Anduril to acquire Ireland's Klas to bolster AI warfare systems
AI-powered defense startup Anduril Industries on Monday said it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Ireland-based tactical communications systems maker Klas.
Anduril, along with software maker Palantir and Elon Musk's SpaceX, has emerged as frontrunners to win a crucial part of President Donald Trump's "Golden Dome" missile defense shield, Reuters reported last month citing people familiar with the matter.
The deal, the terms of which were not disclosed and is subject to regulatory approvals, aims to strengthen the defense technology firm's autonomous warfare systems with Klas's hardware.
Klas manufactures compact computers and internet equipment that enable soldiers to communicate and control drones, even in environments lacking electricity and cellphone signals.
Anduril, which is backed by venture capital heavyweights, will integrate Klas' hardware into its AI-powered software platform Lattice, the "central brain" of its AI-powered autonomous systems.
Lattice synthesizes data from sensors of various unmanned systems to provide a real-time battlefield overview, facilitating collaboration between machines and humans.
Klas, which has 150 employees, is expected to continue operating from its facilities in Ireland and the U.S., as part of the deal, with plans to expand manufacturing capacity to meet increased demand.
This marks the ninth deal by Anduril since it was established in 2017.
Reuters previously reported that the company was in talks for a new funding round that could increase its valuation to $28 billion, according to sources.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
11 minutes ago
- Straits Times
‘Quantum leap': Nato chief Mark Rutte calls for 400% increase in air and missile defence
Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte speaking during a press conference at the alliance's headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, on June 4. PHOTO: REUTERS – Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte will use a speech in London on June 9 to say the military alliance needs a 400 per cent increase in air and missile defence, one of the priorities for a summit of members in The Hague later in June. Mr Rutte is pushing for members to boost defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and commit a further 1.5 per cent to broader security-related spending to meet US President Donald Trump's demand for a 5 per cent target. In May , he said he assumed that the target would be agreed at the summit on June 24 and 25. Mr Rutte will argue in a speech at London's Chatham House think-tank that for Nato to maintain credible deterrence and defence, it needs 'a 400 per cent increase in air and missile defence'. 'We see in Ukraine how Russia delivers terror from above, so we will strengthen the shield that protects our skies,' he will say, according to extracts of his speech provided by his office. 'The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defence. The fact is, we must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defence plans in full. The fact is, danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends.' With little let up in fighting in Russia's war against Ukraine despite ceasefire calls, European countries are under pressure to raise defence spending after Mr Trump signalled a shift in policy, pushing for the region to better protect itself. Several countries say they are doing so, with Britain pledging an increase from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027 and 3 per cent of GDP at a later date. Germany has said it will need roughly 50,000 to 60,000 additional active soldiers under new Nato targets. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
12 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Train service between Moscow and North Korea's Pyongyang to resume this month, says Russia
Train service between Moscow and North Korea's Pyongyang to resume this month, says Russia Russia and North Korea plan to restart a direct passenger train service between Moscow and the North Korean capital Pyongyang this month for the first time since 2020, Russia's state-owned rail monopoly said on Monday. Russian Railways said it had agreed with North Korea's railways ministry to resume a twice-monthly service between the two capitals on June 17, a journey it said took eight days and which, at over 10,000 km (6,213 miles), was the longest direct rail journey in the world. Another service between Pyongyang and Khabarovsk, a Russian city close to China's northeastern border, will restart two days later. The services will be operated by Korean State Railway, the state operator, and in the case of the Moscow-Pyongyang route will see a North Korean passenger railcar hitched to the regular Moscow-Vladivostok service and then re-attached to another train. Passenger rail traffic between Russia and North Korea was suspended in February 2020 at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Moscow and Pyongyang have since ratcheted up cooperation, including in the military sphere since President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty last year. North Korea confirmed in late April that it had sent more than 10,000 troops and weapons to Russia to assist in its war in Ukraine, aid which proved crucial for Moscow in recapturing Russia's western Kursk region from Ukraine. The two countries already operate a passenger rail service between Vladivostok in Russia's Far East and Rason, a North Korean port city. The nations are also linked by freight rail networks, although Russia does not disclose the size of the cargo traffic. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Independent Singapore
20 minutes ago
- Independent Singapore
Elon Musk, Twitter, and the billionaire balancing act – Is it really a crisis?
UNITED STATES: Still recall the sensational, buzz-worthy moment when Elon Musk bought Twitter for US$44 billion? It was Oct 27, 2022, a day that redesigned social media and changed the world's perception of how billionaires play. In a post on Facebook, one user tried to analyse the financial position of Musk amid speculations that he is in 'hot water' money-wise. Initially, the poster refuted what many perceived after Musk bought Twitter. According to him, the world presumed at the time that Musk had an extra US$44 billion in the bank. However, in truth, just like most excessively wealthy individuals, his net value was (and is) mainly locked in assets, mainly Tesla stock. To fund the transaction, Musk did what many magnates do — he tapped into his current assets. Tesla shares were a chunk of the equation, either directly or indirectly. However, to fix the narrative, Tesla stock wasn't dropping when he did the acquisition. According to a commenter to the post, 'on the day he clinched the Twitter contract, Tesla stock floated at around US$220 to US$230, fast-forward to June 2025, and Tesla stock sits at almost US$301, even higher than it was back then.' Likewise, some commenters have pointed out it 'has even soared to US$376' on recent peaks. So, no, the description that he's under pressure from banks, like how some overhyped headlines speculate, is not accurate. His warranty has more value now than when he made the transaction, and, contrary to the view that he received a huge credit, some contend that much of the cash came from equity holders, such as Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, allegedly obtained with a single phone call. But there's more to the story than just numbers It's not just about money. Musk has constantly stimulated 'storms,' and his recent acts have fanned the flames of obsessive reactions. Detractors cite his collaboration with contentious figures and his positioning with prickly views, particularly about matters associated with South Africa and international politics. One commenter said blatantly, 'I hope he doesn't bounce back.' Others went further: 'Bounce back where? May he lose everything.' These views mirror huge disapproval with what some see as the treacherous combination of affluence, clout, and ideology. See also S'pore ambassador named in Brazilian court in graft probe On the business side, the surge of Chinese EV builders is real—they're quickly seizing global market share with viable pricing and remarkable quality. Tesla, while still a driving force, no longer remains uncontested. The rich don't always have it easy – just different One common fallacy is that tycoons like Musk have billions of dollars in cash at their command. Not so. They may be oozing with assets, but not necessarily oozing with cash. Many people often equate him with Jeff Bezos, who had sufficient cash flow to provide his former wife with more than US$100 billion in a divorce agreement; however, much of that 'cash' came from selling stocks, not withdrawing money from a bank account. Then there's the provocative matter of taxation and debt acquisition. Musk exploited a technicality: he can borrow against his assets without activating capital gains duties. One annoyed commenter put it this way: 'If it's not a gain, why can it be used as collateral? Let us play the same game, too.' It's a legitimate question, and one that's prompting demands for tax restructuring at the highest levels. See also Why did Musk do a livestream of migrant crisis from the border? So, what's really going on? Notwithstanding the drama and headlines, Elon Musk is not at present in a perilous financial abyss. His resources are up and about, not down. His Twitter purchase is obviously still being discussed in terms of value and significance, but whether you like or fume over him, his story is a window where the world can peep into how affluence, power, and clout operate in the 21st century. Being rich doesn't make one invulnerable to pressure; it just changes how pressure appears or what it looks like. Whether it's navigating regulatory inspections, steering investor expectations, or shaping public opinion, the risks at the top are high. Also, as one commenter mockingly said: 'Why don't they just print money—they are the presidents after all.' For sure, that is said in jest, but it realistically captures the cynicism many people feel about how power operates in contemporary times.
