What just happened? PC gamers recently encountered an unexpected issue when their computers triggered Windows Defender alerts due to a kernel-level driver called WinRing0. This software, used by various hardware monitoring applications, was flagged as a potential threat, causing some systems to behave erratically. For instance, fan control applications were affected, leading to fans running at high speeds after the tool was quarantined. However, this was not an actual attack but rather a false alarm caused by Windows Defender detecting WinRing0 in apps like Fan Control, Razer Synapse, SteelSeries Engine, and others.WinRing0 is a kernel-level driver that allows these applications to access hardware components such as fans and LED lights. It has been widely used because it provides developers with a way to interact with hardware that is typically restricted within the Windows operating system."There are only two freely available Windows drivers I know of that are capable of accessing the SMBus registers we need to be able to control LEDs: InpOut32 and WinRing0," Adam Honse, developer of OpenRGB, told The Verge.OpenRGB switched to WinRing0 after InpOut32 conflicted with Riot's Vanguard anti-cheat software.Image: GithubMicrosoft's decision to flag WinRing0 has left many developers in a difficult position. The company requires drivers to be digitally signed, a process that is costly and often unfeasible for many open-source projects. "It is not feasible to demand not-for-profit hobby [free open-source software] projects to pay the same costs for driver signing as for-profit companies," Honse said. As a result, some developers are considering alternative solutions, such as creating proprietary drivers, though this is a resource-intensive task. // Related StoriesSignalRGB, for example, has developed its own proprietary SMBus driver to replace WinRing0. However, this approach is not viable for smaller projects due to the significant engineering resources required. "I won't sugarcoat it the development process was challenging and required significant engineering resources," said SignalRGB's Timothy Sun.Microsoft has acknowledged the issue and is re-evaluating its detection logic to avoid false positives, according to Scott Woodgate, the company's General Manager of Threat Protection.While Microsoft continues its investigation, some developers suggest that fixing the vulnerability in WinRing0 itself could be a simpler solution. However, getting a patched version signed by Microsoft remains a challenge due to the associated costs.There is some hope for a resolution. iBuyPower, a prebuilt gaming PC manufacturer, plans to obtain an updated and signed version of WinRing0 to share with developers. This could provide a cost-effective solution for many affected applications. "If this solution works, we'll share our updated and signed version of the library so the community of developers can distribute new versions of their apps with validated Microsoft drivers," said Hyte product director Robert Teller.In the meantime, users of affected software may need to update their applications or add exceptions in Windows Defender to maintain functionality. Razer and SteelSeries have already moved away from using WinRing0 in their latest software versions, though this may result in some lost functionality.

Love crossword puzzles but dont have all day to sit and solve a full-sized puzzle in your daily newspaper? Thats what The Mini is for!A bite-sized version of the New York Times well-known crossword puzzle, The Mini is a quick and easy way to test your crossword skills daily in a lot less time (the average puzzle takes most players just over a minute to solve). While The Mini is smaller and simpler than a normal crossword, it isnt always easy. Tripping up on one clue can be the difference between a personal best completion time and an embarrassing solve attempt.Recommended VideosJust like ourWordle hints and Connections hints, were here to help with The Mini today if youre stuck and need a little help.Please enable Javascript to view this contentBelow are the answers for the NYT Mini crossword today.New York TimesAcrossDude! Come on! BRUHSan Antonio attraction to remember ALAMORecurring Stallone role RAMBOStream CREEKHudson after whom the Hudson River is named HENRYDownLoudly play, as a speaker BLAREDish that might come with a spoon and chopsticks RAMENRaw ___, color in the Crayola Hall of Fame UMBERSomething played to avoid class HOOKYEyebrow shape ARCHEditors Recommendations

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsHow to play StrandsHint for todays Strands puzzleTodays Strand answersStrands is a brand new daily puzzle from the New York Times. A trickier take on the classic word search, youll need a keen eye to solve this puzzle.Like Wordle, Connections, and the Mini Crossword, Strands can be a bit difficult to solve some days. Theres no shame in needing a little help from time to time. If youre stuck and need to know the answers to todays Strands puzzle, check out the solved puzzle below.Recommended VideosHow to play StrandsYou start every Strands puzzle with the goal of finding the theme words hidden in the grid of letters. Manipulate letters by dragging or tapping to craft words; double-tap the final letter to confirm. If you find the correct word, the letters will be highlighted blue and will no longer be selectable.RelatedIf you find a word that isnt a theme word, it still helps! For every three non-theme words you find that are at least four letters long, youll get a hint the letters of one of the theme words will be revealed and youll just have to unscramble it.Every single letter on the grid is used to spell out the theme words and there is no overlap. Every letter will be used once, and only once.Each puzzle contains one spangram, a special theme word (or words) that describe the puzzles theme and touches two opposite sides of the board. When you find the spangram, it will be highlighted yellow.The goal should be to complete the puzzle quickly without using too many hints.Todays theme is Grrr.Heres a hint that might help you: annoyed.Todays Strand answersNYTTodays spanagramWell start by giving you the spangram, which might help you figure out the theme and solve the rest of the puzzle on your own:CROSSWORDTodays Strands answersCRANKYSURLYPEEVEDVEXEDIRKEDGRUMPYTOUCHYEditors Recommendations

Not dead yet Even the worst mass extinction had its oases Plants thrived in present-day China throughout the End-Permian extinction. Elizabeth Rayne Mar 18, 2025 7:45 am | 3 Credit: Corey Ford Credit: Corey Ford Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreAbout 252 million years ago, volcanic eruptions triggered the End-Permian Mass Extinction, also known as the Great Dying. About 96 percent of marine species were wiped outbut were things just as grim on land?Scientists have debated whether this event caused nearly as much terrestrial destruction. Now, researchers from the Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology (NIGPAS) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences suggest that terrestrial ecosystems did not suffer nearly as much as the oceans.Led by paleontologist Feng Liu, the NIGPAS team found evidence for refugiums, oases where life thrived despite the devastation. Not only did these refugiums give life a chance to survive the mass extinction event, which lasted 200,000 years, but they are now thought to have been crucial to rebuilding ecosystems in much less time than was previously assumed.This environment might have served as a refugium for the iconic Mesozoic flora that emerged in the late Permian, potentially contributing to the stability of the food chain and attracting numerous terrestrial animals that survived, the NIGPAS team said in a study recently published in Science Advances.Life, uh, finds a wayAt the Turpan-Hami Basin, an archaeological site in Xinjiang, Liu and his team unearthed fossilized tree trunks and fern stems, their roots still firmly planted in the stone that was once soil hundreds of millions of years ago, that demonstrated these plants had actually grown there and were not just scattered remains.Preserved pollen grains and other spores told them about the diversity of plant life in the refugium, something like an oasis where there is food and water available, and environmental conditions are moderate enough to keep organisms surviving through natural disasters and other adverse conditions.The researchers tracked which species disappeared as they went from older to younger rock layers, which spanned from before the mass extinction to directly after. Using zircon dating of the rock layers in which spores were embedded, they determined that most of the plant species found had started growing in the area 60160,000 years before the mass extinction and persisted through up to 210,000 years after the catastrophe.Some earlier plants might not have made it through the extinction since rock layers from the onset of the End-Permian Mass Extinction showed a decrease in pollen and spores, as well as fewer plant species. Other species were scarce because they had not been as well-preserved as others; the team did not automatically assume the scarcity of a plant that did not fossilize meant it had gone extinct.While there were plant species that ended up being victims of the Great Dying, analysis of species through spore and pollen told the team that only about 21 percent of them succumbed to extinction.Life will not be containedThe fossils also revealed the presence of plant species known to grow near lakes, which meant an environment that most likely provided drinking water for land-dwelling animals. Fossilized spores farther from what were once the banks of an ancient lake or the edge of a lakeplain suggest it was surrounded by a forest of gymnospermous trees, such as conifers or ginkgo, and ferns.Because the researchers found so many spores from plant species known to grow in humid climates, they think the regional climate before the extinction was either humid or sub-humid, with plenty of rain. It was a lush environment that would see dry periods during the mass extinction event, but not be completely devastated.Despite some species of plants vanishing, those that were found to have survived during and after the extinction mostly belonged to conifers and pteridosperms (now-extinct plants similar to ferns), which showed a remarkable ability to adapt to drought, as Liu and his team said in the same study.The drought turned out to be only temporary. Younger rock layers were found to contain a greater abundance of pollen and spores from species that grew during the extinction event. The types of plants represented suggest a climate that had returned to subhumid and was more habitable.Fossils of animals found at the site support its role as a haven for life. From the herbivorous Lystrosaurus (not a dinosaur), which looked something like a walrus with legs and a shovel face, to the carnivorous chroniosuchians that resembled giant lizards and fed on insects and small amphibians, the refugium in what is now Xinjiang kept life going.Both flora and fauna would soon spread across terrestrial environments once again. Life on land flourished only 75,000 years after the End-Permian Mass Extinction, so life really does find a way.Science Advances, 2025. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.ads5614Elizabeth Rayne Elizabeth Rayne is a creature who writes. Her work has appeared on SYFY WIRE, Space.com, Live Science, Grunge, Den of Geek, and Forbidden Futures. She lurks right outside New York City with her parrot, Lestat. When not writing, she is either shapeshifting, drawing, or cosplaying as a character nobody has ever heard of. Follow her on Threads and Instagram @quothravenrayne. 3 Comments

context cues People in this career are better at seeing through opticalillusions Becoming an expert in medical image analysis may make you better at spotting illusions. Martin Doherty and Radoslaw Wincza, The Conversation Mar 18, 2025 7:30 am | 3 Credit: Artur Debat via Getty Credit: Artur Debat via Getty Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreOptical illusions are great fun, and they fool virtually everyone. But have you ever wondered if you could train yourself to unsee these illusions? Our latest research suggests that you can.Optical illusions tell a lot about how people see things. For example, look at the picture below. The Ebbinghaus illusion. Credit: Hermann Ebbinghaus The two orange circles are identical, but the one on the right looks bigger. Why? We use context to figure out what we are seeing. Something surrounded by smaller things is often quite big. Our visual system takes context into account, so it judges the orange circle on the right as bigger than the one on the left.This illusion was discovered by German psychologist Herman Ebbinghaus in the 19th century. This and similar geometrical illusions have been studied by psychologists ever since.How much you are affected by illusions like these depends on who you are. For example, women are more affected by the illusion than menthey see things more in context.Younger children do not see illusions at all. To a 5-year-old, the two orange circles look the same. It takes time to learn how to use context cues.Neurodevelopmental conditions similarly affect illusion perception. People with autism or schizophrenia are less likely to see illusions. This is because these people tend to pay greater attention to the central circle, and less to the surrounding ones.The culture you grew up in also affects how much you attend to context. Research has found that East Asian perception is more holistic, taking everything into account. Western perception is more analytic, focusing on central objects.These differences would predict greater illusion sensitivity in East Asia. And true enough, Japanese people seem to experience much stronger effects than British people in this kind of illusion.This may also depend on environment. Japanese people typically live in urban environments. In crowded urban scenes, being able to keep track of objects relative to other objects is important. This requires more attention to context. Members of the nomadic Himba tribe in the almost uninhabited Namibian desert do not seem to be fooled by the illusion at all.Gender, developmental, neurodevelopmental and cultural differences are all well established when it comes to optical illusions. However, what scientists did not know until now is whether people can learn to see illusions less intensely.A hint came from our previous work comparing mathematical and social scientists judgements of illusions (we work in universities, so we sometimes study our colleagues). Social scientists, such as psychologists, see illusions more strongly.Researchers like us have to take many factors into account. Perhaps this makes us more sensitive to context even in the way we see things. But also, it could be that your visual style affects what you choose to study. One of us (Martin) went to university to study physics, but left with a psychology degree. As it happens, his illusion perception is much stronger than normal.Training your illusion skillsDespite all these individual differences, researchers have always thought that you have no choice over whether you see the illusion. Our recent research challenges this idea.Radiologists need to be able to rapidly spot important information in medical scans. Doing this often means they have to ignore surrounding detail.Radiologists train extensively, so does this make them better at seeing through illusions? We found it does. We studied 44 radiologists, compared to over 100 psychology and medical students.Below is one of our images. The orange circle on the left is 6% smaller than the one on the right. Most people in the study saw it as larger. The orange circle on the left is actually smaller Credit: Radoslaw Wincza Here is another image. Most non-radiologists still saw the left one as bigger. Yet, it is 10% smaller. Most radiologists got this one right. Does the left orange circle look bigger or smaller to you? Credit: Radoslaw Wincza It was not until the difference was nearly 18%, as shown in the image below, that most non-radiologists saw through the illusion. Most people get this one right. Credit: Radoslaw Wincza, The Conversation Radiologists are not entirely immune to the illusion, but are much less susceptible. We also looked at radiologists just beginning training. Their illusion perception was no better than normal. It seems radiologists superior perception is a result of their extensive training.According to current theories of expertise, this shouldnt happen. Becoming an expert in chess, for example, makes you better at chess but not anything else. But our findings suggest that becoming an expert in medical image analysis also makes you better at seeing through some optical illusions.There is plenty left to find out. Perhaps the most intriguing possibility is that training on optical illusions can improve radiologists skills at their own work.So, how can you learn to see through illusions? Simple. Just five years of medical school, then seven more of radiology training and this skill can be yours too.Martin Doherty, Associate Professor in Psychology, University of East Anglia and Radoslaw Wincza, Lecturer in Behavioural Sciences, University of Central Lancashire. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.Martin Doherty and Radoslaw Wincza, The Conversation The Conversation is an independent source of news and views, sourced from the academic and research community. Our team of editors work with these experts to share their knowledge with the wider public. Our aim is to allow for better understanding of current affairs and complex issues, and hopefully improve the quality of public discourse on them. 3 Comments

Toxic workplaces have been a prevailing theme in the zeitgeist for decades -- the phrase was first used in a 1989 nursing leadership guide. Discussion of workplace dissatisfaction reached a fever pitch with the advent of social media. Disgruntled workers took to the web, sharing their experiences of abusive managers, unrealistic expectations, grueling hours -- and a plethora of more minor complaints as well.Thus, it might be argued, the meaning of the term has been diluted. Surely, there are differences between being regularly berated by a supervisor for insignificant infractions or refusals to acknowledge an employees personal commitments and the occasional request for overtime or expectations of inconvenient social conventions.Even if the intended meaning has drifted, the discourse on workplace toxicity has identified a range of prevailing tendencies that have severe consequences both for employees and the organizations they work for. Cybersecurity is no exception -- and toxicity appears to be particularly pernicious in this profession for a variety of reasons.It is likely exacerbated by the cybersecurity shortage -- small teams are expected to carry heavy workloads, and their managers bear the brunt of the consequences for any failures that occur. This zero-failure mentality results from a siloed structure in which cybersecurity professionals are isolated from other parts of an organization and expected to carry the entire burden of protection from attacks without any assistance. Individuals are blamed for events that in reality result from institutional failures -- and those failures are never addressed.Related:This is exacerbated by a general lack of people skills among managers and poorly executed communication. These factors lead to a bullying managerial culture, demoralized staff, burnout, high turnover rates -- and ultimately, a greater likelihood of breaches.Here, InformationWeek looks at the factors contributing to toxic cybersecurity environments and the steps that CISOs and other IT leaders should take to correct them, with insights from Rob Lee, chief of research at cybersecurity training company SANS Institute; and Chlo Messdaghi, founder of responsible AI and cybersecurity consultancy SustainCyber.Tech Over PeopleOne of the first organizational mistakes that can lead to toxicity in the cybersecurity workforce in an emphasis on packaged solutions. Slick marketing and fast-talking salespeople can easily lead anxious executives to purchase supposedly comprehensive cybersecurity packages that offer assurances of protection from outside attackers with very little work or additional investment. But even the most well-designed package requires maintenance by cybersecurity professionals.Related:Ninety percent of the cybersecurity market is product based, Lee says. You can have an amazing Boeing strike fighter, but you still need a pilot to run it.The failure to understand the demands of this work can lead to underfunded and understaffed departments expected to keep up with unrealistic expectations. CISOs are thus compelled to pressure their employees to perform beyond their capabilities and toxicity soon results.Siloed SecurityEven in cases where cybersecurity teams are reasonably funded and given a degree of agency in an organizations approach to protecting its assets, their efficacy is limited when the entire burden falls to them. If an organization does not implement top-down practices such as multi-factor authentication and education on phishing scams, it regularly falls to the cyber team to clean up preventable messes. This can shift focus from other proactive measures.There are conflicts when the organization is trying to enable innovation and freedom, Lee says. Security still has to do monitoring and restrict access.Related:Siloes develop within cyber teams themselves, too. Teams focused on compliance, risk assessment, and operations may have very different priorities. If they are not in regular communication, those priorities cannot be reconciled. This leads to further conflict and inefficiency.Resources Versus RealityThe availability of both staff and funding can negatively affect a cybersecurity work environment. Tiny teams faced with massive defense tasks are likely to feel overburdened and underappreciated, even under the best management. Understaffed cyber teams are frequently the result of underfunding.Chlo Messdaghi, SustainCyberChlo Messdaghi, SustainCyberWhen you go to like the board or the executive team, theyll say No, its not needed. We don't need more funds, Messdaghi relates. They dont understand why security is important. They see it as setting money on fire.One study found that cybersecurity budgets were only expected to increase by 11% from 2023 to 2025 despite the exponential rise in threats, putting the onus on already strained cybersecurity teams to make up the difference. These unrealistic expectations are likely to lead to employees being burned out.But that is not the whole picture: Burnout also comes from bad leadership. Burnout is not caused by the amount of work you have. Its about leadership and a lack of communication, Messdaghi argues.Toxic Personalities in ManagementToxicity trickles down -- from management to the most junior of employees, no matter the industry. This appears to be particularly true in cybersecurity. One of the worst traits in upper management appears to be apathy -- simply not caring much about cybersecurity at all.This can lead directly to underfunding or band aid solutions that leave teams scrambling to compensate. These types of executives dismiss admonitions to implement password security procedures and phishing tests across the organizations, considering them to be meaningless exercises.When cyber teams do raise relevant issues with management, they may be dismissed or treated as irritations rather than people who are attempting to do their jobs. Further, when errors do occur, they are pinned squarely on these underfunded and understaffed teams.Cybersecurity team leaders themselves can contribute to toxic environments, even if upper management is supporting solid practices. Micromanaging employees, publicly or privately abusing them with demeaning or profane language and refusing to listen to their concerns can lead to disengagement, adversarial relationships and decreased performance.Research has identified such managers as petty tyrants, so involved with their own sense of importance in the organizational scheme that they feel entitled to these behaviors. Their behaviors may more directly affect their subordinates due to the small size of many cyber teams -- their toxicity is not diffused across many employees and their handful of subordinates bear the brunt.These behaviors may be further exacerbated by the shortage of skilled cybersecurity employees -- someone who is able to manage a team on a technical level remains valuable even if they lack people skills and do so in an abusive fashion.And some leadership toxicity may simply be the result of managers not being enabled to do their jobs. CISO burnout is extremely real, Lee says. There are a lot of people saying, Im never doing this job again.When good managers leave due to toxicity from their superiors, the effects can be devastating for the entire organization. Theyll take half the team with them, Lee says.Toxic Tendencies in Cyber TeamsAs poisonous as the behaviors of executives and managers can be, some of the toxicity in cybersecurity workforces can come from within the teams themselves.A prevailing toxic tendency is the so-called hero complex -- highly skilled employees shoulder enormous workloads. This can lead to resentments on both sides of the equation. The hero may resent what they perceive to be an unfair burden, carrying the weight of less-invested employees. And other employees may resent the comparison to heroes, whose work ethic they feel unequipped to match. Some heroes may become bullies, feeling entitled to push others out of their way in an effort to get their work done, and others may feel bullied themselves, forced to shoulder the consequences of the incompetence of their colleagues.This personality type may be prevalent in cybersecurity teams due to the history of competition in the industry, beginning with early hackers. Hierarchies based on achievements -- such as medals -- have been reinforced by the entry of ex-military members into the workforce.The prevalence of these personality types has, likely unintentionally, led organizations to feel comfortable with understaffed cybersecurity departments because the work does ultimately get done, even if it is only by a few people working under unsustainable pressures. But it also creates single points of failure: When one hero finally slips up, the whole enterprise comes crashing down.Blaming and ShamingBlaming individuals for security events is a hallmark of toxic cybersecurity culture. While events can often be traced to a single action by an employee, those actions are typically the result of a defective system that cannot be attributed to one person.The zero-intrusion mindset that prevails among executives who do not understand the cybersecurity landscape can exacerbate the blame game. Intrusions are a near inevitability, even in scrupulously maintained environments. Coming down on the people who are responsible for containing these events rather than congratulating their effective work at containing them is going to result in resentment and anger.Rob Lee, SANS InstituteRob Lee, SANS InstituteTheres this assumption that someone did something wrong, Lee says. There are no medals awarded for stopping the intrusion before it does something devastating.This type of behavior can have even further consequences. Employees who know they will be excoriated if they make a mistake or have been faulted for the mistakes of others are likely to conceal an error rather than bring to the attention of their superiors, which is likely to make a potential breach even worse.There are always going to be people who are curious and want to work on improving themselves, Messdaghi observes. And then youre going to have people who are going to blame others for their wrongdoings.Effects on EmployeesToxic cybersecurity environments can have substantial effects on the physical and mental health of employees. Stress and anxiety are common, in some cases leading to more severe consequences such as suicidality. One study of the industry found that over half of respondents had been prescribed medication for their mental health. Conflicts, infighting and bullying can increase in a vicious feedback loop according to research by Forrester.These factors can result in apathy toward the job, leaving the team and eventual exit from the industry entirely. Nearly half of cyber leaders are expected to change jobs this year according to a 2023 Gartner report. Simultaneously, unrealistic performance expectations lead to further staffing problems. There may be little interest in entry level employees due to their perceived lack of skills even as more experienced staff head for the door.And stress is only growing -- 66% of cybersecurity professionals said their job was more stressful than it was five years ago according to a 2024 survey.Risks Created by ToxicityAccording to a study by Bridewell, 64% of respondents to a survey of cybersecurity professionals working in national security infrastructure saw declines in productivity due to stress.The apathy, annoyance, stress, and eventual burnout that result from toxic cybersecurity workplaces create prime conditions for breaches. Errors increase. Team members become less invested in protecting organizations that do not care about their well-being. Rapid turnover ensues, decreasing team stability and the institutional knowledge that comes with it.A 2024 Forrester report found that teams who were emotionally disengaged from their work experienced almost three times as many internal incidents. And those that lived in fear of retribution for errors experienced nearly four times as many internal incidents. These conditions exacerbated the risk of external attacks as well.Fixing the ProblemAddressing toxicity in cybersecurity is a tricky proposition -- not least due to the vagueness of the term. Distinguishing toxicity from acceptable workplace pressures is highly subjective.CISOs and IT leaders can institute a number of practices to ensure that cyber teams are getting the resources and support they need. Regular meetings with superiors, anonymous surveys and open conversations can elicit useful feedback -- and if that feedback is actually implemented, it can create more positive and productive conditions.Even the best cyber managers can only do so much to address unrealistic pressures and failures across the organization that result in risk. If resources and time are not allocated appropriately, toxicity is likely to fester despite the best efforts of everyone involved.People who are open and good communicators -- these are the best qualities I see, Messdaghi says. They dont need to be super technical. They just need to just be there to support the employees and get them what they need.

Like foreign student exchange programs, a regular exchange program betweentheITteamand end user departmentsin which an IT business analyst spends six weeks in an end-user area doing end- user work, and a person from the end-user area spends six weeks in IT, canbuild bench strength and collaborative relationships between IT analysts and business users.Yetmanywho have tried this idea have exited with mixed results. What are thepitfalls, and is there a way to run an employee exchange program that delivers quality outcomes for everyone?First, WhyDo it?Cross-disciplinary team building and the development of empathy andunderstanding of the business and ITacross departmentsare the driving forces behind user-IT employee exchanges. Youcantteach practical company business acumen to IT staff withtextbooksand college courses. IT needs boots on experience in user departments, where business analysts directly experience the day-to-day process problems and pain points that users do.End users who take a tour of duty in IT have a chance to see the other side, which must plan carefully about how to integrate and secure software, while users complain that application deployments are taking too long.On paper, there is virtually no one in userdepartmentalor IT management whothinksthat employee exchange is a bad idea.So,why havent these exchanges been widely embraced?Related:PitfallsThere are several reasons why employee exchanges between users and IT have faltered:1. The time commitmentWhetheryoureinIT or end-user management, exchanging an employee who is fully trained in your department for another employee who will be a trainee,at best,is not an easy sacrifice to make. There are projects and daily work toaccomplish. Can your department afford an employee exchange that could compromise productivity when you might already be running lean?2. Lack of management commitmentThe user-IT employee exchange starts out strong, with both user and IT management highly enthusiastic about the idea. Then, an unexpected priority comes up on either the user or IT side, and the manager who is affected says, Imsorry.Imgoing to have to pull back my employee from the exchange because we have this important project to get out.Iveseen this scenario happen. Employees get pulled out of the exchange program, and in good faith their managers try to reengage them in the exchange once a crisis has been resolved, but the continuity of the exchange has been interrupted and much of theinitialeffort is lost.Related:3. Failure to set attainable goalsOften, users and IT will agree to an employee exchange with a loose goal of immersing employees in different departments so employees can gain a better understanding of the company.The employees, and those whom they work with in their new departments, arent really sure about what they should be focusing on.When the exchange period ends, no one is exactly sure about what knowledge has been gained, and theycantexplain it to upper management, either.4. Lack offollow upDid the employees in the exchange come back with value-added knowledge that is aiding them in new projectsthatthey are doing? Most managers I speak with who have done these exchanges tell me thattheyrenot sure.One way to be sure is to check in with employees after they complete exchanges to see whattheyrelearned, and howtheyreapplying this new knowledge to their work. For example, if an IT employee goes to accounting to learn about risk management and works six weeks with the risk group, does the employee come back with new knowledge that helps them develop more insightful analytics reports for thatgroup?5. Lack of practicalknow-howLack ofknow-howin running employee exchanges goes hand in hand with the failure to set attainable goals,or to follow up.The managers who are best in these areas are individuals who have backgrounds in teaching and education, but not everybody does.Related:When you exchange employees for purposes of knowledge transfer and growth of business understanding, setting goals and staying with and following up the process are fundamental to execution. Unfortunately, many managers who try exchanges lack skills in these areas.6. Employee transfer requestsMany managers fear that the employees they send to other departments might like the work so well that they request a permanent transfer! This is a major fear.Doing anEmployeeExchangeGiven the pitfalls,itssmall wonder that employee exchange programsarentaggressively pursued,but thatdoesntmean that theydontwork.Wheredothey work?1. Companies that want to improvetheiremployee retentionSeveral years ago, a major appliance manufacturer offered an internal program where employees could sign up for projects outside of their regular businessareas andget time to work on the projects. Other companies have followed suit. This outside of the department work unlocked employee creativity and career growth opportunities. It improved employee morale, which in turn reducedemployee churn. In 2024, overall employee churn at US companies was at 20%, orone in five employees. With a tight job market, companies want to reduce churn, and expanding employee work experiences and knowledge is one way to do it.2. Organizations thatrequirecross-trainingThe military is a prime example of this. Recruits are trained in a variety of different functional areas todeterminewhere theybestexcel.3. Not-for-profit entitiesCredit unions and other not-for-profit entities have historically been great proving grounds for employee exchange programs because of their people orientation. Upper and middle managers are genuinely committed to the idea of employee growth through cross-training. The not-for-profit culture also promotes resource sharing, so managers are less resistant to the idea that they could lose a valuable employee to another department because the employee likes working there.4. When clearobjectivesare set, andfollow-upis doneAn employee exchange requires clearobjectivesto succeed atan optimallevel. For example, youdontsend an IT staffer over to accounting to learn clerical processes of closing the month-end financials and reporting them to management. Ifitstaking finance three days to do the month-end close, you send an IT employee over to learn the process and the process obstacles, and todeterminewhyitstaking finance three days instead of one day to do the close. The hope is that the employee returns to IT and works on the tech side of the process so the month-endclosingcan be done in one day. That'sa clear business win.SummaryFor managers who are uncomfortable with employee exchanges, it might be best not toattemptthem. But for those who can see the benefits of these exchanges, and who can answer a solid yes to their commitment levels, employee exchanges can work extraordinarily well for everyone involved.

Ancient pyramids in modern-day SudanMartchan/ShutterstockArchaeologists have long assumed that ancient Egyptian pyramids were reserved for the richest members of society but an analysis of burials at a site called Tombos suggests low-status workers could merit a place in pyramid tombs too.Tombos, an archaeological site in northern Sudan, came under ancient Egyptian control about 3500 years ago when the famous civilisation was at its most powerful. By this time, Egyptian royalty no longer favoured pyramid burials. But Egyptian nobles were still keen on them,

Population estimates in rural areas of China may be incorrectShutterstock/aphotostoryOur estimates of rural populations have systematically underestimated the actual number of people living in these regions by at least half, researchers have claimed with potentially huge impacts on global population levels and planning for public services. However, the findings are disputed by demographers, who say any such underestimates are unlikely to alter national or global head counts.Josias Lng-Ritter and his colleagues at Aalto University, Finland, were working to understand the extent to which dam construction projects caused people to be resettled, but while estimating populations, they kept getting vastly different numbers to official statistics. AdvertisementTo investigate, they used data on 307 dam projects in 35 countries, including China, Brazil, Australia and Poland, all completed between 1980 and 2010, taking the number of people reported as resettled in each case as the population in that area prior to displacement. They then cross-checked these numbers against five major population datasets that break down areas into a grid of squares and estimate the number of people living in each square to arrive at totals.Lng-Ritter and his colleagues found what they say are clear discrepancies. According to their analysis, the most accurate estimates undercounted the real number of people by 53 per cent on average, while the worst was 84 per cent out. We were very surprised to see how large this underrepresentation is, he says.While the official UN estimate for the global population is around 8.2 billion, Lng-Ritter says their analysis shows it is probably much higher, though declined to give a specific figure. We can say that nowadays, population estimates are likely conservative accounting, and we have reason to believe there are significantly more than these 8 billion people, he says.Unmissable news about our planet delivered straight to your inbox every month.Sign up to newsletterThe team suggests these counting errors occur because census data in rural areas is often incomplete or unreliable and population estimation methods have historically been designed for best accuracy in urban areas. Correcting these systematic biases is important to ensure rural communities avoid inequalities, the researchers suggest. This could be done by improving censuses in such areas and recalibrating population models.If rural population estimates are way out, that could have massive ramifications for the delivery of government services and planning, says Lng-Ritter. The impacts may be quite huge, because these datasets are used for very many different kinds of actions, he explains. This includes planning transport infrastructure, building healthcare facilities and risk reduction efforts in natural disasters and epidemics.But not everyone is convinced by the new estimates. The study suggests that regional population counts of where people are living within countries have been estimated incorrectly, though it is less clear that this would necessarily imply that national estimates of the country are wrong, says Martin Kolk at Stockholm University, Sweden.Andrew Tatem at the University of Southampton, UK, oversees WorldPop, one of the datasets that the study suggests was undercounting populations by 53 per cent. He says that grid-level population estimates are based on combining higher-level census estimates with satellite data and modelling, and that the quality of satellite imagery before 2010 is known to make such estimates inaccurate. The further you go back in time, the more those problems come about, he says. I think thats something thats well understood.Lng-Ritter thinks that data quality is still an issue, hence the need for new methods. It is very unlikely that the data has improved so dramatically within 2010-2020 that the issues we identified are fully solved, he says.Stuart Gietel-Basten at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology points out that the majority of the teams data comes from China and other parts of Asia, and may not be globally applicable. I think its a very big jump to state that there is a great undercount in places like Finland, Australia, Sweden etc, and other places with very sophisticated registration systems, based on one or two data points.Lng-Ritter acknowledges this limitation, but stands by the work. Since the countries that we looked at are so different, and also the rural areas that we investigated have very different properties, were quite confident that it gives a representative sample for the whole globe.Despite some reservations, Gietel-Basten agrees with Lng-Ritter on one point. I certainly agree with the conclusions that we should both invest more in data collection in rural areas as well as coming up with more innovative ways of counting people, he says.But that idea that the official world population should swell by a few billion is not realistic, says Gietel-Basten. Tatem also requires much more convincing. If we really are undercounting by that massive amount, its a massive news story and goes against all the years of thousands of other datasets he says.Journal reference:Nature Communications DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-56906-7Topics:population

2025-03-18T12:12:01Z Read in app U.S. Space Force photo by Airman 1st Class Olga Houtsma This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Trump's 'Golden Dome' is a missile shield, though exactly what the project will look like is still a mystery.Legacy and new defense companies are vying for opportunities within the 'Golden Dome' initiative.There have been arguments for the project to focus on a range of threats beyond missiles.President Donald Trump envisions his "Golden Dome for America" as a next-generation missile shield, but defense companies see other opportunities amid the heightened focus on fending off threats to the homeland.What exactly the project will entail remains to be seen, but industry partners are curious to see if it will include less conventional systems like counter-drone capabilities and electronic warfare. The "Golden Dome" effort is being eyed closely by legacy defense companies and smaller, younger companies alike.Lockheed Martin, an established player in integrated missile defense, has said that it is "ready to answer the call." Other big defense companies, like RTX and Northrop Grumman, have also shown their interest in the project. But other defense firms want a piece of the action as well.BlueHalo, a Virginia-based defense contractor, has said the project, which is already set to be a massive undertaking as the Trump administration effectively revives the Reagan-era Strategic Defense Initiative, will ultimately require "the full might of the Defense Industrial Base to achieve success."In an interview with Business Insider, BlueHalo CEO Jonathan Moneymaker said that a comprehensive Golden Dome could become an all-encompassing threat response with buy-in from all areas of the defense tech and AI industries.BlueHalo develops cost-effective counter-drone systems, among other defense technologies. The company developed the Palletized High Energy Laser system that uses directed energy and AI to eliminate drones for the Army and is working on a next-generation counter-drone missile that it recently tested.'A very wide swath of threat vectors'Moneymaker said the defense industry will need greater clarity for companies to begin fielding potential "Golden Dome" solutions. Right now, there are still a lot of questions about the scale and how extensive the White House wants this to be.And those are not the only uncertainties. Agencies like NORTHCOM, Space Command, and the Missile Defense Agency may all have requirements and varying levels of ownership, raising responsibility questions. Leading agencies will also have to hash out how the potential inclusion of electronic warfare and signals intelligence will work on American soil and balance citizens' privacy rights. A Standard Missile-6 Dual II is launched from the USS Daniel Inouye off the coast of the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii as part of testing event, March 30, 2023. Mark Wright/Missile Defense Agency Some of these issues are likely being addressed now as the first planning deadline fast approaches. In late January, the White House gave the Pentagon 60 days from the president's executive order to develop a plan for the new shield.The executive order for what Trump initially called "Iron Dome for America" was focused on the threat of ballistic, hypersonic, and advanced cruise missiles. But it also mentioned without specificity "other next-generation aerial attacks."The White House did not respond to Business Insider's request for clarity on whether it would want the new project to focus on more than missile threats.Moneymaker said when it comes to the dangers the US is facing, there are "a lot of varying degrees of technology that are ranging from very unsophisticated threats to very, very sophisticated threats."He said potential threats include everything from complex and maneuverable hypersonic missiles to cheap, off-the-shelf drones with munitions taped to them. The Ukraine war has seen the revolutionary employment of drones and loitering munitions. The threats to the nation can range from missiles to cyberattacks to drone swarms. "That is a very wide swath of threat vectors," the CEO said.Former military officials have argued the original focus of the Trump administration's shield project was too narrowly focused on missiles.Glen VanHerck, a retired Air Force General who previously served as the head of NORAD, and Pete Fesler, another retired Air Force general and former NORAD official, argued last month in The National Interest that plans for Trump's "Golden Dome" are stuck in a bygone era focused primarily on legacy systems.The former military officials called for "a comprehensive and holistic approach to homeland defense one that addresses the full spectrum of current and future threats." That approach could include electronic warfare, cyber-resilience, and improved counter-drone capabilities."The Pentagon cannot afford to simply buy more of yesterday. Instead, it must dynamically adapt for tomorrow," they wrote.Getting to a fully operational Iron Dome within the US will be a heavy lift, one that demands organization and a "whole of government" approach."This will be clearly a collaborative effort across a lot of players," Moneymaker said. "Both government and industry alike."