A new ultra-compact radio system from Stockholm-based startup TERASi promises high-speed, secure, and interference-resistant communications for defence, disaster response, and industrial operations, without the vulnerabilities of satellite services like Starlink.

A Sovereign Alternative to Satellite Networks?

Unveiled on 21 August 2025, the RU1 is being marketed as the world’s smallest and lightest millimetre-wave (mm-wave) radio with military-grade security. It’s designed to provide sovereign, high-speed backhaul in environments where traditional communications infrastructure is unavailable, unreliable, or compromised.

At a glance, the RU1 looks more like a ruggedised action camera than a piece of battlefield hardware. However, under the hood, it delivers gigabit-speed performance, extreme portability, and a mesh networking capability that could reshape how critical operations stay connected.

The Swedish firm behind the device, TERASi, says it’s built from the ground up to eliminate reliance on third-party providers, offering users full control over their own secure communications infrastructure.

What’s So Different About It?

While satellite services like SpaceX’s Starlink have played a vital role in recent conflicts and disaster responses, they can have some key vulnerabilities. For example, Elon Musk’s decision in 2022 to restrict Starlink coverage during a Ukrainian counteroffensive in Kherson drew widespread criticism. Ukrainian military operations reportedly lost access to real-time drone video, artillery guidance, and unit coordination as a result.

Speaking about those limitations, TERASi co-founder and CEO James Campion said: “The need for sovereign, independent connectivity has never been greater. Our mission is to give defence forces, disaster response teams, and critical industries the ability to create secure, high-capacity networks instantly, anywhere in the world, without relying on satellites or fixed infrastructure.”

Uses Focused Beams Above 60 GHz

The RU1 works by using highly focused directional beams operating above 60 GHz, i.e. a part of the mm-wave spectrum that allows for enormous data capacity and fast speeds. TERASi claims the device currently supports up to 10 Gbps with sub-5 millisecond latency. That’s around 50 times faster than Starlink’s average speed and over five times quicker in terms of response time.

These figures are crucial for scenarios such as live drone control, sensor fusion, and autonomous coordination, where split-second decisions and uninterrupted data flows can determine mission success.

Built for the Field, Not the Lab

One of RU1’s standout features is its deployability. For example, the radio can be mounted on a tripod or drone and configured in minutes. Each device links into a mesh network with others, extending range and resilience without the need for towers, satellites, or cables.

Campion has described it as “the GoPro of backhaul radios”, a deliberate analogy emphasising ease of use and rugged flexibility.

Also, RU1 is designed for off-grid use, with low energy requirements that allow it to run on batteries. This makes it ideal for field deployments where there’s no access to mains electricity or where speed is essential.

The underlying hardware is built on TERASi’s Aircore™ technology, a patented wafer-scale packaging system that allows miniaturisation of high-frequency components. According to the company, this makes RU1 up to 40 times smaller and 100 times lighter than equivalent mm-wave systems currently on the market.

Military, Emergency and Industrial Applications

Although the military sector is the most obvious early adopter, TERASi is also targeting civil and commercial sectors. In disaster relief, for example, RU1 could allow emergency teams to restore high-speed communications across damaged infrastructure almost instantly.

In heavy industry, it could enable temporary wireless networks on construction sites, remote mines, or offshore energy platforms, areas where fibre or satellite links are either too slow to deploy or cost-prohibitive.

The device is currently undergoing evaluation by several defence agencies and is being integrated into systems by tactical communications providers and drone manufacturers. TERASi is also working with system integrators to build end-to-end packages suitable for rapid deployment.

A Potential Challenge to Starlink’s Dominance?

While Starlink has made satellite internet far more accessible in remote areas, its scale and centralised control remain points of concern for sovereign users, i.e. organisations (e.g. governments, militaries, or national emergency services) that require full control over their own communications infrastructure, without relying on foreign-owned or third-party services. The reliance on a single commercial entity, especially one led by an individual as influential and, many would say (particularly after his work in Trump administration), as unpredictable as Elon Musk, has prompted growing debate in both defence and regulatory circles.

Starlink operates using low-frequency radio waves that cover footprints of up to 1,000 km, which may be good for reach, but could be easier to intercept or jam. In contrast, RU1’s laser-like beams create coverage areas as small as 3 km, making them far harder to detect or disrupt.

Campion has been clear about the contrast: “RU1 gives users control over their data and the freedom to build sovereign networks on-the-fly, changing the frontline paradigm from waiting on infrastructure to creating it instantly, from depending on external actors to self-sufficiency.”

However, it’s also clear that RU1 doesn’t aim to replace Starlink on every front. Its strength, for example, essentially lies in short-range, high-speed, secure communications, not global connectivity. In that sense, the two technologies are complementary, but for use cases where sovereignty and speed matter most, RU1 appears to offer distinct advantages.

Looking Beyond the Hype

Despite strong technical claims, RU1’s real-world performance still depends on further field testing and large-scale evaluations. TERASi has not yet confirmed full pricing, mass deployment timelines, or long-term interoperability with wider communications systems.

There are also practical considerations. mm-wave signals are highly directional and can be affected by obstructions or adverse weather. This means line-of-sight placement is likely to be essential, particularly in complex or changing environments.

To address these constraints, TERASi has focused on flexible, mesh-based deployment and drone-mounted coverage. This allows networks to adapt rapidly, reroute around obstacles, and maintain coverage in challenging terrain.

The company’s broader ambitions are also becoming clearer. With backing from the European Space Agency (ESA) on related satellite communications projects, TERASi is positioning itself as a strategic supplier of sovereign networking technologies designed to integrate across land and space-based systems.

Others

It should be noted that TERASi’s RU1 isn’t the only system of this kind. For example, in Finland, KNL Networks, a subsidiary of Telenor, is supplying encrypted manpack radios for long-range communication without relying on satellites. Recently selected by Finland and Sweden in a joint €15 million deal, the technology is being tested by NATO countries for defence scenarios where GPS and satellite signals may be lost or jammed.

Also, in Poland, Microamp is developing rapid-deployable mm-wave 5G “tactical bubbles” to deliver secure, mesh-based networks in mission-critical conditions. These are currently being trialled by NATO’s DIANA programme, with a focus on high-speed, short-range deployments similar to RU1’s.

Ukrainian startup Himera has also attracted international attention with its compact G1 Pro tactical radio, which uses frequency-hopping to resist electronic warfare and runs for up to 48 hours on battery power. The US Air Force is among the defence users currently evaluating the units.

Established defence suppliers Elbit Systems and Rohde & Schwarz also have software-defined radio systems (E-LynX and Soveron respectively) that are already in service with NATO forces. These provide secure, multi-hop communications and battlefield tracking, although they typically require larger form factors and more complex integration.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

TERASi’s RU1 appears to challenge the idea that advanced, secure communications must rely on satellites or major infrastructure providers. By combining portability, speed and sovereignty in one device, TERASi appears to have created a tool that meets the operational demands of modern defence and emergency teams while also appealing to industries that need rapid, reliable connectivity on their own terms.

The main appeal here lies in control. Unlike Starlink, which has shown it can be restricted or overridden by its operator, RU1 offers users the ability to set up and manage their own high-speed networks independently. That distinction is likely to carry some weight in defence and civil protection, where communication failures can have serious consequences. The technical advantage of higher data rates, lower latency and strong anti-jamming capabilities adds further value for those needing secure performance in dynamic or hostile environments.

For UK businesses, particularly those in sectors like utilities, logistics, remote construction or energy, RU1 introduces the possibility of deploying temporary or semi-permanent high-capacity networks without reliance on local telecoms or satellite providers. That could reduce downtime, improve on-site operations, and enhance resilience in both planned and emergency scenarios. As pressure grows to secure digital infrastructure and keep data under tighter control, this kind of field-ready, self-managed solution could offer a practical alternative where traditional networks fall short.

However, there are still some unknowns here. For example, RU1’s effectiveness in complex or obstructed terrain will need to be proven in large-scale use, and long-term success will depend on integration, cost, and reliability under real conditions. But with geopolitical concerns rising and demand increasing for sovereign technology platforms, RU1 arrives at a time when many governments, organisations and businesses are actively looking for exactly this kind of autonomy.

Gmail’s spam filters have come under fresh scrutiny after US FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson accused Google of suppressing Republican fundraising emails while letting similar Democratic messages through.

Direct Accusation from the FTC

In a letter dated 28 August 2025, Ferguson wrote directly to Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, alleging that Gmail’s filtering system may be violating US consumer protection law by unfairly targeting one side of the political spectrum.

“My understanding from recent reporting is that Gmail’s spam filters routinely block messages from reaching consumers when those messages come from Republican senders but fail to block similar messages sent by Democrats,” Ferguson stated in the letter, published on the FTC’s website.

He cited a New York Post report that found identical fundraising emails, differing only by party, had been treated unequally by Gmail’s filtering system. The letter suggests such behaviour could breach Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices, particularly those that harm consumers’ ability to make choices or receive important information.

Ferguson warned that Alphabet’s “alleged partisan treatment of comparable messages or messengers in Gmail to achieve political objectives may violate” the law, and said an FTC investigation and enforcement action may follow.

Political Context Behind the Complaint

It’s worth noting at this point that Ferguson, a former solicitor general of Virginia, was appointed as FTC Chairman by Donald Trump in January 2025 following the President’s return to office. He replaced Lina Khan, a vocal critic of Big Tech, and has made no secret of his intention to target what he sees as political bias by dominant technology platforms.

In December 2024, Trump described Ferguson as “the most America First, and pro-innovation FTC Chair in our Country’s History,” adding that Ferguson had “a proven record of standing up to Big Tech censorship.” Ferguson himself has argued that if platforms work together to suppress conservative views, they may be guilty of antitrust violations.

This political backdrop has led some observers to question whether the accusations against Google are being made entirely in good faith, or as part of a broader effort to align the FTC’s enforcement agenda with Republican political objectives.

Google Says “Filters Apply Equally”

Google has responded by rejecting the accusation that its spam filters discriminate based on political ideology.

In a statement, spokesperson José Castañeda said: “Email filter protections are in place to keep our users safe, and they apply equally to all senders, regardless of political affiliation.”

Google has long maintained that its filtering decisions are driven by user feedback, email engagement metrics (such as open and click rates), and security concerns, not by any partisan motive. In fact, in 2022, the company launched a pilot programme allowing political campaigns to apply for exemption from spam filtering, after similar accusations were raised during the US midterms.

Despite this, the Republican National Committee (RNC) sued Google in October 2022, claiming emails from Republican groups were being systematically filtered to spam during key fundraising periods. That lawsuit was dismissed in 2023 due to lack of evidence, although it has since been revived.

What Is Gmail’s Filtering Actually Doing?

While some critics argue Gmail suppresses conservative messages, academic research on the topic is inconclusive. A 2022 study from North Carolina State University found that Gmail filtered more right-leaning emails to spam than left-leaning ones, while Yahoo and Outlook tended to do the opposite. However, the researchers also noted that much of Gmail’s filtering was based on user behaviour and sender reputation, not politics.

Google pointed out at the time that Gmail users have full control over spam settings, and that users can mark any email as “not spam” to prevent future filtering.

That said, the subject remains politically sensitive. Fundraising emails are a key revenue stream for US political campaigns, and if filters prevent delivery, they can materially impact donations and voter engagement.

Ferguson’s letter argues: “Consumers expect that they will have the opportunity to hear from their own chosen candidates or political party. A consumer’s right to hear from candidates or parties, including solicitations for donations, is not diminished because that consumer’s political preferences may run counter to your company’s or your employees’ political preferences.”

Could Google Face Penalties or Restrictions?

If the FTC finds that Google has violated the FTC Act, the company could face enforcement action, including fines or mandated changes to Gmail’s filtering systems. However, such action would require a formal investigation and proof that any bias is systematic and not attributable to legitimate filtering criteria.

It’s also unclear how such an investigation would reconcile users’ rights to avoid spam with senders’ rights to reach inboxes. Ferguson’s interpretation of consumer harm appears to rest on the assumption that missed political emails constitute a denial of free speech or access to political discourse, which is something Google is likely to contest.

Google does not publicly disclose the exact algorithms or rule sets behind its spam detection system, citing security and abuse prevention concerns. Any forced transparency could have knock-on effects for email security and user privacy.

What This Means for Businesses and Email Platforms

This case raises broader questions for email platforms, regulators, and business senders, particularly in the UK, where GDPR and PECR (Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations) place strict limits on unsolicited marketing.

If the US FTC sets a precedent that political fundraising emails cannot be filtered as spam without triggering regulatory scrutiny, it may embolden other organisations, including businesses, to claim similar protections. This could undermine the effectiveness of spam filters, frustrate end-users, and expose platforms to further regulatory pressure.

For UK businesses, this case highlights the fine balance between sender rights and consumer protection. Email campaigns must navigate complex consent rules and content standards, while email service providers must demonstrate that their filtering practices are fair, consistent, and user-driven.

Key Challenges and Questions Ahead

Ferguson’s letter exposes the change in regulatory posture toward Big Tech under Trump’s second term. However, legal and technical barriers remain. For example, successfully proving partisan intent behind essentially secret algorithmic filtering is notoriously difficult, especially when the same tools are used to combat phishing, scams, and malware.

Also, while Ferguson’s language is strong, i.e. warning that “Alphabet may be engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices”, it is not yet clear whether a full-scale investigation is underway or likely to be.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The deeper challenge now facing Google is how to respond without weakening the very protections that users expect from email filtering. If Gmail adjusts its filters in response to political pressure, it risks opening the door to wider claims of bias from other interest groups, including corporate marketers and advocacy organisations. This could reduce user trust in the platform’s ability to safeguard inboxes from unwanted or harmful content. At the same time, refusing to alter its approach may invite further regulatory scrutiny from a politically motivated FTC, especially given Ferguson’s stated aim of tackling what he sees as anti-conservative censorship by tech platforms.

For regulators, the situation is no less complex. Ferguson’s framing of email filtering as a potential violation of the FTC Act relies on defining political emails as essential consumer content. That may be a difficult case to make without clearer evidence of intent or unequal treatment that goes beyond what automated systems already do in response to user signals. Yet the fact that this issue has been raised so directly at such a senior level suggests it is unlikely to fade quickly.

For UK businesses, the implications are more practical than political. Any moves in the US to curb the ability of platforms to filter unsolicited messages could have downstream effects on email service standards, especially for multinational tech providers like Google. If filtering rules are softened or become more contested, businesses may see higher volumes of low-quality or irrelevant messages reaching customers, increasing the risk of consumer disengagement or even regulatory backlash under UK and EU privacy laws. It may also complicate how marketing platforms classify and process outbound email campaigns.

Google finds itself once again in the position of defending complex algorithmic processes against public accusations that are simple to make but hard to refute. Ferguson, meanwhile, has positioned the FTC as a key actor in the battle over perceived ideological bias online, bringing renewed pressure to bear on how tech firms balance neutrality, safety, and control.

For businesses and users alike, the way this unfolds could influence not just inbox filters, but broader expectations of platform fairness and responsibility.

Chatbots powered by large language models (LLMs) are giving out fake or incorrect login URLs, exposing users to phishing risks, according to research from cybersecurity firm Netcraft.

In tests using GPT-4.1 models, including Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot, only 66 per cent of login links provided were correct. The rest pointed to inactive, unrelated, or unclaimed domains that scammers could exploit. In one case, Perplexity recommended a phishing site posing as Wells Fargo’s login page.

Smaller brands were more likely to be misrepresented, as they appear less in AI training data. Netcraft also found over 17,000 AI-generated phishing pages already targeting users.

To stay safe, businesses should avoid relying on AI for login links, train staff to recognise phishing attempts, and push for stronger safeguards from AI providers.

A small, flexible cooling device developed by UCLA scientists can continuously reduce surrounding temperatures by up to 16°F, offering a sustainable alternative to traditional air conditioning.

A Compact, Solid-State Breakthrough in Cooling

Researchers at UCLA have unveiled a new cooling technology that operates without refrigerants, fans or compressors. Instead, it uses layers of flexible polymer films that expand and contract in response to an electric field, thereby actively removing heat. The tiny device, just under an inch wide and a quarter of an inch thick, offers a lightweight, energy-efficient alternative to conventional systems, and has already demonstrated the ability to lower ambient temperatures by nearly 9°C (16°F) continuously in lab tests.

Uses The ‘Electrocaloric Effect’

The prototype uses the electrocaloric effect, which is a property found in certain materials that causes them to change temperature when exposed to an electric field. However, this project has gone further than earlier experiments by pairing this effect with electrostrictive motion, i.e. the polymer also physically moves when charged, allowing the researchers to create a dynamic pumping action that shifts heat away from the source.

Designed With Wearables and Portables in Mind

The lead developer, Professor Qibing Pei of the UCLA Samueli School of Engineering, described the innovation as “a self-regenerative heat pump” and believes it could be ideal for wearable cooling systems. “Coping with heat is becoming a critical health issue,” he said, citing the growing dangers of heat stress in both industrial and consumer contexts. “We need multiple strategies to address it.”

The UCLA team sees wide potential for the design in personal cooling accessories, flexible electronics, and mobile systems used in hot environments. The films are flexible, lightweight, and made without liquid coolant or moving parts, which means they could be incorporated into garments, safety gear, or on-the-go electronic equipment where heat management is essential.

For example, warehouse and outdoor logistics workers in hot climates could benefit from clothing-integrated cooling components. Also, remote field technicians or engineers working on battery-heavy devices in poorly ventilated spaces could also deploy portable cooling pads to protect both personnel and electronics.

A Re-think of How Cooling Systems Are Built

Traditional cooling systems rely on vapour compression, a process that typically uses refrigerants such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). These are powerful greenhouse gases, and while the Kigali Amendment and other measures have helped phase them down, their use remains widespread. Vapour-compression cooling is also relatively mechanically complex, energy-intensive, and bulky.

By contrast, UCLA’s design eliminates the need for refrigerants entirely. Each layer in the stack is coated with carbon nanotubes and acts both as a charge carrier and a heat exchanger. As an electric field is applied, alternating pairs of layers compress and expand in sequence, creating a kind of mechanical ‘accordion’ that actively moves heat from the source through the material and out into the environment.

Hanxiang Wu, one of the paper’s co-lead authors and a postdoctoral scholar in Pei’s lab, explained that the device’s core advantage is its simplicity. “The polymer films use a circuit to shuttle charges between pairs of stacked layers,” he said. “This makes the flexible cooling device more efficient than air conditioners and removes the need for bulky heat sinks or refrigerants.”

Sustainability Advantages for the Built Environment

For commercial and industrial sectors, the implications of this development could be significant. While the current model is small-scale, the underlying principle could enable more energy-efficient climate control in buildings and vehicles if adapted into broader system designs.

For example, smaller commercial premises, off-grid cabins, or remote infrastructure hubs could use scaled-up polymer-based systems to passively remove heat without heavy energy use. Similarly, businesses looking to reduce their cooling-related carbon footprint could integrate such systems into server racks, battery storage units, or sensitive workspaces where localised heat management is critical.

Unlike passive radiative cooling materials, which typically require exposure to the open sky and only work under certain conditions, this system functions independently of ambient humidity, weather, or sunlight. Its electricity-only operation means that when powered by renewables, the cooling process can be entirely emissions-free.

Markets and Use Cases with the Most to Gain

While mainstream residential HVAC systems are unlikely to be replaced overnight, sectors requiring portable, distributed, or wearable cooling solutions may see faster uptake. This includes defence, first responders, sports performance, outdoor event staffing, and high-temperature industrial roles such as glass or steel manufacturing.

The research team has already filed a patent and is exploring future product development. Pei confirmed the device could also be adapted to cool flexible electronics and embedded sensors. In particular, industries working on wearable tech, soft robotics, and thermal regulation in electric vehicles may find these materials offer a compact and scalable solution.

The innovation also opens the door to new kinds of thermal design for electronics. For example, temperature-sensitive components such as lithium batteries, processors, or optical sensors could benefit from localised solid-state cooling that does not compromise device flexibility or mobility.

Still in the Early Stages

Despite the promise, this technology is still in its early stages and, as with many materials science innovations, scaling up from lab to market presents challenges. Currently, the temperature drop of 8.8°C below ambient was achieved under carefully controlled test conditions and for small surface areas.

However, maintaining this level of performance over larger spaces, longer durations, or in real-world outdoor environments will require further development, particularly around durability, power consumption, and integration with fabrics or casings.

Another limitation is cost. While the polymers and carbon nanotubes used are relatively accessible, mass-manufacturing precision-layered ferroelectric film stacks could prove complex and expensive without production breakthroughs. Reliability under repeated use and extreme conditions is another consideration, especially for use in wearables or industrial settings.

Energy consumption is also an issue that really matters. For example, while the device itself uses low-voltage electricity, constant operation across large areas would still draw power, meaning the overall carbon footprint depends on the source of that electricity.
Concerns have also been raised in the wider field about the longevity of electrocaloric materials under stress. For example, ferroelectric polymers can degrade over time, especially under high cycling rates, and the cumulative effects of charge and discharge cycling on mechanical integrity are not yet fully known.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

For now, the most immediate value for this innovation appears to lie in small-scale, high-impact use cases. Businesses operating in hot environments, whether in logistics, manufacturing, or field services, may be among the first to benefit from wearable or portable versions of this cooling technology. If the materials can be manufactured at scale and integrated into clothing or equipment affordably, it could improve productivity, reduce health risks, and lower demand for energy-hungry air conditioning. UK companies involved in the design of smart workwear, industrial safety gear, or modular electronics may also find opportunities in applying or adapting this technology into their own products.

Beyond wearables, the principle behind this cooling system offers a fresh approach to thermal management that could influence future designs in everything from data centres to electric vehicles. For UK firms in clean tech, energy-efficient infrastructure, or defence systems, this could represent a new avenue for collaboration or licensing. It also sits comfortably alongside national net zero goals, particularly in cutting energy consumption and phasing out refrigerant-based systems. However, progress will depend on whether UCLA’s lab success can translate into real-world resilience, cost efficiency, and ease of integration.

The wider lesson is that cooling does not have to mean compressors, gas, or fans. By embedding thermal functionality directly into the material structure, this research challenges long-held assumptions and opens up routes to smarter, lighter, and greener alternatives. For now, the technology is experimental and best seen as part of a wider portfolio of next-generation cooling methods. However, as climate challenges grow and energy costs rise, pressure is mounting on both researchers and businesses to bring practical alternatives like this to market sooner rather than later.

ChatGPT offers four distinct pre-made ‘personalities’, namely : cynic, robot, nerd, and listener. You can ask for your content to be output through any (or all) of these different personality-types, thereby giving you the ability to get different responses, according to each personality type. Depending on your audiences and/or research, getting different perspectives could be very useful indeed.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It may be best to download it first]

Use Word’s Document Inspector to remove potentially sensitive metadata, such as author names and comments, to protect your information when sharing documents.

– Go to File > Info > Check for Issues > Inspect Document.
– Select the types of metadata to inspect and remove.
– Run the inspection and review the results.
– Remove the metadata as needed.

This helps ensure your document doesn’t inadvertently expose sensitive information.