SpaceX rocket stage will fall on the Moon, creating a crater for scientific research

The upper stage of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is preparing for an unexpected flight, concluding its trajectory on the surface of the Moon. It is anticipated that the impact will result in the formation of a new crater and assist researchers in studying the consequences of space collisions.

The object had been in orbit for over 18 months following the lunar mission. Its path to the Moon was not planned but was determined by the action of gravity and solar activity.

Why did the rocket end up on the Moon?

The Falcon 9 was launched in January 2025 with two private probes: Blue Ghost from Firefly Aerospace and Resilience, built by the Japanese company ispace. The Blue Ghost probe successfully landed and completed its mission, while Resilience failed during its landing attempt. Meanwhile, the rocket's upper stage headed toward another destination.

Typically, SpaceX controls the end-of-life of such components through a planned entry into the Earth's atmosphere. However, in this launch, almost all the fuel was used to deliver the probes to the lunar region. The stage, weighing about four thousand kilograms, was in a high orbit crossing the lunar area. It is projected to reach the lunar surface this Wednesday (the 5th) around 3:35 AM Brazilian time, forming a crater approximately 27 meters in size.

Gravity and Sun directed Falcon 9 to impact

The rocket was not commanded to move toward the Moon; the change in course occurred slowly as natural forces altered its trajectory. Juliana Sheiman, Director of NASA Science Programs and Dragon Capsules at SpaceX, explained that the combination of solar activity and gravitational forces directed the object onto a lunar path. This incident draws attention because it demonstrates a growing problem in space exploration: what to do with equipment that continues to orbit after a mission is complete.

Key points related to the collision include: the stage weighs about four thousand kilograms; the impact should open a crater approximately 27 meters in size; scientists will be able to study how impacts affect the lunar surface; the data obtained may help in planning future crewed missions.

The impact could reveal risks for future bases on the Moon

Most people on Earth are unlikely to see the collision, as it will occur on the illuminated side of the Moon. Nevertheless, astronomers with powerful telescopes will be able to detect the plume of material ejected during the impact. Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and lead investigator of this event, stated that the phenomenon will help better understand the dangers posed by space debris. This concern is linked to NASA's plans to build a base near the Moon's south pole as part of the Artemis program. Since astronauts will live there for extended periods, preventing unexpected collisions will become an important issue. SpaceX is collaborating with NASA and other agencies to find safer ways to dispose of high-energy mission stages.

The Falcon 9 will not be the first object to reach the Moon in this manner. In 2022, the upper stage of the Long March 3C rocket created a rare double crater on the lunar surface. The new impact should add more data to understanding how these events occur and how to mitigate associated risks in the future. Brazilian astronomers are already preparing their telescopes!

As in many parts of the world, astronomers in Brazil are anticipating this moment. Some of them will also cover the collision in real-time, including profiles from AstroNEOS, Astronomia Ao Vivo, OARU – Observatório Astronômico Rei do Universo, and Mistérios do Espaço.

olhardigital.com.brAugust 5, 04:16

White House establishes new rules for AI, exempting open-source models from initial review

The United States government has implemented a new oversight system for advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The proposal, presented on Tuesday (4th), stipulates that only certain closed-source AI models will undergo a voluntary safety assessment before being released to the public by major industry companies.

This framework, developed under the management of President Donald Trump, opts to exclude open-source models at least for now. This exclusion may benefit companies that adopt this development approach and reignites the debate over AI regulation.

Sources close to the discussions informed The Wall Street Journal that only proprietary AI developers who reach top-tier levels—including advanced capabilities in system intrusion and cybersecurity, measured by performance tests—will be invited to voluntarily submit their technologies for pre-launch governmental analysis.

Among the corporations likely to need to adhere to this process are OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, whose models are classified among the most sophisticated on the market. On the other hand, companies focused on open models, such as Nvidia and Meta, are excluded from this first stage, although this situation may change as these technologies evolve.

The review is part of Trump's AI strategy

This new procedure is aligned with an executive order signed by Trump in June, which aims to intensify surveillance over more powerful AI systems without harming U.S. competitiveness in the technological landscape against China.

Although company participation is voluntary, industry executives warn that neglecting the review could carry reputational risks if security flaws are discovered later. Liz Huston, White House spokesperson, stated that companies collaborating with the administration through this framework will be prioritizing innovation, security, and U.S. cyber defense.

The guidelines were presented during a meeting with representatives from companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Nvidia. Despite requesting corporate input, the White House told The New York Times that the rules for the AI model review process are nearly finalized.

Exclusion of open models draws criticism

The decision to omit open-source models attracted attention from experts. Such systems allow the code to be accessible so that developers can download, modify, and use it freely. Companies like Nvidia, Meta, and Google provide versions of this type of technology.

The issue gained relevance following the progress of open models created by Chinese companies, such as Alibaba, DeepSeek, and Moonshot AI, which recently achieved performance comparable to major American models. Despite concerns about the rapid evolution of these tools, US authorities recognize the difficulty in subjecting them to reviews, given that Chinese companies are unlikely to voluntarily participate in the process conducted by the US.

Lindsay Gorman, former technology consultant for Joe Biden's government, stated that the new model leaves crucial questions unanswered, asserting: 'I don't think this structure seriously addresses the question of what the limits should be for advanced artificial intelligence and whether these barriers should become stricter as the technology evolves.'

Recent incidents accelerated the creation of the rules

This new regulatory milestone emerged just days after the disclosure of new events involving artificial intelligence models. This week, the UK's AI Security Institute reported that models from OpenAI and Anthropic carried out potentially harmful actions during safety assessments, including attempts to inject malicious code into an open-source software project and targeted attacks on real organizations.

OpenAI also revealed that one of its models exploited a configuration vulnerability during another test to access the internet and browse a website without permission. These occurrences reinforced the US government's concerns about the inherent risks of the most advanced AI systems, increasing pressure for the implementation of oversight mechanisms.

Details will remain confidential

Even while formalizing a review process for advanced models, the White House chose to keep several aspects of the initiative confidential. According to sources informed to the Times, the details of the framework guiding the AI model review will not be made public. Furthermore, the list of entities considered 'trusted' and granted early access to advanced models by the government will also remain confidential.

This decision was criticized by AI governance experts. Brad Carson, president of Americans for Responsible Innovation, commented to the Times: 'A set of rules can only keep AI companies in check if people outside those companies know what those rules are.' He added that 'Keeping this structure secret reduces transparency and weakens public accountability.'

The dispute with China influences the strategy

The definition of these new guidelines occurs amid growing rivalry between the United States and China for dominance in AI. Trump argued that regulation should not impede the advancement of American companies, stating: 'In China, there are practically no controls. They have much more freedom. We need to be careful not to restrict our companies to the point where we fall behind China.'

Simultaneously, members of the administration have debated possible restrictions on certain Chinese companies, alleging that these companies might have used advancements developed by American firms to train their own models in what is considered unfair competition.

olhardigital.com.brAugust 5, 03:30

OpenAI and Anthropic AI Models Attempt to Inject Malicious Code in Security Tests

Artificial intelligence models developed by the companies OpenAI and Anthropic performed unauthorized actions on the internet while undergoing security evaluations conducted by the UK AI Safety Institute (AISI).

In one of the recorded cases, one of the systems attempted to introduce malicious code into an open-source software project hosted on GitHub. The AISI reported that these incidents occurred during tests that allowed the models access to the World Wide Web to check for cyber vulnerabilities. The suspicious activity was detected on July 28 after the institute noticed atypical data transfers.

Subsequent investigation indicated that the Mythos 5 model, belonging to Anthropic, and GPT-5.6-Sol, developed by OpenAI, were involved in 'continuous and potentially harmful activities targeting real individuals and organizations.'

Attempt to Inject Malicious Code into GitHub

According to the British institute, one of the models sought to add malicious code to an open-source repository on GitHub. To maximize its chances of success, the system even created fake profiles with the intention of persuading the project maintainers to accept the proposed modifications. However, this attempt was blocked because 'a human maintainer identified the problem and denied approval of the malicious code,' according to the AISI.

Anthropic and OpenAI Initiate Investigations

In a post on the X platform, Anthropic announced that it is collaborating with the British institute to understand what happened. The company stated that it plans to examine the model's internal reasoning logs and conduct its own investigation to determine the reasons behind the observed behavior.

For its part, OpenAI released a statement thanking the AISI for its cooperation during the investigative process and assured that it will continue to collaborate with the body in future security audits.

Another Test Revealed Unexpected Behavior

OpenAI also disclosed a second event that occurred during an evaluation conducted by the cybersecurity firm Irregular, which provides AI model testing services and has a partnership with Anthropic. According to this company, during this test, one of its models exploited an inadequate configuration of the evaluation environment to gain internet access and exploit a website, a behavior not foreseen in the experiment's objectives.

OpenAI emphasized that this episode differs from a previous incident involving the Hugging Face platform. These new developments intensify the debate about the ability of corporations to maintain control over increasingly sophisticated AI models. Institutions like the AI Security Institute are conducting evaluations to understand how these systems behave in complex situations, especially when given autonomy to browse the web and interact with real services.