider footpaths and a two-directional cycleway. On Cross Street, a wide footpath ran all along the southern side and most on-street parking was removed, though there were options for some loading zones, car share and short stay areas. On East Street, it was proposed that the two-way cycleway that was initially built to be temporary during construction would stay. Near the other entrance of the station, the plan for Pitt Street included another pedestrian and cycle crossing, new bus stops, cycle lanes, and new trees and landscaping. To make way, on-street car parking and loading zones were to be removed. How was Project K received? AT consulted the public from April to May 2023, met stakeholder groups like business associations and received more than a thousand items of feedback. A majority – 73% – of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the proposed changes would ' improve the area for me ', and 76% agreed or strongly agreed that the changes would 'improve the area for the neighbourhood'. People were overwhelmingly positive towards changes to support walking and cycling. Responses to changes in parking were mixed, but still a majority was in support – 53% backed the proposed changes and 17% opposed them. Support for pedestrianising the upper part of Mercury Lane was also mixed but positive, with 67% in support and 20% opposed. Another 10% had mixed feedback, and 3% of responses were 'not relevant to the survey question'. The engagement feedback report also notes that the George Court Body Corporate, from the 1926 George Court apartment building on the eastern corner of Karangahape Road and Mercury Lane, opposed the proposed pedestrian mall on Mercury Lane because it believed it would have a negative impact on the community, negatively impact property owners and business operators and was inconsistent with the Resource Management Act. The ADIO Trust needle exchange on East Street was concerned about it too, saying that many of its visitors come by car. They said that if Mercury Lane must be closed, then there should be a right-hand turn at the Karangahape Road/Upper Queen Street intersection. The report noted that some aspects of the project required further engagement to agree on the best outcomes, and that final decisions were anticipated to be made by November 2023. What happened next? When November 2023 rolled around, AT held three community workshops, inviting locals to join the conversation to shape plans for the spaces. The first focus area was Cross Street and then Mercury Lane, Canada Street and Beresford Street. Participants agreed with widening the footpath on the southern side of Cross Street, and removing on-street car parking there to make space. Suggestions of making Cross Street an even more pedestrian-friendly 'shared space' with surface painting were supported too. Workshop participants liked the idea of large planted pots and seating on lower Mercury Lane, and a slew of other measures to slow down cars and make the area more inviting to pedestrians and cyclists. Meanwhile, the George Court Body Corporate was presenting a case against the pedestrian mall at the top of Mercury Lane. Connor Sharp has dug into their activities, which included attending Auckland Transport board meetings and approaching Auckland Council's transport committee and even the mayor. While the group threatened legal action, AT's legal team reviewed their concerns and noted they were wrong. Sharp has called the George Court group a 'vocal minority' and 'never-satisfied grumblers'. In his view the original designs, which were well-supported and refined by community feedback, were ' quietly chipped away by a vocal, litigious, oppositional minority, in a series of small rooms '. What are the plans now? The most recent version of the plans was shared with the Waitematā Local Board in early April, 16 months after they were supposed to be finalised. The top of Mercury Lane is no longer a pedestrian mall, it is now a 'shared space'. Burt says pedestrians will have priority but residents and service vehicles can use the area at low speed. The notes on the plans say that a 'low number of vehicles' are expected and 'safety and space for pedestrians will be paramount'. There are retractable bollards that could be used to control traffic if monitoring indicates they're necessary. At the bottom of Mercury Lane, green areas have been adjusted to accommodate a roundabout for two-way traffic. Nearby on East Street, the new plans now remove the two-way cycleway – which was added as an interim measure during CRL construction – in order to reinstate two-way vehicle traffic. On Cross Street, where the southern side was once planned to be a wide footpath, there is instead preserved on-street car parking, a new loading zone and a relocated car share space. 'Businesses have told us they rely on loading on both sides,' says Burt. Proposed planter boxes, speed humps and speed cushions have been removed. Burt says that due to feedback, AT is now investigating an option that would create a footpath on the south side by bridging over the trench next to the carpark building. Burt wants people to know that for Cross Street, 'this project is not a final outcome'. He says it's an interim approach to allow for future projects because there are private developments expected on the street and nearby which will lead to changes in the way the street is used. The area near the station's other entrance on Pitt Street has not had the same attention, though local businesses have asked for a loading zone that is now planned on the western side but only available outside bus lane hours. What will happen next? Councillor Richard Hills is not happy that this proposal is 'suddenly so different'. He says the original plans aligned with council policy and plans – now, he has 'serious concerns about accessibility and safety'. He sees the decision to allow cars through Mercury Lane as dangerous, and says that on Cross Street the plans show a lack of access for pedestrians, especially people with limited mobility, disabilities and prams. He says that while the plan should include loading space for businesses, this should not come at the detriment of all other users. Due to pushback from supporters of the original proposal, AT has promised a full review of the plan for Cross Street and potential for other changes. 'I hope we end up with a dramatic improvement for pedestrians and other users, like originally planned,' says Hills. Burt says the Karanga-a-Hape Station precinct integration project's updated plan has already received further feedback and is once again being updated as AT tries to find 'the best possible outcome'. The updates are expected to be shared with the local board and stakeholders in 'the coming weeks'.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Riot Games' League of Legends TCG is officially called Riftbound
Riot Games has unveiled new details for its upcoming tabletop game, called Riftbound - The League of Legends Trading Card Game. We first got a look at this TCG under the codename Project K in December. The latest trailer showed off new artwork for the cards, including fresh takes on the LoL characters that aren't just copies of their in-game champion portraits. The card UI has also gotten some extra polish compared with what was showed late last year. The team at Riot has been incorporating player feedback into the game's first set, called Origins. This set will have more than 300 different cards, and familiar LoL champions including Jinx, Viktor and Lee Sin will star in pre-built decks for this inaugural set. For the serious collectors, there will also be secret rare versions of the champion cards with unique art. In addition to the previously revealed multiplayer aspect, Riftbound offers a path for reaching fans who don't have experience in this card game genre. Riftbound will have a box called Proving Grounds where champions like Lux, Annie, Master Yi and Garen will help newer players to get acclimated to TCG basics. The timeline for the Riftbound is also starting to firm up, with its China launch is scheduled for summer 2025. Some English speaking countries will also see the game arrive this year, but other markets will have to wait until 2026; the devs didn't specify which regions will be on which timeline.
Yahoo
04-02-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Amid an Escalating Arms Race in Space with Russia and China, Is the U.S. Falling Behind?
On July 9, 1962, the night sky above the Pacific Ocean, from Hawaii to New Zealand, suddenly became illuminated by brilliant light, as if it were the middle of the day. A stunning artificial aurora appeared, creating a glow of green, yellow, and red, which lingered for less than an hour. Then came the blackouts. The streets of Hawaii became unlit, telephone service was disrupted, burglar alarms went off. What looked like a beautiful light show from Earth was the result of the biggest nuclear bomb ever detonated in space. From a tiny island in the middle of the North Pacific Ocean, the U.S. had launched a 1.4-megaton nuclear warhead, a weapon test and a display of power during a particularly tense period of the Cold War. The experiment, dubbed Starfish Prime, generated an electromagnetic pulse, releasing a massive burst of energy 250 miles above the ground, which fried about one third of all active satellites at that point and turned out to be more destructive than anyone expected. Then, on October 22 of the same year, the U.S.S.R. conducted its own high-altitude experiments, including the Project K nuclear tests. The Soviets launched and detonated a 300-kiloton warhead some 180 miles above central Kazakhstan. The smaller yet lower and therefore more destructive blast also affected infrastructure on the ground, frying overhead telephone lines and causing the fuses to blow on their overvoltage protectors, shutting off underground power cables and knocking out a power plant. Nukes in the sky don't stay only in the sky: With their electromagnetic radiation, they're a threat to any technology or device that can carry a charge, and they can destroy satellites, immediately disrupting key functions that those spacecraft provide. From these tests, the world learned the danger of a nuclear weapon exploding in space; but today, the risks are far greater. That's why on February 14, 2024, lawmakers were startled when Ohio congressman Mike Turner warned of a 'serious national security threat.' The House Intelligence Committee chief offered no details, perhaps because key information remained classified, though the statement was quickly linked to the possibility of a Russian nuclear space weapon. Speculation immediately swirled. It was like a terrifying Mad Libs, as experts imagined ways to combine 'Russia,' 'space,' and 'nuclear.' Was it an actual nuke or just nuclear-powered? Was it an orbiting bomb or an antisatellite missile? Was it a worrisome weapons program being advanced, was it just bluster, or was it a cynical ploy to boost calls for more U.S. military aid to Ukraine? The following day, officials said little, likely because intelligence was still being collected. 'It is not an active capability and it has not yet been deployed,' said National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby at a White House briefing. Few experts offered much insight. 'There's not a lot of information out there,' said Victoria Samson, a space policy expert at the Secure World Foundation in Broomfield, Colorado, a nongovernmental organization that supports peaceful uses of space and promotes space diplomacy. However, based on information available to her, Russia's space military appears to be engaged in research and development on some sort of nuclear-armed space weapon that could be deployed and used in orbit. Days later, Russian President Vladimir Putin denied claims that the country is developing a nuclear capability for space. But during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on May 1, a Pentagon official dismissed his denial, citing a Russian veto of a United Nations resolution from April that would have reinforced the ban on nukes in space by the Outer Space Treaty from 1967. Russia's government hasn't shied away from nuclear threats—at least not on the ground—and Russia, like the U.S., maintains a vast nuclear arsenal on hair-trigger alert and hasn't ruled out a first-use policy. Russia's potential space nuke—or whatever it is—is just the latest military technology countries have been developing that could be used to trick, damage, or destroy rivals' spacecraft. And Russia is not the only potential threat: The Pentagon is closely watching China's nuclear ambitions, as its arsenal is on its way toward rivaling those of the U.S. and Russia. Nearly 70 years after the first space race began, we're in the midst of a new, more complex one, where security concerns and goals are paramount, often trumping science and exploration. After all, the Space Force's budget has already surpassed NASA's, and China and Russia also spend enormous sums annually on their space militaries. As tensions intensify between these big three powers, we could be advancing toward a new arms race, in space. At first, the hazardous tests and risky brinkmanship of 1962 spurred a temporary and rare period of enthusiastic diplomacy, with international negotiators hammering out new accords, including the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963 and the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which remain the only widely recognized pieces of space law ever developed. They make peaceful uses of outer space a priority, and while the Outer Space Treaty includes few specifics, it explicitly forbids the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in space. That means tests like Starfish Prime and Project K would be considered violations of international law. If Russia is working on a nuke—as Samson and her colleagues speculate— and if the country launches the warhead into orbit, that would be considered illegal as well, regardless of whether it detonates and lets loose an explosive pulse. Yet space-faring powers, including Russia, can and do test other dangerous weapons that are perfectly legal. On the morning of November 15, 2021, Samson and her colleagues were startled by social media reports of an orbiting cloud of debris, looking like the remnants of a satellite destroyed by a missile. They waited to respond until they could find more credible information or statements from the U.S. Space Command or the Russian Space Agency. Later that day, it was confirmed: Russia had launched an antisatellite missile from a remote northern Russian spaceport that ascended nearly 300 miles into the sky and blasted its derelict two-ton military satellite, Cosmos 1408, into smithereens. Where that object once orbited, an expanding shrapnel field was left, careening at some 17,000 miles per hour, threatening everything in its path. The trajectory took the fragments dangerously close to the International Space Station, forcing the four NASA crew members, two Russian cosmonauts, and a European Space Agency astronaut to don their spacesuits and take shelter in their docked spacecraft, in case a disastrous collision forced them to abandon the outpost, like Sandra Bullock narrowly escaping the station in the movie Gravity, as it's hit by debris from a blown-up Russian satellite. The real-world explosion took place in a busy lane in low Earth orbit, and although the Russian Defense Ministry claimed the fragments posed no threat to space activity, some debris flew near the Chinese space station and other spacecraft as well. U.S. government officials deemed Russia's test 'irresponsible' and 'reckless.' To many, it served as a warning, a couple of months before Russia's military forces invaded Ukraine, reminding its rivals what it's willing and able to do. Not that the demonstration was necessary—Russia had previously conducted antisatellite weapons tests successfully, as have the U.S., China, and India, and thousands of chunks of hazardous space junk from those tests remain in orbit today, too. The antisatellite weapons tests are clearly not just tests, and they look like swaggering displays of power that threaten astronauts and crucial space activities. We frequently associate space with exploration and scientific discovery, not military objectives. But since the early 1950s, after the launch of Sputnik and its successors, space has had military undertones, says Bleddyn Bowen, PhD, a Durham University researcher and author of the book Original Sin, which examines geopolitics and the military and economic control of space. 'The boundaries [between civil and military space] have been blurred,' he says. There's a long history of research on space-based weapons, with the U.S. and U.S.S.R. exploring such tech as far back as the 1940s, says Bruce McClintock, a former defense attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and head of the Space Enterprise Initiative of the RAND Corporation. U.S. political leaders, from President Ronald Reagan through his Star Wars program in the '80s to Senator Ted Cruz today, have sought to invest in the research and development of space-based weapons, albeit of the non-nuclear variety. President John F. Kennedy's famous 1962 speech, in which he advocated for NASA's Apollo Program, is another example of the role of military and geopolitical concerns in space. In those remarks, Kennedy cited 'space science,' but he also argued that U.S. spacecraft were 'more sophisticated' and 'supplied far more knowledge' than their Soviet counterparts, and he unequivocally stated, 'No nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.' Contrary to Kennedy's claims, at the beginning of that first space race, the two global powers advanced at a similar speed, though the U.S.S.R. achieved some milestones before the U.S., including lofting the first satellite into orbit in 1957, the first crewed space mission in 1961, the first space walk in 1965, and the first (uncrewed) lander on the moon in 1966, among other feats. But, of course, in 1969, the U.S. became the first to achieve the most momentous task: safely landing humans on the moon. By the 1980s, the U.S. had gained supremacy in space, but in terms of military space capabilities, Russia is now close behind, and China has quickly caught up. The big three all have antisatellite missiles, electronic weapons, laser weapons, and the ability to maneuver a spacecraft toward a target, Samson says. China now operates more satellites than Russia, though the bulk of orbiting craft remains under U.S. control, which is both a strength and a weakness, providing adversaries with many potential targets. Other military space technologies abound. The Space Force has begun investing in its own satellite armadas, shifting from a handful of billion- dollar craft to large collections of cheaper, smaller, and less vulnerable satellites. The U.S. and China have both been testing military spaceplanes, which resemble miniature autonomous space shuttles, apparently to launch satellites and experiment with new technologies as they're exposed to microgravity and space radiation. Both countries have been advancing their hypersonic and ballistic missile programs, many of which go through space during their trajectories. Russia, China, and the U.S. aren't the only nations growing their military capabilities in space. At the Secure World Foundation, Samson plays a leading role in preparing its annual report on global space military capabilities and space security. In the SWF's most recent assessment, published in April 2024, she and her fellow analysts kept an eye on the military space capabilities of 11 countries, including the big three, as well as India, Australia, Japan, France, Iran, the U.K., and North and South Korea—a growing list to which they've now added Israel. In November 2023, Israel successfully operated its Arrow-3 ballistic missile defense system, codeveloped with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, to destroy a missile fired by Houthi rebels in Yemen that traveled beyond the Earth's atmosphere, indicating the potential ability to blow up a satellite. The U.S. and Russia have one remaining shared space program that has endured since the 1990s: the iconic International Space Station. It has long represented a beacon of space diplomacy and served as a stage for space science. But the aging orbital structure's days are numbered, with Russia's module and Soyuz spacecraft facing persistent problems, such as coolant leaks and tiny holes that have sprung up over the years. Those recurring issues appear to signal Russia's declining civilian space program, even while it continues investing in military space research and development. Final missions aboard the ISS could come as early as 2028, unless the U.S. and Russia jointly extend its life by a couple of years. When NASA finally has to deorbit it with a space tug, it will be the end of an era. As divisions grow between the two geopolitical poles—the U.S. and its allies versus China, Russia, and their allies—it's hard to imagine another major American-Russian space alliance anytime soon. Instead, the three space powers are going their separate ways. China completed its own new, smaller, T-shaped station in November 2022. Tiangong (meaning 'heavenly palace') began hosting international science experiments, and it will eventually invite non-Chinese astronaut visitors, according to the deputy director of China's space agency. NASA has invested in multiple commercial space station designs for an ISS successor, which would be run by private sector companies like Axiom Space, Voyager Space, and Blue Origin. In these scenarios, NASA would be among the biggest customers, with labs and tourist modules existing side by side. Russia, for its part, has no plans to play second fiddle to China or the U.S.; its government claims that its space program will launch the first module of a brand-new space station in 2027, though McClintock and other space analysts doubt the feasibility of that timeline. Whether these new and next-generation stations will continue the legacy of the ISS remains to be seen. Today, the atmosphere is very different from the early space race era of Starfish Prime and Project K. More than 500 times as many satellites from around 80 countries now orbit the globe, some of them costing billions of dollars and performing crucial functions like GPS navigation, communication, and supporting astronauts aboard two space stations. When we look up at the night sky today—assuming we can escape the creeping glow of light pollution—it appears unlike it did to our ancestors. With the naked eye, we can occasionally see one or even multiple space stations overhead, and witness rocket launches, new satellites moving into position, and, every once in a while, flaming space debris in the atmosphere. And thanks to artificial constellations like SpaceX's Starlink, the glint of light-reflecting satellites is beginning to make traditional stellar constellations look different than they did for all of human history. In a few years, tens of thousands of satellites will be floating up in orbit, outnumbering the thousands of stars we can see on a clear night. Just as wars moved to the sky a century ago, modern conflicts spill into space. But while military and civilian aircraft are easy to tell apart, the situation is murkier up in orbit. Many satellites provide essential services both for the military and for everyone else. This 'dual-use' has turned important infrastructure like GPS, broadband internet, and Earth-observing satellites that monitor weather or military deployments into juicy targets. Satellite services that our smartphones and other devices depend on could be disrupted as easily as shipping routes on the ground. While a lasting region-wide blackout like the one in Sam Esmail's apocalyptic 2023 movie Leave the World Behind might be unlikely, a temporary loss of GPS or broadband internet would be disorienting, especially for those in remote areas lacking backup. And if a commercial spacecraft is damaged or destroyed by antisatellite weapons, it's not clear, from a legal perspective, who would be responsible for footing the bill. Spacecraft have mattered in Israel's war in Gaza and Russia's war in Ukraine. Eyes in the skies can provide important clues, especially in war zones that are dangerous for journalists. In both conflicts, observers and researchers have used radar and optical satellites to track the devastation of civilian infrastructure. Both wars have involved imaging, mapping, navigation, and internet-providing satellites. Russia, like Israel in Gaza, has also been jamming GPS and communications in Ukraine, in addition to a cyberattack that hacked and disabled ground terminals of the American satellite company ViaSat, disrupting communications for Ukrainians and other Europeans for up to two weeks in some areas on the eve of the 2022 invasion. It's not just governments meddling in military affairs. The private space industry has grown rapidly over the past decade, thanks in part to decreasing launch costs. Just as NASA, the European Space Agency, and other space agencies have networks of Earth-observing satellites, companies like California-based Planet Labs, Capella Space, and Colorado-based Maxar Intelligence have been collecting their own high-resolution imagery and providing them to researchers, media organizations, and governments. SpaceX now boasts numerous military launch contracts, and it has been delivering broadband internet services through Starlink, the largest artificial constellation ever constructed, with more than 6,000 satellites in its fleet. Early during Russia's invasion, Elon Musk sent a truck full of Starlink satellite dishes and terminals to Ukraine, when the country's vice prime minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, expressed concern about a loss of internet access. Then, after months of support, Musk chose not to fulfill a Ukrainian request to activate the network over occupied Crimea during Ukrainian drone strikes, posting on X (formerly Twitter), rightly or wrongly, that 'SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.' While Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman have always been military contractors, SpaceX and other companies are also becoming major players. Russia's war in Ukraine and Israel's war in Gaza have already revealed the growing power of commercial actors, and the problems and liabilities they could present. In addition to SpaceX's Starlink, satellite imaging companies have mattered too, and when U.S. law has severely restricted the gathering of satellite imagery over Israel, humanitarian groups and others have had to rely on public space agency data. Other nonstate actors, like the Russian mercenary Wagner Group and the pro-Ukraine cyber hacktivist group GhostSec, now jam and spoof satellite signals, says Clayton Swope, deputy director of Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He includes such tactics in what his team's report calls 'the 'normalization of deviance' and its behaviors that we would have said are concerning, outside the norm, harmful perhaps, but they've become commonplace.' Thanks to the expanding industry, a broader range of actors, including opposing sides of a conflict, can now quickly access a variety of imagery. This means that it's not just government satellites, but commercial spacecraft that are now legitimate military targets, says Jessica West, a space security researcher at Project Ploughshares, a research institute based in Waterloo, Ontario. 'They're involved in warfighting and are profiting off of it. But we don't really talk about what their responsibilities are and to what extent they're complicit in war crimes or other human rights violations.' With all the nationalist rhetoric, international suspicion, and investment in increasingly advanced arsenals, just how concerned should we be? Since Starfish Prime and Project K, no one has 'intentionally' destroyed or permanently disabled another country's spacecraft, but the U.S. is taking some preventive measures beyond merely tracking rocket and missile launches and satellite activities in orbit. For example, most spacecraft aren't sufficiently radiation-hardened to withstand a nuclear blast, even from far away. Following talk of this potential new Russian weapon, the U.S. Space Force has been considering upgrading its missile-tracking satellite design so they'd be more protected from such attacks. Every military advance or perceived threat need not be met with yet more powerful and dangerous weapons, and space rivals need not gird for a fight in the skies. There are other ways to address issues of space security and instability. 'The diplomatic tool should not be overlooked,' says Samson. Space diplomats have been making slow progress in their efforts to defuse geopolitical tensions and reduce the chances for military escalation, West says. International negotiators agree that the world needs new and more detailed space rules for the 21st century, as space tech has blasted ahead of what was available in the '60s, and more space agencies and companies have the ability to design myriad spacecraft and structures in orbit and beyond. But many countries disagree about what new space rules should look like. Over the past decade, Russia and China have sought to garner support for holding talks on a potential new space treaty, but there hasn't been much appetite for that internationally. The U.S. has called for less stringent 'norms,' which can't be enforced the way treaties can, but would nonetheless help guide activities in space. The United Nations has organized four meetings over the past couple of years, as diplomats share their concerns and goals for norms that would reduce space threats. These norms would focus on behaviors rather than capabilities; so, for example, if a government or company designs dangerous technology but never launches or uses it, it would be acceptable. A first step in this direction is a de facto moratorium on conducting orbit-polluting antisatellite missile tests, with at least 37 countries making that pledge, following Vice President Kamala Harris's announcement in 2022 that the U.S. would no longer conduct such tests. Russia and China have resisted this move and haven't signed the pledge, sticking to their preferance for a new treaty that would prohibit any kind of weapon in space. There may be a way to navigate out of this diplomatic impasse, with U.S.-allied governments taking one approach and China, Russia, and their allies taking a different one, says West. Fostering an environment where space agencies and militaries communicate more openly about their intentions with their spacecraft and space technologies could lead to less escalatory rhetoric, fewer mistakes, and a reduced risk of hostilities. 'Transparency is one way to bring these two discussions together,' says West, 'because there needs to be some synergy between them if we're actually going to move forward.' Cassandra Steer, a space policy expert at Australian National University, agrees with this assessment. Until there's more transparency and data sharing, however, she remains skeptical that Russia even has an advanced space nuclear weapons program, which might be something else that has been misinterpreted or blown out of proportion. Everyone has a vested interest in avoiding conflict in space, and Steer also looks forward to seeing smaller and mid-level nations, beyond the big three, taking leadership and promoting transparency. 'I'm actually very hopeful and optimistic that it's going to take place, and we'll see more of an international pushing back against this escalatory competition between the greater powers.' Without open communication and clearly stated intentions, weapons portrayed as defensive or for deterrence can be viewed as offensive ones. After all, a few years before the origins of NASA, the U.S. Department of Defense was still called the Department of War. While the Trump administration often brazenly sought space 'superiority' and 'dominance,' the Biden administration called for maintaining a 'competitive edge,' especially with respect to China's advancing space military. But when China and Russia also strive for an edge, a space arms race seems inevitable.▶ Electronic and cyberweapons, such as malware and jamming signals, have become popular because they don't fling space debris all over Earth orbit and are cheaper and harder to attribute, says space policy expert Victoria Samson. After all, it's not just the orbiting pieces of equipment that matter: Spacecraft rely on ground infrastructure, which is easier to target than a satellite itself, and a potential attack is less likely to draw international condemnation. If anyone doubts that a cyberattack could cause a conflict, the former head of Russia's space program previously said that hacking a Russian satellite would be considered an act of war.▶ Russia has been investing in a mobile ground-based laser system called Peresvet. Russia and France may even be developing lasers that could fire from spacecraft against other craft, but there's limited evidence of that yet, Samson says. Such technology, currently only beamed from the ground, could 'dazzle' optical sensors of rivals' satellites by flooding them with laser light, temporarily blinding them so that they can't track missile-launching systems, for example, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The U.S. and China have been experimenting with laser systems, too, though as far as we know, they haven't yet been used to harm others' satellites.▶ In the Netflix show Space Force, a Chinese spacecraft sidles up to an American one and snips off its solar arrays, cutting its only power supply. While China has no such known capability, robotic arms do concern the Pentagon. A lot of what causes suspicion today isn't new, says Wendy Whitman Cobb, a researcher at the Air Force's School of Advanced Air and Space Studies in Montgomery, Alabama. In the 1970s, the Soviets accused the U.S. of using the space shuttle as a potential antisatellite weapon for its robotic arm capability. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station have been using its robotic appendage for peaceful activities since 2001. China used a spacecraft with an arm to relocate a satellite out of a crowded orbit, and has plans to launch a spacecraft in 2025 to rendezvous with a military satellite and upgrade its instruments. However, robotic arms have not yet been used as weapons. You Might Also Like The Do's and Don'ts of Using Painter's Tape The Best Portable BBQ Grills for Cooking Anywhere Can a Smart Watch Prolong Your Life?
