Connect with us

Automotive

See The VW Golf 8 Coast With The Engine Off For Nearly 4 Minutes

Avatar

Published

on

The Volkswagen Golf 8 was certainly not the most exciting car to be revealed this year, but the compact hatchback was one of the most important debuts given the nameplate’s immense popularity all over the world. One of the vehicle’s many party tricks is the ability to coast with the engine completely shut off to save precious fuel as previously seen in the seventh-gen Golf facelift in the 1.5 TSI ACT BlueMotion variant introduced in August 2017.

The novelty brought by the Mk8 is the engine-off coasting functionality is now being paired with a mild-hybrid variant of the same engine, renamed eTSI to signal its eco-friendly credentials. In the adjacent video we can see the Golf 8 being driven for an impressive amount of time without sipping any gasoline to boost the car’s efficiency.

The combustion engine was turned off for 3 minutes and 51 seconds without kicking in at all during this interval of a real-world test, which ended with the Golf averaging a fuel consumption of only 4.4 liters / 100 km (53.5 miles per gallon). During the test, the car covered 20.5 miles (33 kilometers) and was driven with the engine turned off for 9 minutes and 45 seconds or 24% of the time.

Some see this type of technology as another nail in the diesel engine’s coffin as the advancements made in gasoline-fueled engines makes them nearly as efficient as the mighty TDI that once ruled European roads. Add into the mix the proliferation of plug-in hybrids and EVs, the diesel engine is highly unlikely to regain the popularity it once had.

Bear in mind that only DSG-equipped Golfs have the engine-off coasting feature, so if you prefer to row your own gears, the gasoline engine will be on at all times. Well, except for when the start/stop system kicks in. VW has said the 1.0- and 1.5-liter eTSI engines – available with 109, 129 and 148 horsepower – reduce fuel consumption by approximately 10% compared to their predecessor thanks to the mild hybrid tech and engine-off coasting while improving acceleration via an electric boost.

Source: https://www.motor1.com/news/389742/vw-golf-8-engine-off-coasting/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=RSS-category-

Automotive

GM and LG Chem’s Ultium Cells partners with Li-Cycle to process manufacturing waste

Avatar

Published

on

Ultium Cells LLC, a joint venture between General Motors and LG Chem, has been steadily building up its battery cell manufacturing capacity in the U.S. since the venture was first announced in December 2019. But with each battery cell they produce, they’ll also produce waste – tricky-to-handle waste that also has too much inherent valuable to toss into a landfill.

Instead of throwing it away, Ultium is sending it to a recycler. The venture has executed an agreement with Canadian company Li-Cycle to recycle critical materials from the scrap produced from Ultium’s manufacturing processes from its Lordstown plant, starting later in 2020. The materials from the Lordstown location will be sent to Li-Cycle’s recycling location in Rochester, New York, to be processed and returned to the battery supply chain.

General Motors and LG Chem are clearly determined to scale their battery cell manufacturing. Around 5-10% of the output of a cell manufacturer is this excess scrap. Considering that the Lordstown facility will be capable of producing 30 gigawatt hours of capacity annually, it’s sure to produce a sizable amount of waste material. (For perspective, Tesla’s factory in Nevada has a 35 GW-hour capacity.)

Li-Cycle’s approach is different from more traditional recycling processes, co-founder Ajay Kochhar told TechCrunch. Traditional recycling use a pyrometallurgical, or high temperature, process. With this process, batteries go into a furnace and excess material, like plastics and the electrolyte, are burned off, leaving around a 50% recovery rate for the valuable raw materials.

Li-Cycle also differs from competitors like Redwood Materials, which also use high-temperature, Kochhar explained. Redwood processes things like consumer electronics, which requires different approaches. Li-cycle uses a hydrometallurgical process that shreds – actually shreds, like a paper shredder – the battery materials in a submerged, proprietary solution. Doing it this way reduces the thermal risk of a fire and recovers up to 95% of the battery materials (Redwood also claims a recovery rate of 95-98%). By not burning anything off, the company also avoids producing potentially toxic emissions, Kochhar said.

Shredded lithium-ion batteries. Image Credits: Li-Cycle (opens in a new window)

The cathode and anode material is converted into battery-grade chemicals, like lithium carbonate, nickel sulfate and cobalt sulfate. Li-Cycle works with a company Traxys, which buys the chemical material.

“And where it goes from there is back into cathode making and back into the broader economy and battery supply chain,” Kochhar said. The next step would be a “true circular economy closed loop” where the same material used by a manufacturer is returned back to it.

The company has two recycling “spokes,” where shredding and mechanical separation occurs, in Rochester and Ontario, Canada, with a third commercial facility being built in Arizona. Once the Arizona facility becomes operational, Li-Cycle will be able to process around 20,000 metric tons, or 4 gigawatt-hours, of lithium-ion batteries annually. It’s also building what it calls a “hub” to make the battery chemicals in Rochester, which will have an annual capacity to process around 60,000 metric tons of battery scrap and “black mass” (a mix of cathode and anode material, and one of the outputs from the company’s “spokes”).

It works with 14 different automotive and battery manufacturers (though not all of those deals are public), as well as auto dealers and auto recyclers to accept and process spent lithium-ion batteries.

Ultium in April announced a second $2.3 billion U.S.-based battery factory in Spring Hill, Tennessee that is due to open in 2023. Both factories will supply the automaker with the cells needed for the 30 electric vehicle models it plans to launch by mid decade. However, it is not known if Li-Cycle will process waste from this plant, too.

Notably, the company also recycles R&D scrap from various automakers, giving Li-Cycle “a kind of first look at what’s coming down the pipe” in terms of battery technology, Kochhar said. That helps the company stay on top of the newest battery chemistries and technologies, like solid-state or lithium iron phosphate (LFP), and develop recycling processes accordingly. Li-Cycle already processes some LFP batteries; in those instances it remakes the phosphate back into a fertilizer additive.

In this case, Kochhar said he hopes people see this partnership as a proof point for the economic and environmental case for electric vehicles.

“This should be one commercial example [. . .] that EV batteries will not go into a landfill,” he said. “They’re very valuable. The technology’s here to deal with that in an economically and environmentally friendly fashion.”

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/11/gm-and-lg-chems-ultium-cells-partners-with-li-cycle-to-process-manufacturing-waste/

Continue Reading

Automotive

GM and LG Chem’s Ultium Cells partners with Li-Cycle to process manufacturing waste

Avatar

Published

on

Ultium Cells LLC, a joint venture between General Motors and LG Chem, has been steadily building up its battery cell manufacturing capacity in the U.S. since the venture was first announced in December 2019. But with each battery cell they produce, they’ll also produce waste – tricky-to-handle waste that also has too much inherent valuable to toss into a landfill.

Instead of throwing it away, Ultium is sending it to a recycler. The venture has executed an agreement with Canadian company Li-Cycle to recycle critical materials from the scrap produced from Ultium’s manufacturing processes from its Lordstown plant, starting later in 2020. The materials from the Lordstown location will be sent to Li-Cycle’s recycling location in Rochester, New York, to be processed and returned to the battery supply chain.

General Motors and LG Chem are clearly determined to scale their battery cell manufacturing. Around 5-10% of the output of a cell manufacturer is this excess scrap. Considering that the Lordstown facility will be capable of producing 30 gigawatt hours of capacity annually, it’s sure to produce a sizable amount of waste material. (For perspective, Tesla’s factory in Nevada has a 35 GW-hour capacity.)

Li-Cycle’s approach is different from more traditional recycling processes, co-founder Ajay Kochhar told TechCrunch. Traditional recycling use a pyrometallurgical, or high temperature, process. With this process, batteries go into a furnace and excess material, like plastics and the electrolyte, are burned off, leaving around a 50% recovery rate for the valuable raw materials.

Li-Cycle also differs from competitors like Redwood Materials, which also use high-temperature, Kochhar explained. Redwood processes things like consumer electronics, which requires different approaches. Li-cycle uses a hydrometallurgical process that shreds – actually shreds, like a paper shredder – the battery materials in a submerged, proprietary solution. Doing it this way reduces the thermal risk of a fire and recovers up to 95% of the battery materials (Redwood also claims a recovery rate of 95-98%). By not burning anything off, the company also avoids producing potentially toxic emissions, Kochhar said.

Shredded lithium-ion batteries. Image Credits: Li-Cycle (opens in a new window)

The cathode and anode material is converted into battery-grade chemicals, like lithium carbonate, nickel sulfate and cobalt sulfate. Li-Cycle works with a company Traxys, which buys the chemical material.

“And where it goes from there is back into cathode making and back into the broader economy and battery supply chain,” Kochhar said. The next step would be a “true circular economy closed loop” where the same material used by a manufacturer is returned back to it.

The company has two recycling “spokes,” where shredding and mechanical separation occurs, in Rochester and Ontario, Canada, with a third commercial facility being built in Arizona. Once the Arizona facility becomes operational, Li-Cycle will be able to process around 20,000 metric tons, or 4 gigawatt-hours, of lithium-ion batteries annually. It’s also building what it calls a “hub” to make the battery chemicals in Rochester, which will have an annual capacity to process around 60,000 metric tons of battery scrap and “black mass” (a mix of cathode and anode material, and one of the outputs from the company’s “spokes”).

It works with 14 different automotive and battery manufacturers (though not all of those deals are public), as well as auto dealers and auto recyclers to accept and process spent lithium-ion batteries.

Ultium in April announced a second $2.3 billion U.S.-based battery factory in Spring Hill, Tennessee that is due to open in 2023. Both factories will supply the automaker with the cells needed for the 30 electric vehicle models it plans to launch by mid decade. However, it is not known if Li-Cycle will process waste from this plant, too.

Notably, the company also recycles R&D scrap from various automakers, giving Li-Cycle “a kind of first look at what’s coming down the pipe” in terms of battery technology, Kochhar said. That helps the company stay on top of the newest battery chemistries and technologies, like solid-state or lithium iron phosphate (LFP), and develop recycling processes accordingly. Li-Cycle already processes some LFP batteries; in those instances it remakes the phosphate back into a fertilizer additive.

In this case, Kochhar said he hopes people see this partnership as a proof point for the economic and environmental case for electric vehicles.

“This should be one commercial example [. . .] that EV batteries will not go into a landfill,” he said. “They’re very valuable. The technology’s here to deal with that in an economically and environmentally friendly fashion.”

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/11/gm-and-lg-chems-ultium-cells-partners-with-li-cycle-to-process-manufacturing-waste/

Continue Reading

Automotive

Chasing Test Escapes In IC Manufacturing

Avatar

Published

on

The number of bad chips that slip through testing and end up in the field can be significantly reduced before those devices ever leave the fab, but the cost of developing the necessary tests and analyzing the data has sharply limited adoption.

Determining an acceptable test escape metric for an IC is essential to improving the yield-to-quality ratio in chip manufacturing, but what exactly is considered acceptable can vary greatly by market segment — and even within the same market depending upon a specific use case or time frame. The goal has been to reduce the number of failures in the field as chips have become more complex and as they become an essential part for safety-critical and mission-critical applications, but the emphasis on quality has been creeping into other markets, as well.

In the 1990s, quality engineers set the limit for desktop and laptops at 500 defects per million (DPM). With volumes of 1 million units per week, a computer system company can easily detect escapes. Today, automotive OEMs are demanding 10 ppm for much more complicated devices, even though car makers may find it challenging to measure escapes at this DPM level. Finding those escapes involves a deeper look into data, which in turn requires investments in data management, data analysis tools, and the engineering effort needed to make this all work.

With every test-time reduction decision, test content deliberation, and responses to test escapes, engineering teams determining test content process must grapple with the constructive tension found in the yield/quality/cost triangle, which is required to determine the test content process. And fundamental to all of this is having enough good data.

“We have an interesting problem within the semiconductor industry in that generally production yields are extremely high, which means there just isn’t that much fail data,” said Keith Schaub, vice president of technology and strategy at Advantest America. “So how do you develop a model to detect failures when it almost never fails? That’s a difficult problem. You must come up with some creative data-blind techniques, where you try to get the model to look for something different than the norm or out of the ordinary.”

The primary driver of these predictive models to detect test escapes has been feedback from customers. The reason is that “out of the ordinary” failed parts may be perfectly good in a customer system. If test escapes go down and the yield impact to failing good parts is minimal, then the new test metric is good enough.

How much data do you need?
In responding to customer returns, product, quality, and yield engineers revisit the yield/quality/cost triangle tradeoffs. Quality issues need to be addressed, and if this means that some good parts get thrown out, the quality engineer generally deems this needs to be an acceptable loss to make the customer happy.

This isn’t as simple as it sounds. To begin with, yield is assessed in terms of percentage, while quality is measured in ppm.

Moreover, to effectively chase test escapes, engineers need enough production volume to have the feedback from the end customer’s system. The more escapes, the less production volume engineers need to determine whether an issue exists. From there, assessing whether a new test adequately screens for test escapes requires just enough volume. Those numbers do not have to be the same.

However, no test is perfect. All of them are likely to fail a few good dies or units. Those false negatives commonly are referred to as overkill. If the fallout from a new test is in the range of 100 ppm, a yield engineer won’t blink an eye. A 1,000 ppm could be the battle line upon which a yield engineer and quality engineer have arguments. Yet in response to a customer failure, the quality engineer normally will win. If the yield loss is too excessive, then the product engineer needs to investigate other possible tests to distinguish bad from good parts.

Ratio of bad to good parts failed
How many good parts get thrown out when you apply a test? You can only measure this if you bother to look.

A system test, or an engineering characterization level of a parameter, remains the final arbitrator of labeling a true failure. Consider two different real-world scenarios involving false negatives. The first revolves around a measurement of I/O timings. In comparing an ATE determination of pass/fail parts for timing measurements with the characterization of a bad part, it was found that a ratio of 1 true fail to 2 true good existed. The second involved implementing an outlier detection technique to detect escapes. The escapes measured on order of 100 ppm. The outlier detection technique caught the escapes and failed approximately two times good as measured by a system-level test. By coincidence both examples found a 1 fail to 2 good part ratio. For the second example 100 ppm fails results in an approximate 333 ppm total fails with 233 ppm as yield loss.

So how much data do you need to determine a test limit or predictive model that distinguishes between good and bad parts?

“The short and simple answer is, ‘How accurate do you want to be?’” said Jeff Roehr, IEEE senior member and 40-year veteran of test. “You can start implementing lot-based adaptive test limits after about 30 parts, if you can accept 10% error. The accuracy improves significantly (about 1% error) when the sample reaches 300 parts.”

These numbers assume a Gaussian distribution for the parameter of interest. Such errors would change if the distribution is bimodal, for example.

If engineers have previous product history to base their test methods on — i.e., always do static part average testing on this product — they can be comfortable with 30,000 units, which has an approximate error of 0.01%.

It’s not always necessary to have a large data set to verify the effectiveness of a new test screen. Engineers can have confidence even with smaller data sets if they have feedback from a customer system. What is required, though, are unique IDs.

Ken Butler, strategic business creation manager at Advantest America, highlighted the differences between large SoCs and analog products from his many years at TI. “With large SoCs, because we had die ID, we could track all the way through manufacturing. In our analog IC businesses, where we were also applying outlier test techniques, we didn’t have die ID in many cases, because the die are extremely small and you just can’t afford the die area to do it. So you have to run open loop, no feedback, and we applied such screens. In these situations, we typically used 100 wafers’ worth of data in order to be able to go through and determine some screens. Because not every IC product line has that much material, we did arrive at screens with less data. The concern is that if you create a screen based upon 5, 10, or 20 wafers’ worth of data, the likelihood that you’re going to see enough process variation is low. Then you’re likely to miss some defect mechanisms that you might otherwise catch with more data.”

The challenge, then, is that failures happen at such a low incidence that you need enough volume to discern they exist. Once you know they exist, you can study them and figure out what makes them different from good units. In the case of test escapes that impact the customer, the failures may seem random, which makes it seem impossible to determine a test screen.

Determining a test to detect escapes
For 100 ppm, a customer needs only a volume at min of 30,000 units, although 300,000 units provides engineers more confidence in the magnitude of the problem. This provides enough information to go into the detailed data analysis needed to determine “one of these things is not like the other.”

The number of publicly documented cases for how to manage test escapes is extremely limited. This is understandable, because such stories expose both the IC vendor and the end customer. But the value cannot be overstated. These cases provide the evidence that outlier detection testing works, even when engineers cannot find the physical evidence.

“In 2005 we were having a field return problem with a product that represented an escape of 100 ppm. Our analysis indicated that these field returns just simply didn’t work in the customer system, yet it passed all of our tests applied on ATEs,” said Roehr. “System-level test (SLT) was not part of our production flow and we couldn’t afford to add SLT. We did isolate the nature of the field return to know that an extensive engineering characterization could distinguish the field returns from parts that passed both SLT and ATE-based tests. We couldn’t afford the test time to run that engineering characterization type test on our ATE.”

So now the question is whether some other test parameter can be used to distinguish the field returns from good parts that passed system-level test?

“We started digging into the data,” Roehr said. “This is one of the first cases where we found that when you look at the parts on a wafer — lot-by-wafer-lot basis, or wafer-by-wafer basis — we can start to see something. If you looked at the part across the spec range, you don’t see a problem. But when you looked at the individual parts within a lot, there were a few parts in a lot that don’t look quite like their sisters even though these parts were well within spec.”

He noted that failure analysis on selected parts never determined a definitive defect mechanism, and he surmised that the change in behavior was due to a timing-related failure — a signal path with a bit more delay. In addition, a small sample of parts that failed the new test was run through the system test. Not all parts failed the system test, but enough of them failed to provide confidence there now existed a sufficient screen to detect all the field returns.

ROI for data collection and analytic platforms
Looking at all test data for a differentiator can provide engineers with a magnet to find needles in a haystack, which are the test escapes. Yet without adequate investment this may not be possible. With test escape stories similar to Roehr’s, other product engineers said it may take 9 to 12 months before they learn of a test escape issue. Then they need to delve into the test data archives. To do so with ease requires an investment in data collection, storage and analytics. In addition, due to data alignment issues and business barriers to data sharing, this is an easier task for product engineers at IDMs than at fabless companies.

“Segmented supply chains and the lack of data sharing are still general data management gaps to be overcome in the classic data flow: Customer design to foundry to OSAT to customer. To help address this today, we are seeing more “turnkey” manufacturing options for fabless customers,” said Mike McIntyre, director of software product management at Onto Innovation. “These build options help with data consolidation, but unfortunately these options are limited both in breadth of supported technologies, application, and number of participants.”

Semiconductor data analytic companies sell their yield management platforms to fabless companies, foundries, IDMs, and OSATs, because these customers want to understand their respective role in the IC performance and quality. Rarely can anyone upfront predict the new outlier detection techniques that will be needed for a product.

The question engineering managers ask their teammates wanting to invest in outlier detection upfront is, “What’s the return on investment?” It’s a challenge to know this up front with no prior engineering experience showing the value. The cost side of the yield/quality/cost test triangle comes up. Managers want to know what money will they save if their team spends the engineering effort to find outliers up front? Another question engineers will ask is how they will know these outliers are true failures, when it’s nine to twelve months for feedback from system application.

Industry sectors with products that have safety concerns may warrant an upfront identification of potential outlier tests. Risk mitigation has a return on investment. For large SoCs going into computing systems and ASIC devices with lower part volumes, it is harder to justify because the ROI is not clear.

“We can improve DPM by getting rid of outliers,” said Phil Nigh, R&D test engineer at Broadcom. “So let’s look at testing a typical SoC. How much DPM to detect by avoiding outliers? How much could it improve DPM? My experience has been maybe as much as 10%, and 10% is not a lot. I would say a lot of customers would not be able to measure that 10%.”

Conclusion
Test escapes from customer returns will continue to occur, and product, yield and quality engineers will need to respond. With today’s yield and test data analytic platforms assessing test data for possible outliers that may impact a customer system is now possible. Identifying them ahead of time seems pointless to most product engineers because they already are applying all known tests.

Test data analytic platforms can identify test parameter combinations that show distinct population differences. However, most engineers remain skeptical without proof that it fails in a customer system, and ultimately DPM only can be measured at the end customer system. Not all outliers will be indicative of a part that will fail a system.

Related stories
Adaptive Test Gains Ground
Demand for improved quality at a reasonable cost is driving big changes in test processes.

Part Average Tests For Auto ICs Not Good Enough
Advanced node chips and packages require additional inspection, analysis and time, all of which adds cost.

Too Much Fab And Test Data, Low Utilization
For now, growth of data collected has outstripped engineers’ ability to analyze it all.

Data Issues Mount In Chip Manufacturing
Master data practices enable product engineers and factory IT engineers to deal with variety of data types and quality.

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://semiengineering.com/chasing-test-escapes/

Continue Reading

Artificial Intelligence

Lidar startup Innovusion closes $64M round led by Temasek

Avatar

Published

on

More investors are joining the wave to bet on lidar, the remote sensing method that uses laser light to measure distances and has garnered ample interest from automakers in recent times. But it’s also a technology that has long been scorned by Elon Musk partly due to its once exorbitant costs.

Innovusion, a five-year-old lidar company and a supplier to Chinese electric car upstart Nio, just landed a Series B funding round of $64 million. The new proceeds boost its total investment to over $100 million, not a small amount but the startup is in a race crowded with much bigger players that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars, like Velodyne and Luminar.

Temasek, the Singaporean government’s sovereign wealth fund, led Innovusion’s latest financing round. Other investors included Bertelsmann Asia Investment Fund, Joy Capital, Nio Capital, Eight Roads Ventures, and F-Prime Capital.

Innovusion runs core development teams out of Sunnyvale, California and Suzhou, an eastern Chinese city near Shanghai that the robotaxi unicorn Momenta also calls home.

Junwei Bao, Innovusion’s co-founder and CEO, is not deterred by the industry’s existing giants. Back at Baidu where Bao oversaw sensors and onboarded computing systems for autonomous driving, he also worked on the Chinese search engine leader’s investment in Velodyne.

“They were designing things more like a college student designing in their labs,” Bao said of Velodyne.

Lidar was a niche market up until about five years ago, the founder explained, for the technology was mostly used by a small community of amateurs and areas such as military, surveying and mapping. These were relatively small markets in terms of shipping volume and Velodyne filled the demand.

“They were not thinking about industrialization, volume manufacturing, or roadmap extensibility. They were a pioneer and we [Baidu] recognized their value… but we also knew their weakness.”

In fairness, Silicon Valley-based Velodyne today is a $2.2 billion company supplying to some of the world’s largest automakers, including Toyota and Volkswagen. It also pocketed a hefty sum of cash after going public via a SPAC merger last year. Innovusion’s strategy is to make sensors for automakers that are “good enough for the next five years,” according to Bao. The startup chooses “mature components” so it can quickly ramp up production to 100,000 units a year.

Its biggest customer at the moment is Nio, a Chinese challenger to Tesla which has backed Innovusion through its corporate venture fund Nio Capital. For mass production of its auto-grade lidar, Innovusion is partnering with Joynext, a smart vehicle arm of the Chinese auto component supplier, Joyson Electronics.

For now, China is the largest market for Innovusion. The startup is scheduled to ship a few thousand units this year, mainly for smart transportation and industrial use. Next year, it has a target to deliver several tens of thousands of units to Nio’s luxury sedan, ET7, which is said to have a scanning range of up to 500 meters, an ambitious number, and a standard 120-degree field of view.

Similar alliances between carmakers and lidar suppliers have played out in China as the former race to fulfill their “autonomous driving” promises with the aid of lidar. Xpeng, a competitor to Nio, recently rolled out a sedan powered by Livox, a lidar maker affiliated with DJI that markets its consumer-grade affordability.

Price is similarly important to Innovusion, which sells lidars to automakers for about $1,000 apiece at the volume of 100,000 per year.

“Adding a $1,000 upfront cost plus another couple thousand dollars for a car that’s selling for $30,000 or $50,000 is affordable,” Bao suggested.

With the fresh capital, Innovusion plans to increase the production volume of its auto-grade lidar and put more R&D efforts into smart cities and vehicles. The company has over 100 employees and plans to expand its headcount to over 200 this year.

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/10/innovusion-64-millions-series-b/

Continue Reading
PR Newswire4 days ago

Polystyrene Foam Market worth $32.2 billion by 2026 – Exclusive Report by MarketsandMarkets™

Cyber Security4 days ago

How to Become a Cryptographer: A Complete Career Guide

Blockchain3 days ago

Launch of Crypto Trading Team by Goldman Sachs

Aviation3 days ago

What Happened To Lufthansa’s Boeing 707 Aircraft?

AR/VR4 days ago

Apple is giving a laser company that builds some of its AR tech $410 million

Aviation2 days ago

JetBlue Hits Back At Eastern Airlines On Ecuador Flights

Cyber Security3 days ago

Cybersecurity Degrees in Massachusetts — Your Guide to Choosing a School

Cyber Security4 days ago

How To Unblock Gambling Websites?

Payments5 days ago

G20 TechSprint Initiative invites firm to tackle green finance

Ripple’s XRP Price
Blockchain4 days ago

Charted: Ripple (XRP) Turns Green, Here’s Why The Bulls Could Aim $2

Blockchain3 days ago

Miten tekoälyä käytetään videopeleissä ja mitä tulevaisuudessa on odotettavissa

Blockchain3 days ago

DOGE Co-founder Reveals the Reasons Behind its Price Rise

Blockchain4 days ago

South America’s Largest E-Commerce Company Adds $7.8M Worth of Bitcoin to its Balance Sheet

Blockchain4 days ago

Bitcoin Has No Existential Threats, Says Michael Saylor

Aviation3 days ago

United Airlines Uses The Crisis To Diversify Latin American Network

Cyber Security3 days ago

U.S. and the U.K. Published Attack on IT Management Company SolarWinds

Fintech3 days ago

The Spanish fintech Pecunpay strengthens its position as a leader in the issuance of corporate programs

Blockchain2 days ago

“Privacy is a ‘Privilege’ that Users Ought to Cherish”: Elena Nadoliksi

Blockchain4 days ago

Cardano (ADA) Staking Live on the US-Based Kraken Exchange

Private Equity4 days ago

This Dream Job Will Pay You to Gamble in Las Vegas on the Company’s Dime

Trending