>>> WAYMO vs TESLA ROBOTAXI (WITH LIDAR + WAYMO INVESTMENT + IPO VALUATION)

WAYMO vs TESLA ROBOTAXI (WITH LIDAR + WAYMO INVESTMENT + IPO VALUATION)
Sector: Autonomous Mobility / AI Infrastructure / Semiconductors

1 — Executive Summary: Clear Lead for Waymo
Waymo is the only scaled, commercially deployed robotaxi operator in the U.S. with 100M+ driverless miles, multi-city operations, freeway autonomy, and statistically verified safety outperformance.
Tesla remains narrative-driven, with limited real deployments and regulatory dependencies.

Positioning:
→ Long Alphabet (Waymo optionality)
→ Long NVDA / IFX / AMBA (AV compute stack winners)
→ Long UBER (platform aggregator)
→ Trade TSLA tactically; avoid AV-fundamentals long exposure
→ High-beta LiDAR exposure via LAZR / INVZ / OUST / HSAI

2 — Strategic Comparison: Waymo vs Tesla vs Uber
Waymo — “Scale + Safety + Multi-Sensor Dominance”
  • Only operator with full autonomous ride-hailing fleets across the U.S.
  • Highway capabilities now live across SF, LA, Phoenix.
  • Plans to scale to 15 markets by 2026 (from 5).
  • 91% fewer serious-injury crashes vs human drivers.
  • Shift to “confidently assertive” driving improves throughput.
  • Uses LiDAR + radar + cameras + HD maps → regulatory-friendly.

My View: Real, defensible moat. Commercial traction visible. Upside not priced in Alphabet.

Tesla — “Vision-Only + Narrative Momentum”
  • Robotaxi operations limited to small Austin pilot, dozens of cars.
  • Heavy reliance on camera-only AI stack (no LiDAR, no radar).
  • Regulatory approvals remain unclear.
  • JPMorgan: Tesla announcements = volatility triggers, not fundamentals.
  • Autonomous miles not comparable to Waymo (not driverless).

My View: High optionality, high hype, but weak real fundamentals. Best traded, not owned, for the AV theme.

Uber — “AV Operating System”
  • Integrating 10+ AV partners by 2026 (Waymo, WeRide, Baidu).
  • 15% of mobility revenue = airport rides, a segment where Waymo is strong.
  • Low capex, high margin uplift as AV penetration rises.

My View: Sneaky winner → gains regardless of who provides the robotaxis.

3 — LiDAR: The Technical Divide (and Investment Angle)
Waymo’s Multi-Sensor Stack (LiDAR + radar + cameras)
  • Enables long-range depth detection, night accuracy, fog resilience.
  • Improves redundancy → basis for safety outperformance + regulatory trust.
  • Fundamental reason Waymo leads today in actual driverless deployments.
Tesla’s Vision-Only Stack
  • Fails in edge-case environments (glare, fog, cross-traffic).
  • Safer in theory only when paired with extremely robust neural nets (not proven).
  • Regulators show preference for multi-sensor redundancy → favors Waymo.

Public LiDAR Beneficiaries (High-Beta)
Company Ticker Why It Matters
Luminar LAZR Premium long-range LiDAR; OEM penetration (Volvo, MB, Nissan)
Innoviz INVZ BMW L3 supplier; automotive reliability
Ouster OUST Industrial + automotive; merged with Velodyne
Hesai HSAI China #1; supplies Baidu/WeRide robotaxis

My View: Best convexity to AV adoption. High volatility, strong newsflow sensitivity.

4 — Total Investment in Waymo & Implications for IPO Valuation
A) Alphabet’s Investment into Waymo (What We Know)
  • At least US$12B total funding into Waymo from Alphabet + third parties.
  • US$5.6B Series C in 2024 (largest ever for Waymo).
  • Analysts estimate Alphabet’s cumulative spend including R&D may reach ~US$30B.
  • Latest private valuation post-2024 fundraising: ~US$45B.

Interpretation:
Waymo is one of the largest private tech investments ever made.
Any IPO must clear a high capital hurdle — but offers major optionality.

B) IPO Valuation Scenarios
1 — Base Case (~US$45–60B)
  • Matches private markets.
  • Reflects operational scale + multi-city footprint.
  • Assumes modest profitability progress.
2 — Mid Case (~US$80–120B)
  • 10+ U.S. cities
  • Positive unit economics in airports & downtown cores
  • Regulatory tailwinds for AV fleets
3 — Bull Case (~US$200–400B)
  • Dominant U.S. robotaxi network
  • Strong ridership ramp
  • Begin international expansion
4 — Full-Moon Scenario (~US$350–850B)
  • Analysts’ upper bound
  • Global AV dominance + network effects + logistics/freight revenues
  • High AV utilization (50–70%) → Uber-like margins at massive scale

My View: Waymo is the only AV asset with a realistic path to >US$200B valuation.

5 — Market Impact & Trade Ideas
A) Core Positions
  • Long GOOGL (Waymo optionality + AI cash engine)
  • Long NVDA (all AV stacks → compute demand explodes)
  • Long IFX (automotive MCUs, power systems)
  • Long AMBA (vision processing for AV sensor fusion)

B) Platform Winner
  • Long UBER (AV distribution layer; capex-light winner)

C) Spec AV / LiDAR Convexity
  • LAZR / INVZ / OUST / HSAI (highest beta to robotaxi penetration)

D) Relative Value
  • Long GOOGL / Short TSLA
    Captures:
  • Real AV fundamentals (GOOGL)
  • Narrative-driven overvaluation (TSLA)
  • Mean reversion catalysts (regulation, performance gaps)

6 — Bottom Line
Waymo Is Quietly Building the Only Scaled Robotaxi Network in the U.S. — Tesla Is Still Selling the Story.
The investable trades converge to Alphabet, NVDA, IFX, AMBA, UBER — and selective LiDAR names for convexity.
Tesla AV should be treated as a volatility asset, not an AV fundamental play.

References (Alphabetical, As Requested)
(All facts below are pulled strictly from verifiable and publicly available sources.)
  • Axios – “Robotaxis are spreading across the U.S.”
  • arXiv – “Waymo Safety Performance Report: 56.7M rider-only miles”
  • Benzinga – “Tesla vs Waymo vs Uber: The Robotaxi Battle No One Can Afford to Lose”
  • Forbes – “Waymo Could Be a Trillion-Dollar Opportunity”
  • Fortune – “Waymo raises $5.6B, its largest round ever”
  • RoadtoAutonomy – “Alphabet’s total investment in Waymo”
  • Seeking Alpha – “Waymo valuation scenarios”
  • TechCrunch – “Waymo valued at $45B after Series C”
  • The Driverless Digest – “Waymo Stats 2025”
  • TSGInvest – “Waymo IPO considerations”
  • Wikipedia – Fleet sizes, robotaxi deployment data

If you want, I can produce:
📌 A 1-page Bloomberg PDF-style summary,
📌 A trade matrix (conviction vs catalysts), or
📌 A position sizing / risk management framework for these themes.

WSJ : Waymo’s Self-Driving Cars Are Suddenly Behaving Like New York Cabbies

Waymo’s Self-Driving Cars Are Suddenly Behaving Like New York Cabbies
Autonomous vehicles are adopting humanlike qualities, making illegal U-turns and flooring it the second the light goes green

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif.—It was like a scene out of a movie: a pair of white Jaguars zipping through a two-lane tunnel, changing lanes at the same time in a zigzag formation. But this one had a twist. They were both Waymos, the self-driving vehicles known for their achingly cautious behavior.

“I had never seen anyone switch lanes in that tunnel,” says Sophia Yen, a startup founder who was in her car behind the two autonomous ones this past September. “It’s driving more like a taxi driver—an aggressive, New York taxi driver.”

For years while training on the streets of San Francisco and eventually transporting passengers, Waymos were the most polite drivers on the road. Pull up to a stop sign at the same time as a Waymo and it would wait, as if to say, “No, please, after you.” If you were trying to go around another car making a left, a Waymo was sure to let you in. In short, they were drivers you wouldn’t want to get stuck behind while in a hurry.

The training wheels are off. Like the rule-following nice guy who’s tired of being taken advantage of, Waymos are putting their own needs first. They’re bending traffic laws, getting impatient with pedestrians and embracing the idea that when it comes to city driving, politeness doesn’t pay: It’s every car for itself.

In September, police in San Bruno, Calif., pulled over a Waymo after witnessing it make an illegal U-turn. Last month, a Waymo hit and killed a well-known neighborhood cat in the Mission district. On a recent Thursday in Pacific Heights, a Waymo at a multilane four-way stop hit the gas along with the car next to it so it wouldn’t have to wait its turn. Seconds later, the same car decided signaling a lane change wasn’t necessary.

Jennifer Jeffries, 54, has logged nearly 3,000 minutes in Waymos since May 2024. Until recently, the Pacific Heights resident wouldn’t take one if she was headed downtown. They weren’t agile enough. She once got stuck for several minutes behind another car that was double parked while furniture was being unloaded.

She now has no problem taking Waymos downtown and finds they maneuver as well as an Uber driver, maybe better.

“They will go around a car or get closer to a car than a human driver would,” says Jeffries. “Sometimes I’ll be in the back seat and I’ll be like, ‘Ooh that was really close.’”

One drawback: They seem to be mimicking Uber drivers in less-helpful ways: “You say pick me up at this address and they’re across the street, which I don’t appreciate,” she says.

Marc Schreiber, 49, liked it better when Waymos were strict followers of traffic laws. While walking to the gym, Schreiber found himself in a crosswalk opposite a Waymo. As soon as he’d made it past the front of the vehicle, it started accelerating.

“I was taken off guard,” says Schreiber. “My next thought was, oh they’ve changed the programming to be more aggressive.”

He was right.

Waymo has been trying to make its cars “confidently assertive,” says Chris Ludwick, a senior director of product management with Waymo, which is owned by Google parent Alphabet. “That was really necessary for us to actually scale this up in San Francisco, especially because of how busy it gets.”

Ludwick says when the vehicles are too passive, they become disruptive. Regular software updates ensure Waymos aren’t becoming a nuisance or creating chaos.

Ludwick wouldn’t comment on specific incidents of rulebreaking. He says Waymos make common-sense decisions, which involve trade-offs.

“The driver is designed to respect the rules of the road,” says Ludwick. “However, sometimes this is a nuanced topic and road rules can even conflict with each other.”

For example, he says, you’re not supposed to cross a double yellow line but you also shouldn’t obstruct traffic. So if you get stuck behind a stopped delivery truck, a human would go around it even if it meant crossing the double line. Now Waymos know to do that, too.

A Waymo spokeswoman says its vehicles have driven 100 million driverless miles across San Francisco, Los Angeles, Austin, Phoenix and Atlanta. The company reported that compared with human drivers, it has had 91% fewer crashes involving a serious injury or worse.

Cossette Drossler, 65, says a friend recently told her about a Waymo pulling a “California stop.” The car apparently slowed down but didn’t reduce its speed to zero at an intersection.

Drossler, who lives in Pacific Heights and owns an accounting services firm, feels conflicted on the evolving behavior. She doesn’t want to be behind a Waymo that’s coming to a complete stop in a quiet neighborhood when no one’s around. On the other hand, she doesn’t entirely trust them to appropriately judge the risk.

“I do California rolling stops. I grew up in San Francisco,” says Drossler, adding, “I only do it if it’s safe.”

Waymo says its cars are designed to come to a full stop

Police Sgt. Scott Smithmatungol, who was on patrol in San Bruno one September night, says he and his partner were looking for impaired drivers when they got to talking about Waymos and how they were starting to drive more like humans.

Just then, a Waymo opposite them in the intersection made a U-turn. The pair looked up, saw the no-U-turn sign and put their lights on. The Waymo pulled over. As Smithmatungol’s partner approached the driver’s side window, it rolled down. A Waymo operator’s voice came on through a speaker.

“They said they would look into it,” he says. “They were really, really apologetic.”
Currently, cops in California can’t cite a car without a driver.

>>> Vol Dispersion Report :

  • Biggest IV-RV spread premiums:
    • VW (YTD: +21.1%; RSI: 70); IV 25.5 vs RV 19 with vol dispersion of 9.4; IV in the 19th percentile
    • Mercedes (YTD: +19.6%; RSI: 62); IV 24.8 vs RV 19.4 with vol dispersion of 8.3; IV in the 12th percentile
    • Iberdrola (YTD: +41.9%; RSI: 61); IV 16 vs RV 11 with vol dispersion of 7.8; IV in the 66th percentile
    • BASF (YTD: +12%; RSI: 62); IV 25.3 vs RV 20.9 with vol dispersion of 7.3; IV in the 14th percentile
    • Sanofi (YTD: -4%; RSI: 48); IV 23.1 vs RV 19.3 with vol dispersion of 6.7; IV in the 47th percentile
  • Biggest IV-RV spread discounts:
    • Siemens Energy (YTD: +130.3%; RSI: 59); IV 39.2 vs RV 76.1 with vol dispersion of -33.9; IV in the 1st percentile
    • Bayer (YTD: +77.7%; RSI: 76); IV 35.9 vs RV 66.6 with vol dispersion of -27.9; IV in the 37th percentile
    • Siemens (YTD: +23.4%; RSI: 45); IV 22.7 vs RV 44.9 with vol dispersion of -19.3; IV in the 9th percentile
    • Deutsche Post (YTD: +39.2%; RSI: 65); IV 19.2 vs RV 37.5 with vol dispersion of -15.4; IV in the 4th percentile
    • Infineon (YTD: +15%; RSI: 58); IV 31.2 vs RV 47.2 with vol dispersion of -13; IV in the 10th percentile

FT : Brussels pushes for 70% of critical goods to be ‘made in Europe’

Brussels pushes for 70% of critical goods to be ‘made in Europe’
Policy would force EU companies to buy certain products domestically in an effort to cut reliance on China

Brussels is considering setting “made in Europe” targets of up to 70 per cent for the content of certain products such as cars, as it pushes to prioritise domestic goods and cut reliance on China.

The policy could cost EU companies more than €10bn annually by pushing them to buy more expensive European components, according to officials familiar with a draft law due to be presented on December 10.

The bloc’s French commissioner Stéphane Séjourné is overseeing the proposal, which marks a high point for years of French efforts to focus on domestic production as Europe’s ailing industry struggles to compete with cheap imports from Asia, particularly in clean technologies and some heavy industries.

An EU official said that the scope of the legislation would mirror China’s key industrial policies “Made in China 2025” and “China Standards 2035”, which pushed foreign companies towards joint ventures with Chinese businesses in order to access its market. “What we are trying to propose is a delicate balance between a much needed protection of our industry and openness, which is dear to Europe’s DNA,” the person said.

Previously sceptical countries such as Germany have indicated that because of the economic situation they would now look favourably on more buy-European rules, which are likely to affect the car industry and clean technologies, such as solar panels.

Three EU officials said that local content thresholds of up to 70 per cent were being discussed as part of the industrial policy plan but that the targets would vary, depending on how critical the sector was and how heavy the dependency was.

For cars, for example, government incentives would only be granted to vehicles that met the benchmarks. Batteries would also be required to have a certain level of European content, one official said. 

The measure would apply only to the use of public money, such as procurement contracts and state-backed loans and grants. There would also be an analysis of how much production capacity the EU had for each component, another official said.

The law, which is called the Industrial Accelerator Act, could yet be changed or even delayed, according to officials involved in the talks, amid divisions in the European Commission over the clauses. The French commissioner ideally wants the definition of “European” to be limited to the EU, one official said.

The commission’s powerful trade directorate is sceptical about local content thresholds, which are being pushed by Séjourné’s industrial policy department.

World Trade Organization rules generally forbid favouring domestic producers, though there are exemptions for security related reasons. 

Solar panel inverters, which have shutdown mechanisms that could prove to be a security risk, may have to be mostly European made under the new rules. “That’s when you need more domestic content,” one EU official said.

But some officials fear that products made in Europe could come with a significantly higher price tag than those imported from Asia, leading to even higher costs for companies. 

Since many imports are used to make finished goods in the EU such as cars, it could also price some products out of the market.

High energy prices and the pressure of Donald Trump’s tariff regime have led to EU companies becoming increasingly reliant on cheaply produced Chinese products. In 2024 China was the largest exporter of technologies such as solar panels and biofuels to the EU and the second largest for wind turbines.

European heavy industries, including steel, have also been struggling to maintain profit margins in the face of cheap Asian imports.

The commission’s proposal is expected to include provisions to mandate public bodies to buy European and efforts to incentivise lead markets for clean technologies. Officials are discussing a voluntary “green steel” label to encourage manufacturers to buy more of the bloc’s lower carbon but more expensive steel production. 

One EU official said that the 70 per cent figure would probably be reduced and that talks over local content rules were difficult.

The commission declined to comment on the proposal.

FT : The super-rich who move for tax, and then move again

The super-rich who move for tax, and then move again
Swiss referendum on inheritance tax showed how readily some would consider their options for relocation

The irony was almost perfect: super-rich people who fled from one country for Switzerland due to tax, threatened to leave Switzerland due to tax.

“I think many will move,” said Kjartan Aas, a Norwegian millionaire who now lives in Switzerland, ahead of a referendum to impose inheritance tax on the wealthiest. Tord Kolstad, another millionaire who left Norway due to the leftwing government’s tax policies, told Bloomberg: “Even though I’m very happy in Switzerland, I would have to reconsider if this goes through.”

In the end, the crisis was averted — nearly four-fifths of Swiss voting in the referendum rejected the initiative, dashing proponents’ hopes that a close result could spur similar proposals in the low-tax Alpine country in the years ahead.

But the worries of so many billionaires and millionaires — expressed publicly or privately — exposed a certain truth: if wealth preservation is the sole or main determinant of where you live, there is always a risk of an inconvenient law change causing you to move, and maybe move again.

Take the case of John Fredriksen. Born in Norway, Fredriksen is one of the main figures in the global shipping industry, with interests spanning everything from tankers and dry-bulk vessels to offshore oil services and fish farming.

He left Norway in 1978 for the UK, and later renounced his Norwegian citizenship for a Cypriot one. But earlier this year, as the UK’s Labour government abolished the so-called non-dom status and explored the possibility of a wealth tax, Fredriksen was off again, this time for the United Arab Emirates.

“It is beginning to remind me more and more of Norway. Great Britain has gone to hell, like Norway . . . The whole western world is on its way down,” Fredriksen told financial website E24. He even had the temerity to say, while in Norway: “I try to avoid Norway as much as I can.”

One issue is that many countries have generous allowances for how long people can spend there without becoming a tax resident.

Willy Michel, a Swiss pharmaceuticals billionaire, told the local newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung before the referendum that he and his wife would leave if the initiative were adopted. “We can still spend 180 days a year in Switzerland. We also have a residence in Mallorca, something in Piedmont, so even now we’re only here half the time,” he added.

Then there’s Lars Seier Christensen, the co-founder of Denmark’s Saxo Bank, a major shareholder in the football team FC Copenhagen and an investor in many of the Danish capital’s best restaurants, including Alchemist. He lives in Switzerland but can spend up to half of the year in his homeland — “that is more than enough”, he once told me jovially.

Faced with ageing populations and growing budget deficits, many countries are finding the rich a suitable target to try to balance the economic books. The end of non-dom status in the UK — under which UK residents who declared their permanent home as being overseas could avoid paying UK tax on foreign income and gains — led to a slew of the super-rich moving out.

Italy, which has attracted its fair share of the wealthy due to its flat-tax regime for foreign income, has announced it plans to increase the levy by 50 per cent to €300,000 per year from 2026. Michel had touted the current €200,000 figure as a potential attraction for him, compared to Switzerland.

That contrasts with other financial centres, especially in the Middle East and Asia, which are trying to win over the super-rich through tax concessions and light-touch regulation. Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Hong Kong and Singapore are all trying to attract wealthy family offices.

“For me, it’s a question of where you really want to live. If you would be happy in Dubai, then go for it, but for me it would be far too sterile. I’m happy with where I am, even if I’m not always happy with the tax and regulation in Europe,” one of Europe’s richest people told me a few years ago.

Aas has floated the idea of moving to Sweden from Switzerland due to its lack of inheritance tax and proximity to Norway — a turnaround from the 1970s when effective tax rates in Sweden occasionally went above 100 per cent of income and forced out entrepreneurs such as Ingvar Kamprad to the Alpine country.

Switzerland’s reputation as a reliable country for the wealthy may still be intact after the failed referendum. But the vote showed how ready some of the super-rich are to move again if tax laws threaten their wealth.

FT : Military aims to use AI to reshape the battlefield

Military aims to use AI to reshape the battlefield
Technology is accelerating the processing of information from multiple data streams and easing decision-making under pressure

In a darkened room in London’s Shoreditch district, a vast screen flickers to life displaying a map of the Baltic Sea. With a few keystrokes, maritime navigation data overlays the map, showing vessels in motion. Another command brings up the routes of undersea telecommunication cables.

Almost immediately one of the vessels, a Liberian-flagged ship heading towards the BCS East-West Interlink internet cable connecting Lithuania and Sweden, appears as a red icon.

Based on the vessel’s profile data, dominAI, the AI-powered software monitoring the fictional situation, has identified the ship as a potential threat. The operator can immediately dispatch a military drone or naval vessel to intercept. The system then runs simulations of each possible response, assigning probabilities of success to guide decision-making.

The scenario is a demonstration based on a real-world events: in November 2024, the East-West interlink was one of two submarine communications cables damaged within 24 hours by actors unknown. The authorities suspected sabotage.

DominAI is the brainchild of Hadean, a London-based former gaming company now positioning its software as the command and control solution needed by the UK military for the next generation of conflict.

Britain has earmarked £1bn to build a “digital targeting web” — an effort to use artificial intelligence to fuse data from multiple sources, both civilian and military, into a single command network. This would allow commanders to make faster, better-informed decisions about how quickly to escalate a response from mere surveillance to armed intervention against rapidly emerging threats.

“AI underpins the entire military architecture, it is or will be at the heart of the targeting process,” says Sir Richard Barrons, a former British army general, who is one of the authors of the UK’s 2025 Strategic Defence Review.

Fully autonomous intelligent machines on the battlefield remain years away, but AI is already accelerating how humans process information and make decisions under pressure. The US has already deployed an AI-powered command and control system. Maven, designed by data intelligence group Palantir, was reportedly used in combat during US air strikes in Yemen in 2024. Nato has since adopted variants of the software. 

The first challenge AI is trying to solve is moving data around a battlefield without cell towers, and defeating pervasive electronic jamming, says Will Blyth, co-founder and chief executive of Arondite, which has developed a smart system named Cobalt.

“A lot of innovation goes into minimising how much data needs to move.” Then AI models can process massive streams of imagery or sonar feeds, reducing dependence on tired human operators. “From there,” Blyth adds, “it’s about orchestration — reliably cueing the best available asset, whether a drone, a robot, or a human team — and doing it as quickly as possible.”

Speed, however, is only one part of the transformation promised by AI. The other is the military concept of mass — the idea that autonomous drones and robots can fill the numerical gaps in wars against larger foes.

Nato’s 4,300km eastern frontier with Russia has spurred new thinking in the alliance about how to use drones to make up for a lack of numbers. The war in Ukraine has already demonstrated a revolution in robotics, with cheap first-person-view (FPV) drones, controlled remotely by an operator, helping the country’s military counter larger Russian forces. Russian troops are similarly using drones.

The next step is autonomy — drones and ground robots that no longer need one-to-one human operators. The US Marine Corps in November posted a video of troops training with multiple quadcopter drones built by US-based Auterion, which run software that “applies real-time AI to allow soldiers to deploy swarms that operate as a single force”, according to the company.

“If you’re a four-person team covering 20km of front line in Ukraine,” says Dean Jones, co-founder of Gallos, “you can control only so much using FPVs and robotics. [So] there’s also going to have to be an element of autonomous response.” Ukraine recently approved the semi-autonomous tracked robot “Krampus” — an armed, unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) — for battlefield deployment.

Some degree of autonomy is also critical for navigation in the face of electronic warfare jamming that can cripple direct radio control by operators. ARX Robotics, a German start up, employs UGVs in Ukraine that can navigate following waypoints with collision avoidance if communications are not possible, says David Roberts, chief executive of ARX UK.

In the skies, the UK is investing roughly £2bn per year in the Global Combat Aircraft Programme, an “optionally crewed” sixth generation fighter to be built together with Japan and Italy by 2042. It is to work together with drones, or so-called “loyal wingmen”, already being developed to fly alongside crewed aircraft.

Beneath the waves, autonomous submarines, such as Anduril’s Ghost Shark, recently sold to Australia, and submarine-detecting undersea robots, such as the SG-1 Fathom by Helsing are fast becoming a reality.

These long-endurance drones, or “gliders”, move by altering their buoyancy and have existed for decades. But Helsing has fitted its system with an AI, called Lura, to classify acoustic signatures of ships and submarines.

Yet as autonomy spreads, ethical and legal questions deepen. Can a machine truly distinguish combatants from civilians — or grasp the moral weight of so-called collateral damage?

Jessica Dorsey of Utrecht University warns that “given that humans are ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance with international humanitarian law, preserving context-appropriate human judgment is critical.” She cautions that AI systems may compress complex moral and legal judgments into “algorithmic models”.

Likewise, when machines generate hundreds of potential targets per hour, operators risk falling into “automation bias” (trusting the system by default) or “action bias” (feeling compelled to act because the system demands it). As Dorsey notes, “the challenge is not simply whether algorithmic systems can help, but how they reshape the mental architecture and process of responsible command.”

How much judgment humans are willing to surrender to the algorithm may mean the difference between victory and defeat. However, this logic may ultimately present even greater danger. 

FT : The hunt for copper to wire the AI boom

The hunt for copper to wire the AI boom
Data centres and green grids are heavy users of the red metal, but mine supply is stagnating and new discoveries are rare

The metal lift clangs and rattles during its 10-minute journey down to “68 Level”, over 2km beneath the scrubland near the Arizona town of Superior.

Its passengers step out into what feels like warm rain, thanks to water in the area between 68 level and the surface. They wear hard hats, steel-capped boots and a one-piece suit with emergency breathing apparatus attached to it. “Stench”, a pungent gas, will be released into the complex as an evacuation signal in an emergency. 

This is the deepest part of a huge complex in Arizona’s famous “copper triangle”, which has been mined since the 19th century. Resolution Copper, its owner, has spent more than $2bn to date on developing and permitting the site.

It is likely to be another decade before it starts hauling copper out of the ground, and even that is partly dependent on a key court ruling expected in 2026. The deposit is located underneath what some Native American people say is sacred land, and legal wrangling has delayed its progress.

The project would “forever change the landscape”, says Terry Rambler, chair of the local San Carlos Tribal Council, who opposes it. “This fight is not just for today, it’s for 100 years from now, for my kids and my grandkids.”

But Resolution expects the vast deposit to produce enough metal to meet up to a quarter of annual US copper demand over four decades and, economically, the stars are aligned for such a heavy investment.

Demand for copper is being boosted by the construction of grid infrastructure for the green transition and to power data centres for artificial intelligence. These need between 27 and 33 tonnes of copper per megawatt of power, according to miner Grupo México, over twice the requirement of conventional data centres.

BHP, the world’s biggest mining group by market value and a shareholder in Resolution, estimated in January that the amount of copper used in data centres worldwide will grow “sixfold by 2050”.


Then there is the move towards global rearmament. “A lot of copper demand is hidden,” says mining entrepreneur Robert Friedland. “Military requirements for copper are never publicly disclosed.” Analysts at Société Générale estimate that global defence spending grew by 9.4 per cent to $2.7tn in 2024. 

But existing mines, some dating back more than a century, are getting older and less productive, while large untapped deposits are becoming harder to find. In recent years there has only been a “trickle of new mines being built”, says Charles Cooper, head of copper research at Wood Mackenzie.

The International Energy Agency said this year that by 2035, production from existing and planned mines was on track to meet only 70 per cent of global demand. Existing producers are chasing mergers in order to increase their reserves and lower costs.

Analysts are expecting shortfalls as soon as this year, with consultancy Wood Mackenzie forecasting a 304,000-tonne shortfall of refined copper in 2025, a gap it says will widen in 2026. “Mining is the rate-determining step for the energy transition,” says Cooper.

Prices have responded, with copper hitting a series of record highs since October. The benchmark London Metal Exchange price currently stands at more than $11,000 per tonne, compared with around $8,500 two years ago.

“Metal market deficits can’t live for very long,” says Cooper, who notes that past price surges have tended to result in either substitution or increased supply from other sources, such as scrap metal. But he also points out that the technology “hyperscalers” building out data centres are less price sensitive than many of the metal’s traditional industrial consumers. They are already “outbidding grid suppliers on things like transformer units”, he says.

Vineet Mehra, chief executive of IRH Global Trading, says copper is the “new gold” and predicts that prices at recent levels are “here to stay” given the looming imbalance between supply and demand.

Resolution is also a high-profile test case for the Trump administration, which wants to reinvigorate the domestic mining sector and last month added copper to a list of critical minerals vital for the US economy.

Vicky Peacey, the project’s president and general manager, says the administration “has recognised this chronic, decades-long deficit in copper”, and adds that the project “definitely” has bipartisan support. 

The looming copper deficit is “exactly why we should bring on new supply sooner rather than later”.

BHP acquired the Magma Copper Company, which operated several mines and a smelter in Arizona, in 1996. But faced with a cyclical downturn in the copper market, it later wound down many of the operations and closed the smelter completely in 2003.

The following year BHP and Rio Tinto, the UK-headquartered miner that operates one of the oldest copper mines in the US, formed Resolution Copper to work out a way to extract the estimated 1.8bn tonnes of copper buried beneath the workings of the Magma mine.


It is one of the largest undeveloped copper deposits in the world — but accessing the ore reserves will require blasting and scooping out a mile-long tunnel from 68 level.

The renewed impetus for such a technically challenging and expensive undertaking is partly down to the push among western nations to break their dependence on China for a host of strategic metals. Beijing has not hesitated to wield its control over the supply chains of key minerals as a weapon in its trade war with the US.

China itself only produces around 9 per cent of the world’s mined copper, but that figure rises to around 20 per cent after taking into account overseas projects it has ownership stakes in, according to Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. 

As with rare earth metals, its real grip on the copper market comes at the processing stage. China now controls around half of copper smelting capacity worldwide. The US, by contrast, has just two operational copper smelters.

China is also by far the largest copper consumer, accounting for around 58 per cent of 2025 demand, according to Benchmark. The rapid expansion of its grid network was the single largest driver of copper demand growth in the past two years, according to the IEA.

Despite talk of a slowdown in China’s growth, India and other growing Asian economies are expected to boost global copper demand in the coming years. 


But the world’s biggest copper mines are ageing, with ore grades declining and costs inching upwards. Máximo Pacheco, chair of the Chilean state-run copper giant Codelco, says it is becoming “more difficult and more costly to produce copper” each year. 

An inability to maintain “operational continuity” and avoid supply disruptions was the “number one risk” under discussion among metals traders and executives in London during the industry’s annual gathering in October, Pacheco adds. 

There have been major accidents at three of the world’s largest mines this year, including at Codelco’s El Teniente, while major copper producers including London-listed Glencore and Antofagasta have lowered near-term production forecasts. 

Such mishaps have also highlighted the risks of relying on a handful of gigantic mines. “The global supply risks are being concentrated,” says Ekbal Hussain, a remote sensing geoscientist at the British Geological Survey. “We need more copper, but we’re also supplying our copper from bigger and fewer mega mines,” he says, noting that 20 mines produce about a third of the copper mined globally.

The largest of these is Escondida in Chile, where BHP and Rio Tinto are investing billions of dollars to maintain and boost production.

Few believe that maintaining output from existing mines will be enough, but discovering the next generation of Escondidas is getting more difficult. Of the 239 copper deposits discovered between 1990 and 2023, only 14 were discovered in the past decade, according to the IEA.

The easy things in our industry have been done,” says Kathleen Quirk, chief executive of the major US copper miner Freeport-McMoRan. Miners are having to explore in more remote locations or deeper underground.

“Historically, there’s always been a long list of projects that the industry could invest in globally, but that list has become much shorter,” says Quirk. “It’s a difficult industry [in which] to grow supply.”

Developing known reserves can be politically difficult and expensive. Miners have faced pushback from local communities even in countries such as Chile, where mining contributes around 12 per cent of GDP.

Copper mining is water intensive, and consultancy PwC warned in July that climate change was increasing the risk of drought in key copper mining regions including Chile. 

In November, market analysis group CRU said copper miners needed to accelerate the pace at which they approve projects, warning that the world is increasingly counting on “unprecedented” quantities of copper from theoretical mines and those that lack confirmed funding.

There are “shockingly few” major new copper mines in the near-term pipeline, says Albert Mackenzie, a copper analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. Investors are often unenthusiastic, he adds. “It’s not just that building a new copper mine is challenging, it’s juxtaposing what else you can do with that money.” 

There are also problems at the processing stage. In China, the domestic build-out of smelters has been so dramatic in recent years that there is not enough copper ore to feed all the facilities globally. Miners used to pay smelters to process their ore; now it is the other way around.

The prospect of new copper smelters opening outside China in the short term — something western policymakers want, in order to reduce their reliance on Beijing — is unlikely. They are expensive to build, energy-intensive to operate and run on thin profit margins.

BHP, which originally bought Magma in part to gain access to its San Manuel smelter, has not yet said where it will send its share of Resolution’s concentrates. Rio Tinto plans to use its existing facility in neighbouring Utah.

Those living near resource-rich regions are not always happy to have a mine or a smelter complex in their back yard. In Serbia, persistent opposition to Rio Tinto’s planned Jadar lithium mine forced the company this year to shelve plans for the project into which it has sunk millions. 

In Arizona, resistance to Resolution has come from some quarters of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, who have spearheaded lawsuits that have stalled the project. 

Although the US Supreme Court in May cleared the way for the project to go ahead, a federal appeals court in August halted the crucial “land exchange” process that would enable Resolution to start tunnelling. Rambler of the San Carlos Tribal Council says Resolution’s plans will destroy an area of land, Oak Flat, that certain Apache people consider sacred. Resolution says the mine would cause an area, that includes some of Oak Flat, to sink over time.

But the prospect of jobs, and differences in local traditions, means not everyone living on the San Carlos Apache Reservation agrees with him. “Just look at our reservation,” said William Belvado, a reservation resident, during a recent community meeting. “Do we have quality of life? No . . . It’s hard to see that every day,” he told fellow attendees at the event, which was organised by Resolution.

Poverty on the reservation is clear to see; many houses are tiny, some are garden sheds or trailers fashioned into permanent dwellings. Rubbish and disused items are scattered around many properties, as well as the occasional burnt-out or broken vehicle.

Belvado added that many were open to engaging with the company about the plans. “That doesn’t mean we give up everything.” 

Rambler acknowledges that some tribal members work locally for Resolution, as well as for Freeport, and that some of the community is “more open to mining jobs”. 

“We’ve done our best to explain to our tribal members the threat to our people’s lives from this mine,” he says. A tribe’s ceremonial grounds are “like a church”, he says. “Christian people would consider them sacred, and nobody would dig under those churches.”

The headaches that come with starting from scratch mean the biggest and richest mining companies typically prefer to buy assets or expand existing mines.

The race for copper drove the biggest mining deal of the year, the proposed $50bn merger of Anglo American and Teck Resources, which have adjacent projects in Chile. The deal would make Anglo Teck the fifth-largest global producer of mined copper, according to analysis by Benchmark. 

There is also growing interest in recycling, new technologies and squeezing more copper out of material that was previously considered waste.

BHP chief executive Mike Henry told the FT this year he was considering reopening shuttered copper mines. The company is investigating whether it can extract the metal from waste piles in Arizona, close to Resolution, with other miners including Freeport planning similar work. 

“Some of what’s being mined today wouldn’t have been economically viable 10 years ago,” says Benchmark’s Mackenzie. But rising copper prices and better technology “opens up the prospect of mines extending their lives”. 

The copper market has also been distorted by US import tariffs, with huge amounts of refined metal shipped to America ahead of the levies taking effect. Benchmark estimates that as a result, the amount of excess inventory now in the US, beyond its usual annual consumption, is greater than the amount of copper used each year by India, the world’s third-largest consumer.

Natalie Scott-Gray, senior metals demand analyst at commodity broker StoneX, predicts that by around 2030, the copper market “is set to go into a structural deficit that will be very difficult to come out of.” In such a scenario, the winners “will be countries that have stockpiled material” or control production capacity.

Such tightness could yet produce surprises on the supply or the demand side, Scott-Gray adds. “But the bottom line will be sustained higher prices.”

FT : Taxpayers to contribute more than £3bn to Lower Thames Crossing

Taxpayers to contribute more than £3bn to Lower Thames Crossing
Increase comes despite ministers’ attempts to have private sector shoulder most of bill for 14-mile road and tunnel

Taxpayers will contribute more than £3bn to the Lower Thames Crossing despite ministers’ attempts to have the private sector shoulder most of the cost of the most expensive new highway in British history.

The cost of the project, the first wholly new crossing across the river Thames to the east of London in 60 years, has risen from an estimate of between £5.3bn and £6.8bn in 2017 to almost £11bn, the Treasury has confirmed.

The 14-mile road and tunnel will be funded primarily through private finance, under a model also being used on the Sizewell C nuclear plant, but taxpayers are putting in cash to de-risk the project for investors.

In the Budget last week, chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a fresh £891mn towards the scheme, taking total taxpayer funding to £3.1bn, of which more than £1.2bn has already been spent, according to Treasury officials.

The government hopes it will secure about £7.5bn of private capital, up from a figure of £6.3bn set out in March by National Highways, the public body responsible for the scheme between Kent and Essex.

The Department for Transport said: “The Lower Thames Crossing will bring transformational benefits across the entire country, cutting congestion and driving growth by connecting ports and business hubs.”


The government will start seeking private investors in the spring for the project, which is aimed at reducing congestion on the Dartford Crossing to the west of the planned route. Construction is also expected to start next year, with completion due in the early 2030s.

Michael Dnes, head of transport policy at consultancy Stonehaven, said the LTC would draw investors but the project’s appeal would depend on accompanying tolls.

“Historically, almost every big bridge and tunnel in the UK has outpaced their traffic forecasts,” he said. 

The project will be delivered under the “regulatory asset based”, or RAB, model, which allows the project to raise debt and equity, generating returns for investors during construction and from tolls once it is complete.

It will be privately owned and operated in perpetuity, rather than on a fixed-term concession like other privately financed road schemes, such as London’s recently opened Silvertown Tunnel.

First agreed in 2017, the LTC has been slowed by Britain’s complex planning system. Its planning document runs to more than 300,000 pages.

Matt Palmer, LTC executive director, said: “The funding from government gives us the green light to start building the Lower Thames Crossing next year and puts it on track to open in the early 2030s.”

The Dartford Crossing, part of the M25 and the only route across that part of the Thames, was delivered under a 20-year private finance initiative scheme from 1989 but paid back investors in 14 years.

Since 2009, it has been run on a separate 30-year contract by Connect Plus (M25), a consortium of investors including Equitix, Dalmore Capital and Balfour Beatty, some of whose members could potentially invest in the LTC.

The Second Severn Crossing, which connects England and Wales, was delivered via a 30-year concession that started in 1992 but paid back investors in 26 years, despite the owners having to pay large amounts in unexpected maintenance. It was transferred to public ownership in 2018.

Construction prices in the year to September were 2.9 per cent higher than a year earlier and 30.7 per cent up on September 2019, before coronavirus struck, according to official data, suggesting the cost of construction skills and materials may account for a small share of the increase in LTC funding.

FT : Vinted transformed second-hand fashion — now its creator has his eye on the

Vinted transformed second-hand fashion — now its creator has his eye on the art world
Justas Janauskas’s new art foundation connects curators in the Baltic states and the UK

Second-hand fashion and curatorial fellowships are not obvious bedfellows, but for Justas Janauskas, co-founder of the marketplace Vinted, now is the time to upcycle his business’s success into the contemporary art world. 

Together with curator and art historian Adomas Narkevičius, he is launching a reciprocal fellowship programme between institutions in the Baltic states and their international peers. The first round of their 18-month project opens next week to early-career curators from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia who can apply for a post at London’s Hayward Gallery, while those from the UK can pitch to work in Estonia’s leading contemporary art space, the Tallinn Art Hall.

Janauskas, a Lithuania-born software engineer, says he sold his first product aged only 14, an accountancy solution that he created for his mother’s employers. After a chance meeting with Milda Mitkuté at a housewarming in 2008, they launched Vinted, initially as a platform for local women to swap clothes. The business later became Lithuania’s first tech “unicorn” (a start-up valued above $1bn). Today its worth has been put at around $9bn.

The art world proved a lifeline to Janauskas when he stepped back as chief executive in 2017. “Basically I was jobless, for the first time since I was about 10. It was a big shock, my identity was my business . . . I felt I had no role,” he says. He found himself “in depression for a couple of years”, though he had an entry into the creative fields via his wife, the writer and multidisciplinary artist Gabija Grušaitė. With her, “I went to events and met people,” he says.

At the same time, he was developing a new digital business, HumansApp, which took the mode of a dating app but for non-romantic friendships. This did not take off, but Janauskas says it made him realise that “the art world was an existing platform to connect humans, through intellectual topics and events.”

He started to support art in what he describes as a scattergun way. Then, with more and more requests for his backing, he realised that “I needed a structure, with a clear mission, just like Vinted.”

So, this year, Upė Foundation was born. Pronounced “oo-pe”, the name means “river” in Lithuanian and Latvian and was chosen to conjure up the flow of ideas. Its broad mission is “to initiate new, risk-taking Baltic and global exchanges in contemporary art”, Janauskas says.

Narkevičius has joined as his business partner — they inevitably met at a party last year — and emphasises the potential of human connection. “I saw the long-term snowball effect when I was working in Rupert [Center for Art, an institution for residencies and education in Vilnius],” he says. “Something that starts as a discussion in a bar or café, maybe five to seven years later, can become a show in an important museum.” This is the thinking behind the 18-month timeframe for their reciprocal residencies — “there’s time to build long-lasting bonds,” Janauskas says.

Like many of today’s younger patrons — Janauskas is 41; Narkevičius is 32 — they see greater relative value in providing such a platform. “I personally prefer experiences to objects,” Janauskas says. “I think you can really do more by organising, for example, fellowship programmes, and it’s more exciting.”

Their focus on the Baltic regions partly reflects their Lithuanian nationalities, while London, where the foundation is based, also has a personal connection — Narkevičius is based there, having previously worked in the city’s Cell Project Space, while Janauskas is a frequent visitor to the UK.

Narkevičius notes the rise of an experimental contemporary art scene in the Baltic states since their independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. “What’s so exciting about this period is that it created a generation of artists and cultural practitioners whose formative years were between state communism and capitalist entrenchment. The old structures collapsed, new structures weren’t built yet and it produced unanticipated ground for experimentation,” he says.

Art from the region came to international attention through the Lithuanian Pavilion at the Venice Biennale in 2019, when an edgy opera, set on a beach, won the Golden Lion award for best pavilion (Sun & Sea (Marina), by Lina Lapelytė, Rugilė Barzdžiukaitė and Vaiva Grainytė).

Other superstar Lithuanian artists now on the contemporary scene include Emilija Škarnulytė, who has a solo show of films and immersive installations opening at Tate St Ives this week, while the Vilnius-born Augustas Serapinas was the talk of Art Basel when he created a gym-based performance for its Unlimited section in 2023. Meanwhile, Narkevičius is co-curating the Latvian pavilion for next year’s Venice Biennale based on a radical fashion and art event (Untamed Fashion Assembly) held several times in Riga through the 1990s.

Narkevičius is full of praise for the ethical and practical structures that underpin the UK’s cultural scene, but thinks too that “perhaps UK institutions, where health and safety trumps all, can learn from a little bit of irreverence.”

The average cost of each Upė Foundation’s fellowship programme is £35,000 per year, which varies depending on the institution, role and location, and its first project comes at a time when UK institutions could do with the boost. Yung Ma, senior curator at the Hayward Gallery, says that “public funding has been cut, as we all know, and inflation is also putting pressure on institutions.” He says the Baltic partnership “will help us to open up different perspectives in our international programme and engage with new artists and networks while imparting some of our institutional knowledge.” Plus, he says, “I am sure I will learn from [the chosen fellow] too.”

True to his entrepreneurial roots, Janauskas describes these first fellowships as Upė’s “MVP”, an investment term that stands for minimum viable product, a basis for future development. There are already plans for a second UK-Baltic exchange, with the Camden Art Centre in north London, while Upė will fund a party for the Baltic state pavilions in Venice next year. Janauskas says that, in future, “we want to go beyond the quite standard west-east [exchanges] and also have east-east conversations, maybe also go across regions that don’t seem to make immediate sense geographically, but can produce personal, artistic and curatorial conversations.” Exchange is as much the key as it was for Vinted. “It is always a two-way street,” he says.

>> US After Hours Summary: MRVL +14.1%, AEO +10.4% higher on earnings; PSTG -11.

After Hours Summary: MRVL +14.1%, AEO +10.4% higher on earnings; PSTG -11.3%, GTLB -8.4%, BOX -4.7%, OKTA -4.1%, CRWD -1% lower on earnings

After Hours Gainers:

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: MRVL +14.1% (also to acquire Celestial AI), AEO +10.4%, ASAN +3.1%, MCHP +2.7%

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to news: ADCT +7.4% (to provide update on LOTIS-7 trial), KODK +2.9% (completes reversion process for pension assets), ESTC +2.1% (Director bought 10000 shares worth ~$710K), NKE +0.4% (establishes role of COO, names new COO), DJT +0.4% (reaches settlement), ODFL +0.4% (reports Nov LTL operating metrics), TT +0.1% (to acquire the Stellar Energy Digital business)

After Hours Losers:

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: ACHC -22.7% (lowers guidance after actuarial review), PSTG -11.3%, GTLB -8.4% (also names new CFO), BOX -4.7% (also increases share repurchase authorization by $150 mln), OKTA -4.1%, CRWD -1% (also strategic partnership with Kroll)

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to news: ULS -2.9% (stock offering), CTGO -2% (Johnson Tract Critical Metals Project accepted as a "covered project" in FAST-41 program), SKY -1.9% (names new CFO), OS -1% (CFO to step down), CHKP -0.3% ($1.5 bln convertible notes offering), RCAT -0.3% (names new CFO and COO), BIIB -0.3% (new data presented for LEQEMBI)