In this Tech Insight, we look at the latest AI developments, including AI agents creating their own language, Opera’s new AI-powered browsing assistant, and a growing debate over the risks of an international race to artificial general intelligence.

AI Agents Are Speaking Their Own Language

A new experiment called ‘GibberLink’ has just demonstrated an intriguing concept, i.e. AI voice agents that can recognise when they are speaking to another AI and then switch to a more efficient communication method (which is incomprehensible to humans). Developed at a hackathon in London by Meta engineers Boris Starkov and Anton Pidkuiko, GibberLink replaces human-like speech with GGWave, a sound-based protocol that allows AI systems to exchange information faster and with less computing power.

To human ears, the communication sounds like a series of beeps and boops, reminiscent of dial-up internet modems from the 1980s. While it may seem like a niche experiment, the technology could actually have real-world applications. For example, as companies increasingly deploy AI-powered customer service agents, there may be a need for them to communicate directly. By using this machine-native ‘language,’ AI agents could cut computing costs significantly, making AI-driven voice interactions cheaper and more efficient.

The apparent viral success of GibberLink has sparked both fascination and concern. For example, some fear that AI developing its own incomprehensible communication methods could reduce transparency and accountability. However, Starkov and Pidkuiko insist their project is simply an experiment, and they have open-sourced the code rather than commercialising it (at least for now).

Opera’s AI Assistant Could Change How We Browse

It seems that Opera, the long-standing web browser, is aiming to redefine internet browsing with its AI-powered feature called ‘Browser Operator’. Unlike traditional AI assistants that simply summarise search results, Browser Operator actively completes tasks for users. For example, if you need to book a flight, it’s just a case of providing a few details, and the AI will search, compare prices, and add the best option for you.

What sets Opera’s AI apart from competitors like OpenAI’s Operator and Anthropic’s Claude is that it operates locally within the browser. This ensures not only faster performance but also better privacy, as user data never leaves the device. Unlike cloud-based AI tools, which require remote servers to function, Browser Operator processes requests directly on the user’s machine.

The potential benefits are clear, i.e. more efficient browsing, time saved on repetitive online tasks, and a more seamless digital experience. However, as with any AI-driven automation, questions remain about how much control users will ultimately have over decisions made on their behalf. Opera has included safeguards, allowing users to pause or cancel tasks at any time, ensuring that humans remain in the loop.

Eric Schmidt Warns Against an AI Arms Race

Amidst the rapid AI advancements, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and two co-authors, Alexandr Wang and Dan Hendrycks, have just published a policy paper warning against a US-led push for artificial general intelligence (AGI). It seems they’re concerned that an aggressive AI race could provoke international retaliation, particularly from China, and potentially destabilise global relations.

Schmidt and his colleagues argue that the pursuit of AGI (a hypothetical AI system with intelligence surpassing human capabilities) should not be treated like the Manhattan Project, the US government’s programme to develop nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Instead, they propose a more cautious strategy, advocating for ‘Mutual Assured AI Malfunction’ (MAIM), which suggests that governments should focus on defensive measures to deter AI-driven threats rather than escalating an AI arms race.

The paper challenges the notion that the US must ‘win’ the AGI race, arguing that such thinking could lead to dangerous consequences, including pre-emptive cyberattacks from adversaries. Instead, they suggest limiting access to powerful AI chips, strengthening cybersecurity, and ensuring AI remains under human control.

What Does This Mean for Your Business?

These developments show just how rapidly AI is reshaping industries, and why businesses need to stay ahead of the curve. The rise of AI agents like GibberLink suggests a future where automated systems could interact more efficiently without human intervention. While this might reduce costs, businesses relying on AI-driven communication must consider transparency and ethical oversight to maintain customer trust and regulatory compliance.

Meanwhile, Opera’s Browser Operator signals a shift in how AI can automate everyday digital tasks. For businesses, this could mean exploring ways to integrate AI-powered automation into their workflows to improve efficiency. Whether it’s customer service, e-commerce, or operations, AI-driven task completion could actually free up human employees for more strategic work. However, as with any AI system, companies will need to carefully manage data privacy concerns and ensure these tools remain user-controlled rather than fully autonomous.

Also, the debate over AGI development highlights broader implications for businesses investing in AI research. If governments take a more defensive stance, regulations around AI chips and open-source models could tighten, limiting access to cutting-edge AI innovations. For businesses in cybersecurity, cloud computing, and AI ethics, this could create new opportunities (but also new risks). Understanding the shifting regulatory landscape will be critical for companies looking to leverage AI without falling foul of future legal constraints.

The main message here is, therefore, that as AI continues to evolve, businesses that can embrace its efficiencies while maintaining ethical and regulatory oversight are likely to be best positioned for long-term success. Whether integrating AI assistants, automating customer interactions, or staying informed on global AI policy, companies that adapt strategically will stay competitive in an increasingly AI-driven world.

According to a report by The Information, OpenAI is gearing up to introduce a new wave of specialised ‘AI agents’, with some of its most advanced offerings set to cost as much as $20,000 per month.

New Revenue Stream For OpenAI

With AI development costs rising fast, OpenAI reportedly lost around $5 billion last year due to the huge expense of running and improving its services. It seems, therefore, that facing growing competition, OpenAI may now be looking for new revenue streams, such as the high-end AI agents idea.

What Are OpenAI’s AI Agents?

AI agents are essentially advanced, self-running AI systems that go beyond simple prompts. Unlike standard AI models that require users to request information, OpenAI’s planned AI agents will be more autonomous. For example, they won’t just answer questions but will proactively analyse data, generate insights, and even carry out complex workflows independently.

Tiers of AI Agents

Reports from The Information suggest that OpenAI may actually offer several tiers of AI agents, each designed for different professional applications. For example:

– High-Income Knowledge Worker Agent – This entry-level agent, priced at $2,000 per month, is intended to assist professionals in managing and interpreting large volumes of information.

– Software Developer Agent – At $10,000 per month, this agent will focus on automating coding tasks, debugging, and optimising software development processes.

– PhD-Level Research Agent – The most advanced and expensive option, priced at $20,000 per month, is designed for high-level research in academia, science, and other knowledge-intensive fields.

Why Is OpenAI Introducing These High-Cost AI Agents?

The pricing structure for these agents reflects both the increasing demand for advanced AI-driven automation and the significant costs associated with developing and running such systems. For example, OpenAI’s AI models require enormous computing power and continuous updates, making them expensive to maintain.

Also, as mentioned earlier, OpenAI is facing mounting pressure to become financially sustainable. Some commentators have suggested that despite its rapid growth, the company’s costs are continuing to outstrip revenue, thereby leading OpenAI to look for high-value enterprise customers who can afford premium AI solutions.

When Could These AI Agents Launch?

While OpenAI has not officially confirmed a launch date, The Information reports that the company is already in active discussions with potential customers. Some reports indicate that businesses may start accessing these agents within the next few months, with a full-scale rollout possibly occurring by the end of the year.

OpenAI has already secured some significant financial backing to support its AI agent plans. For example, The Information reported that SoftBank, a major investor in the AI firm, has committed to spending $3 billion on OpenAI’s agent products this year alone.

Who Will Use These AI Agents?

Given the hefty price tag, OpenAI’s AI agents are unlikely to be aimed at individual users or small businesses. Instead, they will most likely be adopted by large corporations, research institutions, and high-net-worth professionals who require AI-driven expertise in complex fields.

Examples of sectors that could benefit from these AI agents include:

Academic and Scientific Research – AI agents could assist in processing vast amounts of data, identifying patterns, and even generating new theories.

Finance and Investment – Hedge funds and financial analysts may use AI agents for risk assessment, forecasting, and automating trading strategies.

Technology and Software Development – AI-powered software engineering agents could help accelerate innovation and optimise complex coding tasks.

Legal and Corporate Advisory Services – Law firms and consultants could use AI agents for research, contract analysis, and regulatory compliance monitoring.

The Effect of OpenAI’s Agent Pricing Strategy

The effects of OpenAI’s introduction of these high-priced AI agents could include:

– AI as an Elite Tool – At $20,000 per month, access to the most advanced AI capabilities could be restricted to large organisations and well-funded institutions, potentially increasing disparities in AI adoption.

– New Business Models in AI – OpenAI’s move could set a precedent for other AI firms to introduce premium AI services, shifting AI from a general consumer tool to a specialised enterprise product.

– Pressure on Competitors – Companies like Google DeepMind and Anthropic may be forced to introduce competing AI products, potentially driving innovation but also raising concerns about escalating AI costs.

– Regulatory Considerations – As AI agents become more autonomous, regulators may need to step in to establish guidelines for their deployment and use.

OpenAI’s Financial Challenges and Strategic Partnerships

OpenAI’s decision to introduce premium AI agents comes amid efforts to strengthen its financial position. According to The Information’s report, OpenAI aims to raise up to $40 billion in a new funding round, which could push its valuation to as high as $300 billion! SoftBank is expected to play a key role in this funding round, with reports suggesting it could invest between $15 billion and $25 billion.

However, despite these efforts, OpenAI is still facing long-term financial risks. For example, analysts predict the company could lose up to $44 billion before achieving profitability, with its computing expenses potentially rising to $37.5 billion annually by 2029. These financial pressures may force OpenAI to further increase prices or seek new monetisation strategies in the future.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For UK businesses, what these tiers of high-price AI agents could essentially mean is the development of a growing divide between those able to leverage AI-driven efficiencies and those left behind due to cost barriers. High-end AI could, therefore, be moving firmly into the realm of enterprise solutions rather than everyday consumer use. For example, large corporations and institutions may see these tools as a way to cut costs and boost productivity, but smaller businesses could struggle to compete if access to advanced AI remains financially out of reach.

This could mean that the AI industry itself may also shift towards more premium, subscription-based models, where access to top-tier AI capabilities is increasingly restricted to those with the deepest pockets. Competitors such as Google DeepMind and Anthropic may be forced to adjust their pricing strategies or innovate further to stay competitive. Also, regulators may step-in to ensure AI developments remain accessible and ethically governed.

OpenAI’s decision to pursue high-end enterprise customers could also be seen as being part of a broader trend in AI commercialisation, where profitability and sustainability are now as much a priority as innovation. While AI remains a rapidly evolving field, there is increasing pressure on leading AI companies to justify their valuations and revenue models. With OpenAI reportedly seeking to raise billions in new investment while tackling significant losses, the success of its AI agents could help determine whether this is a long-term strategic shift or just a short-term response to financial pressures. The wider AI industry will, no doubt, be watching closely to see if this signals a sustainable future for advanced AI or simply a new phase in an already volatile market.

Non-profit web tech organisation Mozilla has rewritten Firefox’s Terms of Use after widespread criticism from users who feared the company was overreaching with its data policies.

Vague Wording?

It seems that the backlash stemmed from vague and broad wording in the updated terms, which many believed gave Mozilla rights over any data entered into the browser.

After days of mounting pressure, Mozilla admitted the wording had caused unnecessary concern and moved quickly to clarify its position. The rewritten terms now explicitly state that Mozilla does not claim ownership over user data and is only processing it to operate Firefox as intended.

How the Controversy Started

The trouble began when Mozilla introduced its updated Terms of Use and Privacy Notice for Firefox users in late February. The update was meant to improve transparency, but instead, it sparked alarm. The particular clause in the new terms that became the centre of the controversy was:

“When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide licence to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox.”

Unfortunately for Mozilla, many users appeared to interpret this as Mozilla giving itself sweeping rights over everything they typed or uploaded through Firefox, thereby raising concerns about potential data sales to advertisers or AI companies.

To make matters worse, Mozilla had also removed a previous assurance from its Privacy FAQ that explicitly stated the company would never sell user data. This change further fuelled speculation that Mozilla was shifting its stance on privacy.

Mozilla’s Swift Rewrite

The backlash was immediate, with users taking to forums, social media, and tech news websites to voice their concerns. It seems that many long-time Firefox supporters, who valued Mozilla’s strong stance on privacy, may have felt betrayed.

Realising the scale of the problem, Mozilla responded swiftly. Ajit Varma, Mozilla’s Vice President of Product, acknowledged the confusion, stating: “Our intent was just to be as clear as possible about how we make Firefox work, but in doing so we also created some confusion and concern.”

To address these concerns, Mozilla rewrote the contentious section of the Terms of Use. The revised wording now states:

“You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This includes processing your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice. It also includes a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide licence for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. This does not give Mozilla any ownership in that content.”

In addition to clarifying its stance on data ownership, Mozilla also removed a reference to its Acceptable Use Policy, which had caused further confusion.

Why Did Mozilla Change the Terms in the First Place?

The controversy wasn’t caused by a sudden change in how Mozilla handles data, but rather by the legal complexities surrounding privacy laws.

Mozilla explained that it had stepped away from making blanket claims like “We never sell your data” because privacy laws in different jurisdictions define “selling” in different ways. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) considers “selling” to include actions like “disclosing, making available, or transferring data,” even if no money changes hands.

Given these evolving legal definitions, Mozilla had adjusted its wording to avoid potential legal risks. However, in doing so, it unintentionally created alarm among users who feared a change in its long-standing commitment to privacy.

Does Firefox Actually Share User Data?

Despite the backlash, Mozilla insists that its approach to data privacy has not changed. The company has stated that yes, Firefox does collect and share some data, but it is done in a way that protects user privacy.

Mozilla says it doesn’t track individual browsing activity or sell personally identifiable information. Instead, it collects aggregated and anonymised data to support:

– Optional ads on the New Tab page

– Sponsored suggestions in the search bar

– Performance tracking to improve Firefox’s functionality.

Mozilla stresses that users still have full control over their data-sharing settings, which can be customised in Firefox’s privacy controls.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

While Mozilla acted quickly to correct the situation, this whole episode appears to have damaged trust among some users. The controversy highlights how even a company with a strong privacy reputation can stumble when communication isn’t perhaps as clear as it could be.

For privacy-conscious users, such as businesses, the backlash should serve as a reminder to remain vigilant about changes to terms and privacy policies, even from companies that market themselves as pro-privacy.

For Mozilla, this incident underlines the need for better communication when handling sensitive topics like user data. It also shows how legal wording, even if well-intended, can backfire if it leaves room for misinterpretation.

With Firefox struggling to compete against dominant browsers like Google Chrome, maintaining trust is crucial for Mozilla’s future. The company may have resolved this issue for now, but it will need to tread carefully to avoid similar missteps in the future.

Brother (once considered one of the more consumer-friendly printer manufacturers) is now under fire over claims that its latest firmware updates deliberately degrade print quality when third-party toner cartridges are used.

Firmware Updates Allegedly Restrict Third-Party Ink

Right-to-repair activist and electronics technician Louis Rossmann has accused Brother of deploying firmware updates that hinder the use of non-OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) consumables. According to Rossmann, users have reported that certain printer functions, such as automatic colour registration, stop working after an update when a third-party cartridge is detected.

Several users have taken to forums and social media to confirm similar issues, with reports stating that previously functional non-OEM toner cartridges suddenly started producing lower-quality prints or experiencing feature restrictions. Furthermore, rolling back to an earlier firmware version is proving difficult, as Brother has removed older updates from its servers.

Brother Denies Any Wrongdoing

Brother has responded to the allegations, denying any deliberate attempt to block third-party consumables. The company issued a statement saying:

“We are aware of the recent false claims suggesting that a Brother firmware update may have restricted the use of third-party ink cartridges. Please be assured that Brother firmware updates do not block the use of third-party ink in our machines.”

Brother maintains that while they encourage the use of Brother-branded toner for optimal performance, their printers do not intentionally degrade print quality based on the cartridge brand. The company attributes user concerns to its standard troubleshooting process, which includes a “Brother Genuine check”, i.e. a diagnostic step that ensures a printer functions correctly with its own branded consumables.

Not the First Manufacturer to Face Backlash

Brother is not the first printer manufacturer accused of anti-consumer practices related to third-party ink. HP, for example, has implemented “Dynamic Security,” which blocks non-HP cartridges entirely. The company has faced multiple lawsuits over this strategy, with critics accusing it of monopolistic practices. HP, however, defends its approach, citing security risks associated with third-party cartridges, including claims that they could potentially introduce malware.

Similarly, Canon has been criticised for implementing firmware updates that disable scanning functions when ink is low, even when the ink is unrelated to the scanning process. Epson has also faced scrutiny for its use of DRM (Digital Rights Management) technology, which prevents cartridges from functioning after a certain period, even if they remain full.

What This Means for Your Business?

For businesses relying on printers for everyday operations, Brother’s alleged restrictions could pose challenges. Many companies opt for third-party toner to cut costs, often paying significantly less than the high price of OEM cartridges. However, with firmware updates now potentially limiting this option, businesses may find themselves locked into purchasing expensive Brother-branded supplies.

While Brother insists that these changes do not impact third-party ink compatibility, user reports suggest otherwise. Companies using Brother printers may need to consider steps such as disabling automatic firmware updates to prevent potential functionality losses. However, doing so carries security risks, as firmware updates often include patches for vulnerabilities.

The growing controversy surrounding printer manufacturers and third-party ink restrictions could push regulatory bodies to take action. Consumer advocacy groups have already called for stricter oversight of post-sale function removal, arguing that disabling previously available features through software updates constitutes deceptive business practices.

As the debate unfolds, businesses should remain vigilant, assessing how these firmware updates might affect their operations. While Brother’s printers have historically been a more user-friendly option in terms of third-party toner compatibility, recent developments suggest that the industry as a whole is moving toward tighter control over consumable use, thereby raising important questions about fairness, transparency, and consumer choice.

GitLab Threat Intelligence has warned over 3.2 million Chrome users to delete 16 malicious browser extensions that compromise security and expose data to attackers.

The extensions, including ad blockers, screen capture tools, and emoji keyboards, were found injecting harmful code into browsers. GitLab says attackers hijacked these extensions through phishing or by acquiring them from developers, using them to bypass security protections and manipulate content.

Once installed, the extensions connect to a remote server, receive hidden commands, and strip security measures from websites. Although Google has removed them from the Chrome Web Store, the warning to users is to manually uninstall them to stay protected.

Compromised extensions include Blipshot, WAToolkit, Super Dark Mode, and Adblock for Chrome. Experts warn that high download counts and positive reviews do not guarantee safety, as attackers often hijack trusted extensions.

Businesses should restrict unverified extensions, review permissions regularly, and use endpoint security to prevent such threats. Monitoring browser activity can also help detect potential risks early.

Danish startup PhaseTree says its combined use of multi-scale modelling techniques means it can create new materials for clean energy technologies in just 2 years (instead of the usual 20), i.e., a speed 10 times faster than traditional methods.

Who is PhaseTree and What Do They Do?

Copenhagen-based startup, PhaseTree, was founded in 2021 as a spin-off from the Technical University of Denmark (DTU). Their mission is to reinvent the material discovery process, using a unique combination of computer simulations, lab automation, and artificial intelligence (AI) to drastically shorten the time it takes to find and develop new materials.

Slow, Up Until Now

At the moment, creating new materials for clean energy technologies is an incredibly slow and expensive process. For example, the industry norm can take up to 20 years due to time-consuming lab testing and trial-and-error experiments. However, PhaseTree’s solution (based on advanced multi-scale modelling techniques) reduces this to just two years, thereby transforming the way sustainable materials are discovered.

Could Help the Move Away From Fossil Fuels

This speed-up could have major implications for (mostly clean energy) technology industries that rely on scarce or expensive raw materials, such as the battery, automobile, and steel sectors. By identifying alternative materials that are cheaper, more sustainable, and easier to produce, PhaseTree aims to help companies move away from their reliance on rare earth metals and fossil fuels.

How Does PhaseTree’s Technology Work?

Unlike many AI-driven material discovery tools that rely purely on data correlations, PhaseTree takes a different approach, i.e. a “physics-first, AI-on-top” approach. Their platform starts with well-established scientific principles, then layers AI on top to refine predictions. This ensures that the materials they identify are not only promising on paper but actually viable in the real world.

PhaseTree’s three-pronged approach includes:

– Physics-based modelling. This involves analysing fundamental material properties like composition, atomic structure, defects, and microstructures.

– AI refinement. Once strong candidates are identified using scientific principles, AI is applied to optimise their properties and manufacturing potential.

– Lab automation. Cutting down on manual testing time by integrating automated lab experiments that validate material performance faster than traditional methods.

As Jin Hyun Chang, co-founder and CTO of PhaseTree, explains: “Our approach accelerates discovery by combining physics-based modelling with AI, allowing us to rapidly identify and refine promising candidates that would traditionally take decades to develop.”

This “physics-first, AI-on-top” method is what makes PhaseTree stand out in an increasingly crowded sector. In 2024 alone, AI-powered material discovery startups raised over $260 million, with 10 out of 17 funding rounds going to European companies, including ExoMatter, Dunia, and Orbital. However, while many of these companies depend heavily on AI-driven correlations, PhaseTree tries to focus more on real-world scientific accuracy.

Why PhaseTree’s Work Could Be More Important Than Ever

The race to discover new materials is not just about efficiency and innovation. It’s about economic and environmental survival. Therefore, some of the key reasons why PhaseTree’s work could be of particular importance now include:

– The rare earth crisis. With China controlling the majority of the rare earth supply chain, industries are facing soaring costs, limited access, and increasing geopolitical risks.

– Environmental impact. Many existing materials, such as those used in lithium-ion batteries and steel production, have significant environmental drawbacks, including heavy reliance on fossil fuels and high CO₂ emissions.

– Manufacturing challenges. A material may work in a research lab, but that doesn’t mean it can be produced at scale.

PhaseTree’s CEO, Amit Luthra, has highlighted how its work directly addresses these challenges, saying: “From the outset, we design materials with manufacturability in mind, ensuring they can be synthesised at scale rather than remaining a theoretical concept or lab-scale prototype.”

Also, as Christian Lindegaard Jepsen, Partner at Heartcore Capital (a source of PhaseTree’s funding), explains: “Materials play a crucial role in developing clean energy and sustainable technologies. PhaseTree makes it easier and faster to find better alternatives that can help reduce environmental impact and improve efficiency.”

By focusing on low-cost, abundant materials with straightforward synthesis routes, PhaseTree is hoping to maximise the likelihood of real-world adoption by major industrial players.

€3 Million Funding to Drive Expansion

To take their work to the next level, PhaseTree has just secured €3 million from Denmark-based venture capital firm Heartcore Capital. It’s understood that this funding will be used to:

– Expand R&D efforts, enhancing their material discovery platform.

– Grow the PhaseTree team, bringing in more scientists, engineers, and AI specialists.

– Scale up collaborations with some of the world’s largest battery, automotive, and steel manufacturers.

What This Could Mean for the Future

If PhaseTree succeeds in scaling up its technology, it could change the way industries develop materials for the better by reducing their dependence on scarce, expensive, and environmentally damaging resources.

– Some of the potential impacts include:

– Cheaper, more efficient batteries that rely on readily available materials rather than rare earth metals.

– Stronger, lighter alloys for the automotive and aerospace industries, reducing fuel consumption and emissions.

– Faster breakthroughs in renewable energy technology, making solar panels and wind turbines more efficient and cost-effective.

With the clean energy sector desperate for innovation, and supply chain disruptions making material discovery more urgent than ever, PhaseTree may well be in the right place at the right time.

What Does This Mean for Your Organisation?

By combining the accuracy of scientific modelling with the speed and efficiency of AI, they are setting a precedent for how next-generation materials can be developed. The fact that PhaseTree’s approach can significantly reduce development timelines and costs could reshape entire supply chains. This could make sustainable materials more accessible for businesses that have historically struggled with long and expensive R&D cycles. With global demand for cleaner, more efficient materials growing rapidly, this innovation could arrive at a crucial turning point for industries that are under mounting pressure to reduce their environmental impact.

For UK businesses, this development could open up significant opportunities. For example, as industries face increasing regulation on carbon emissions and sustainability, the ability to source materials that are not only greener but also cost-effective could provide a real competitive advantage. British manufacturers, particularly in sectors such as automotive, aerospace, and energy, could benefit from greater access to advanced materials that reduce reliance on imports and offer more stable supply chains. With the UK aiming to become a leader in green technology and advanced manufacturing, partnerships with companies like PhaseTree could support efforts to drive innovation domestically while reducing exposure to global market volatility.

Beyond the business world, the impact of faster, more sustainable material discovery could help society as a whole. For example, the widespread availability of new, more efficient materials could lower the cost of renewable energy infrastructure, making technologies like solar power and wind energy more affordable for consumers. Also, the battery industry, which is crucial to the success of electric vehicles and energy storage, could see faster progress towards alternatives that reduce reliance on scarce or ethically problematic resources. In turn, this could help accelerate the transition to low-carbon transport and cleaner energy grids, benefiting both the environment and consumers.

That said, while PhaseTree’s approach is promising, it remains to be seen how quickly industries can actually integrate these materials into large-scale production. The challenge isn’t only about discovery but also ensuring that new materials can be manufactured at scale, meet regulatory requirements, and gain industry-wide adoption. Although PhaseTree’s focus on manufacturability from the outset is a positive step, real-world implementation will be the true test of its success.