Highlighting such painters as Otto Dix, George Grosz and Max Beckmann, the Neue Galerie devotes a show to the German art movement that was at once dispassionate and disturbing.

veni, vidi, vici Sometimes, its the little tech annoyances that sting the most macOS wouldn't remember mouse settings? This means war! Nate Anderson Mar 22, 2025 7:07 am | 15 Credit: Getty Images Credit: Getty Images Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreAnyone who has suffered the indignity of splinter, a blister, or a paper cut knows that small things can sometimes be hugely annoying. You aren't going to die from any of these conditions, but it's still hard to focus when, say, the back of your right foot is rubbing a new blister against the inside of your not-quite-broken-in-yet hiking boots.I found myself in the computing version of this situation yesterday, when I was trying to work on a new Mac Mini and was brought up short by the fact that my third mouse button (that is, clicking on the scroll wheel) did nothing. This was odd, because I have for many years assigned this button to "Mission Control" on macOSa feature that tiles every open window on your machine, making it quick and easy to switch apps. When I got the new Mini, I immediately added this to my settings. Boom!And yet there I was, a couple hours later, clicking the middle mouse button by reflex and getting no result. This seemed quite oddhad I only imagined that I made the settings change? I made the alteration again in System Settings and went back to work.But after a reboot later that day to install an OS update, I found that my shortcut setting for Mission Control had once again been wiped away. This wasn't happening with any other settings changes, and it was strangely vexing.When it happened a third time, I switched into full "research and destroy the problem" mode. One of my Ars colleagues commiserated with me, writing, "This kind of powerful-annoying stuff is just so common. I swear at least once every few months, some shortcut or whatever just stops working, and sometimes, after a week or so, it starts working again. No rhyme, reason, or apparent causality except that computers are just [unprintable expletives]."But even if computers are [unprintable expletives], their problems have often been encountered and fixed by some other poor soul.I turned to the Internet for help... and immediately stumbled upon an Apple discussion thread called "MacOS mouse shortcuts are reset upon restart or shutdown." The posterand most of those replyingsaid that the odd behavior had only appeared in macOS Sequoia. One reply claimed to have identified the source of the bug and offered a fix:1. Set your Mission Control mouse shortcuts as usual.2. Go to ~/Library/Containers/com.apple.Desktop-Settings.extension/Data/Library/Preferences folder.3. Copy com.apple.symbolichotkeys.plist file.4. Go to ~/Library/Preferences5. Paste the com.apple.symbolichotkeys.plist file. Re-writte the previous one.The bug is the macOS core seems to save the shortcut preferences directly into the step 4 folder, but it should be saved in step 2 and 4 folders at the same time.Unfortunately, I didn't have any such .plist file in ~/Library/Containers/com.apple.Desktop-Settings.extension/Data/Library/Preferences. However, a second intrepid user found the file in a different location, writing:This solution worked for me but NOTE that to find the plist file to copy I had to go to ~/Library/Container/Desktop & Dock/Data/Library/Preferences instead. For whatever reason the other folder (com.apple.Desktop-Settings.extension) didn't exist. Perhaps they moved it in 15.3 (but didn't fix the bug!)?Here, at last, was the answer. I found the proper .plist filed and I copied it over to ~/Library/Preferences, then I rebooted the computer. Everything worked.Sweet success! Jovial victoriousness! Ebullient wonderment!...and then I went on with my day.Who moved my cheese?This trivial annoyance reminded me of several things.First, despite Apple's "it just works" ethos, it doesn't always work; Macs are computers like any other, their software filled with spaghetti code and poorly defined variables. Errors creep in. This one was a bit surprising, however, in that it has already persisted across three point releases of the operating system even though the fix is in Apple's own forums and appears to be as simple as storing a file in the correct spot. I am tempted to draw grandiose lessons from the incident about whether Apple's attention to iOS is leading to sloppiness in macOSbut I won't.Second, we really take the working of these ultra-complex systems for granted. I'm old enough to remember the Bad Old Days of trying to get Wing Commander running on a PC and having to muck about with HIMEM.SYS files just to get the game to load. Young Nate, with his modem and shared phone line that could lose an hour-long download if someone else in the house picked up the phone, would have loved to deal only with small problems like a mouse setting not sticking. So perhaps Current Nate has gotten soft.Third, it is really irritating to have one's muscle memory routine interrupted. Every time I clicked that middle mouse button and nothing happened, I felt the sharp shock of annoyance that my devices should betray me in this way. Even though my brain knew that the clicks were no longer producing their expected results, my fingers clicked anyway out of instinct until I broke down, went back into System Settings, and made the change again. The brain/body system rebels against anything that forces its expected reactions to change. (Though over time, of course, humans are great adapters. But in the short term... not so much.)Fourth, the corollary to this level of irritation is the feeling of triumph when the problemhowever small it might beis successfully fixed. In the slightly less technical realm, our refrigerator has two sliding plastic doors that twist closed together in order to protect (?) the cheese drawer. But years of cheese consumption had apparently led to tiny bits of cheese getting down into the mechanism and gumming it up something terrible. Last week, I spent 45 minutes taking the doors and the drawer apart, washing all the pieces in hot, soapy water, and scrubbing at them for a good 10 minutes until the last of the ground-in cheese residue was cleared away. When I reassembled the whole contraption, and the doors swung as smoothly as if they were new, I felt the same sense of elation as when I defeated the macOS mouse bug. There's something about figuring out how a system works, identifying the current problem, and then addressing that problem that just tickles the brain in a certain way.Fifth and finally, I was reminded that for all of the Internet's many (many!) problems, it is still full of people taking time to share their knowledge just to help others. So thanks, random Internet commenters who showed me how to fix my problem! I owe you a debt of gratitude.Since I enjoyed fixing my little problem so much, I thought I'd share it with you, gentle Ars readers. What minor tech irritations have you overcome recently?Nate AndersonDeputy EditorNate AndersonDeputy Editor Nate is the deputy editor at Ars Technica. His most recent book is In Emergency, Break Glass: What Nietzsche Can Teach Us About Joyful Living in a Tech-Saturated World, which is much funnier than it sounds. 15 Comments

2025-03-22T12:37:41Z Read in app A Ukrainian T-72 tank in the Kharkiv region. SERGEY BOBOK / AFP This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Russia has lost about 3,800 tanks since 2022, compared with about 1,100 for Ukraine, per Oryx estimates.In Kursk, Russian tank losses are nearly equal to those of Ukraine, challenging Kyiv's advantage.Ukraine's dwindling resources and reliance on Western aid hinder its strategic gains in Kursk.Russia appears to have lost far more tanks than Ukraine since Moscow's invasion of its neighbor just over three years ago.Open-source analysts with the Oryx collective estimate that Russia has had about 3,800 tanks destroyed, damaged, abandoned, or captured. The total for Ukraine stands at about 1,100. The totals include only destroyed vehicles for which photo or videographic evidence is available and may be an underestimate.Russia is closing the gap in Kursk. In the eight-month battle, launched when Ukrainian forces smashed into the Russian region in August, Ukraine has suffered a higher ratio of tank losses compared to losses on Ukrainian soil.Russia has lost 66 tanks in Kursk, while Ukraine has lost 55, according to the estimates a ratio that is not sustainable for Ukraine.Ukraine's tank fleet is rapidly modernizing with Western-made Leopard 1s, Leopard 2s, and M-1s, while Russia's tank fleet is aging as it relies on decades-old models. Russia boasts a greater ability to sustain and replace tanks compared with Ukraine.While Russia is fielding older tanks from storage, it still has a vast reserve and can continue producing new ones at a rate that allows it to maintain its fighting capability even while not fully compensating for losses.The near-even loss ratio in Kursk suggests that Ukraine is struggling to maintain the advantage it needs in a war of attrition.Ukraine requires a much higher kill ratio to degrade Russia's forces faster than it loses its own, but the battle for Kursk shows that Russia can still inflict similar losses on Ukraine, limiting Kyiv's strategic gains.A protracted war where Ukraine cannot sustain its advantage plays into Russia's favor, as Ukraine has fewer resources and relies heavily on Western aid.There are also concerns over Ukraine's ability to get more tanks and other critical hardware from its allies.Earlier this month, President Donald Trump said he was pausing all military aid to Ukraine, after a contentious meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office. He then backtracked after Ukraine agreed to the terms of a proposed 30-day cease-fire deal with Russia. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and President Donald Trump clashed in their Oval Office meeting in late February. SAUL LOEB / AFP Serhiy Rakhmanin, a member of Ukraine's parliamentary committee on national security, defense, and intelligence, told Business Insider earlier this month that Ukrainian forces operating inside Russia, specifically in Kursk, rely on a significant number of American armored vehicles.Even so, the ongoing conflict has been far less about tank-on-tank warfare and more about the use of drones, which Ukraine has heavily embraced.Ukraine is losing its grip on Kursk, which is a key bargaining chip against Russia in any negotiations over pausing or ending the war.As of this week, the town of Sudzha, about five miles from Ukraine's border, remains Kyiv's last significant stronghold in the Russian region.By preventing Ukraine from achieving a decisive breakthrough in Kursk, Putin can frame the battle as a strategic success.

2025-03-22T12:30:02Z Read in app An orchard in Warwick Valley, considered to be part of the Hudson Valley, during sunset. Brian Logan Photography/Shutterstock This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? I love visiting the Hudson Valley in New York because it reminds me of the French countryside. The region has delicious local ciders and cheese, plus views of rolling green hills and orchards.The Hudson Valley also has a lot of historic charm and some great French restaurants.Visiting New York's Hudson Valley often transports me to the French countryside.The region is only an hour from where I live, and many parts of it remind me of Normandy, France, which I visited as a child and as an adult.I loved my time exploring the historic French city's lush landscapes, sipping on fermented apples, tasting decadent cheeses, strolling through charming towns, and visiting history-turning battle sites.A trip to Normandy isn't in the cards again for me anytime soon so I've been excited to find the Hudson Valley has much of its gustatory, aesthetic, and historical charm.There are plenty of French-style ciders and cheeses in the Hudson Valley The Hudson Valley has apple orchards and trees. Brandt Bolding/Shutterstock I've found many basic similarities between what the farmers and makers in the Hudson Valley and Normandy create, especially when it comes to cheese and hard cider.Cider is one of Normandy's signature drinks. The region even has a famous 25-mile-long Cider Route through green rolling hills, charming farmsteads, apple trees, villages with esoteric cheeses, and the remnants of epic battles that shaped world history.This drink is also huge in the Hudson Valley. Although its orchards and farmsteads are more scattered, the area also has rolling hills, historic villages, dozens of cideries, and tasty locally produced cheeses.I've found many of the Hudson Valley's cideries offer tasting experiences for families that exude the laid-back Northern French approach to hosting that hypnotized me in the first place.One of my favorite spots is Indian Ladder Farms, a century-old family farm that has classic ciders sourced from its 90-acre orchard, housemade beers, local wines and spirits, pick-your-own berries and pumpkins, nature trails, and farm tours.Both at the Indian Ladder and in Normandy, I was able to sip fresh cider outside in the sunshine while watching children (not all of them mine) frolic merrily in the countryside.And, of course, cider can't be consumed in Normandy without cheese and the Hudson Valley also produces some wonderful varieties.If I put on a blindfold and sat down to a plate of farmstead cheese and a glass of cider born and bred in the Hudson Valley, I'd swear I was back on vacation in Normandy.Hudson Valley's towns are also filled with charm and history Kingston is located near the Hudson River. ChrisBoswell/Getty Images Like Normandy, the Hudson Valley is a great stop for history buffs.Towns throughout the region have landmarks and museums dedicated to their roles in early American history and the Revolutionary War, plus plenty of historic architecture.One highlight is Kingston, established centuries ago in the shadow of the Catskill Mountains, which has preserved pre-revolutionary stone homes.The surrounding downtown area has many boutiques, galleries, and restaurants, too. A highlight is Le Canard Enchaine bistro, which has well-executed French dishes, a candlelit dining room, and rustic-elegant decor. Don't miss its garlicky, butter-soaked escargot and authentic tarte Tatin.I also suggest a stop in Cold Spring, another Hudson Valley town with great shopping, a range of historic tours, incredible food, and opportunities to boat, hike, and cycle in the beautiful outdoors.For stick-to-your-ribs French bangers in Cold Spring, tryBrasserie Le Bouchon, which has red-and-white checked tablecloths, cassoulet, steak au poivre, and a killer wine list.Beacon, Hudson, Rhinebeck, and Millbrook are also charming stops in the Hudson Valley with charming architecture, killer art and antique scenes, and excellent food and drinks.In any of these towns, tucking into dinner starting with a locally sourced cheese board, of course while gazing out rolling green hills or a shining river transports me back to Northern France without the language barrier or passport requirements.

If youre anything like me a policy dork who spends too much time on X youve been unable to escape discussion of a new book called Abundance. Written by the Atlantics Derek Thompson and the New York Timess Ezra Klein (also a co-founder of Vox), Abundance is one of those policy books with one big idea that everyone has to have an opinion on whether theyve read it or not. In Abundance, Thompson and Kleins big idea is that American politics and life for the past 50-plus years has been warped by an ideology of scarcity that has artificially reduced the supply of vital goods like housing and energy through a growing thicket of government restrictions and regulations. They argue for embracing a politics of abundance that encourages building and innovation and unlocks American prosperity, aiming for a future of more rather than less for everyone.Thompson and Klein are self-identified liberals, and their book is mainly meant to diagnose what they see has gone wrong with Democratic governance in recent decades, as progressives have consciously adopted policies that aim to put limits on growth. They point to the examples of Democratic cities like San Francisco or New York, where regulations have made it virtually impossible to build new living spaces, putting the cost of housing out of reach for more and more people. Even on issues that Democrats care deeply about, like climate change, their policies have inadvertently had the effect of slowing progress by making it difficult to build out the vast amount of clean energy needed to reduce carbon emissions without hurting the economy. RelatedThe result was that even as technological progress continued, we stopped feeling it and we stopped appreciating it a consistent theme of this newsletter. Instead, bit by bit, and often with the best intentions, we put countless invisible brakes on development, with the net result that we reduced the supply and raised the price of the goods that we needed for a good life. And once we lost the ability to build physically, we lost the ability to build a better future. Abundance isnt just for DemocratsGiven how much of Abundance focuses on where Democrats went wrong, the book has ignited debate among progressives. If you want to read more about that but dont want to get lost in endless post threads or three-hour-long podcasts, my Vox colleague Eric Levitz has a great piece on the arguments and why Democrats should heed the message of Abundance.But its a mistake to think of Abundance as a book that has meaning only for readers who vote blue. At its heart is a message that matters for Americans of all political backgrounds: we dont have to fight endlessly over who gets what piece of a shrinking pie. For far too long weve let ourselves be convinced that we have to treat American life as a zero-sum game, but we can change the rules. We can embrace policies that actively grow that pie policies that make housing more affordable in the places people want to live, that give us energy to power a high-tech economy without burning up the planet, that bring us better health care at lower costs. Thompson and Klein recognize that Americans will never agree on everything, that there are issues where there are simply fundamental differences between the right and the left. But theyre right to argue that most Americans want a better life for themselves and their children, and that a politics focused on improving material progress in the areas that matter housing, education, energy is one that can appeal to almost everyone. As Thompson wrote in the Atlantic this week, abundance can combine the progressive virtue of care for the working class and a traditionally conservative celebration of national greatness.If we can do that, we might just be able to break the polarization that has gridlocked progress and turned American politics into a winner-takes-all death match.Im sure not everyone who reads Abundance will agree with every page. Diagnosing the mistakes that have held back progress is a lot easier than creating a political movement that can unlock it. But I do believe there is a hunger in this country for a vision of the future that isnt inherently fearful, that recaptures something of the optimism that was once synonymous with America. That gives me hope at a moment when we desperately need it.A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

There are many lawsuits challenging allegedly illegal actions by the Trump administration 132 of them as of March 21, according to the legal news site Just Security. Thats a lot to keep track of.Two issues raised by some of these suits stand out, however, as Trumps most blatant violations of the Constitution, and therefore as matters to pay particular attention to. One is the question of whether Trump can simply cancel federal spending that is mandated by an act of Congress, an issue known as impoundment. As future Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in a 1969 Justice Department memo, it is in our view extremely difficult to formulate a constitutional theory to justify a refusal by the President to comply with a congressional directive to spend.The other issue is birthright citizenship. The Constitution is absolutely clear that anyone born in the United States and subject to its laws is a citizen, regardless of the immigration status of their parents. As one Reagan-appointed judge said of Trumps attempt to strip citizenship from some Americans born in this country, Ive been on the bench for over four decades, I cant remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one is.The current Supreme Court is not just very far to the right, it is alarmingly partisan. The Courts spent the last several years settling old grievances, overruling decades-old cases that the Republican Party has long found objectionable. It even ruled that Trump, the leader of the Republican Party, is allowed to use his official powers to commit crimes. So it is reasonable to worry that a majority of the justices will simply do whatever a Republican administration wants them to do.This is why the birthright citizenship and impoundment cases are such important bellwethers. No competent lawyer, and certainly no reasonable judge, could conclude that Trumps actions in either case are lawful. There is no serious debate about what the Constitution says about either issue. If the Court rules in favor of Trump in either case, its hard to imagine the justices offering any meaningful pushback to anything Trump wants to do.Fortunately, there are early signs that this wont happen. On the impoundment issue, the Supreme Court recently rejected the Trump administrations request to block a lower court order compelling the administration to make approximately $2 billion in payments to foreign aid organizations. The vote was 5-4, and the Courts decision likely turned on a careless mistake by Trumps lawyers. Still, even a small defeat for Trump indicates that most of the justices arent so eager to bail out the leader of the Republican Party that they will jump on the first opportunity to do so.Similarly, three cases raising the birthright citizenship issue recently landed on the Courts shadow docket emergency motions and similar matters decided, often very rapidly, outside of the Courts normal schedule. So far, the Courts only issued brief orders indicating that the justices wont even start to consider the case until April 4 at the earliest, more than three weeks after the Trump administration asked them to intervene. Thats not a definitive sign that birthright citizenship is safe, but the fact that the Court decided to wait three weeks before looking at lower court orders that protected birthright citizenship suggests that most of the justices dont take the Trump administrations arguments very seriously. If they had, they likely would have heard the cases sooner in the foreign aid case where four justices sided with Trump, for example, the plaintiffs were given just two days to respond to the Justice Departments arguments.The legal arguments for impoundment are really, really badTrump has claimed sweeping authority to cancel spending appropriated by Congress, including dismantling entire agencies like the US Agency for International Development (USAID). He also issued an executive order purporting to strip citizenship from many children born to undocumented mothers, or to parents who are temporarily present in the United States. Thus far, the courts have treated both of these actions with skepticism as they should because they are clearly unconstitutional.Rehnquists dismissive response to impoundment speaks for itself. Theres simply nothing in the Constitution that supports the argument that the president can impound funds that Congress commands him to spend. Indeed, the only language in the Constitution that seems to speak to this issue cuts against Trump. Among other things, the Constitution says that the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. So the president has a duty to faithfully execute any law providing for federal spending.Its worth noting, moreover, that at least two of the Courts Republicans have previously expressed skepticism about impoundment. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a 2013 opinion that even the President does not have unilateral authority to refuse to spend funds appropriated by Congress. And Roberts wrote in a 1985 White House memo on impoundment that no area seems more clearly the province of Congress than the power of the purse. (Though it is worth noting that Roberts also suggested, in an attachment to that memo, that the president may have greater authority over spending relating to foreign policy.)The legal arguments against birthright citizenship are even worseThe case for birthright citizenship is even more straightforward. The Fourteenth Amendment provides that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Someone is subject to US jurisdiction if the federal government can enforce its laws against that person. Undocumented immigrants and their children are obviously subject to US law, otherwise they could not be arrested or deported.As the Supreme Court held in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the subject to the jurisdiction exception to birthright citizenship is narrow and primarily applies to the children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign state, who have diplomatic immunity from US law, as well as children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation.At least three courts have issued orders blocking Trumps attack on birthright citizenship. In a brief asking the Supreme Court to narrow these orders, the Trump administration claims that the word jurisdiction actually means allegiance. So someone is not a citizen if they dont owe primary allegiance to the United States rather than to an alien power.But there are two reasons to doubt that even the Trump administration agrees with this argument. One is that Trumps executive order only purports to strip citizenship from some children born to foreign nationals a child of two lawful permanent residents, for example, remains a citizen. But if the Fourteenth Amendment doesnt apply to anyone who owes primary allegiance to an alien power, that would mean that all children of foreign nationals should be stripped of their citizenship. The Constitution makes no distinctions based on whether a childs parents are legally present in the United States, nor does it draw lines based on whether those parents are temporary or permanent residents.The second reason is that, in its brief to the justices, the administration does not even ask the Court to fully reinstate Trumps birthright citizenship order. Instead, it asks the Court to narrow the lower courts decisions so that they only apply to the plaintiffs in the specific lawsuits challenging that order. If Trumps lawyers thought they had a winning argument, they almost certainly would have asked the justices to consider the merits of this case.The question of whether lower court judges may issue what are known as nationwide injunctions, orders that suspend a federal policy in its entirety rather than permitting the plaintiffs in an individual case to ignore that policy, has lingered for quite some time. Its these orders that are blocking Trumps attack on birthright citizenship. Trumps Justice Department pushed the Court to limit these nationwide injunctions during his first term, as did the Biden administration. But the Court has thus far allowed at least some of these broad orders to stand.While there are strong arguments against these nationwide injunctions, the Court has resisted efforts to limit them for years. It would be quite aberrant for the justices to suddenly decide to strip lower courts of their power to issue these nationwide orders in the birthright citizenship cases, where Trumps arguments on the merits are frivolous.In any event, the only outward sign the justices have given regarding their views on birthright citizenship suggests that Trump is going to lose. When the Justice Department asks the justices to stay a lower courts decision, one of the justices typically asks the other party in the case to respond to that request by a short deadline sometimes as little as a few days, and rarely more than a week. In this case, however, the Court gave the plaintiffs arguing in favor of birthright citizenship three full weeks to respond. So long as the Court does nothing, the lower court orders blocking Trumps attack on birthright citizenship remain in effect. And the justices are unlikely to do anything until they read the plaintiffs response. So, by stringing this case out for an additional three weeks, the justices ensured that Trumps executive order wouldnt go into effect any time soon.All of which suggests that the Supreme Court appears unlikely to back Trump on his two most clear-cut violations of the Constitution. That does not mean that this Court will act as a meaningful check on many of Trumps other illegal actions. But it does suggest that at least some members of the Courts Republican majority will occasionally say no to the leader of their political party.See More:

Less than a month into the second term of Donald Trump, the president signed an executive order that gave the non-governmental Department of Government Efficiency broad powers to gut the federal workforce, in the name of cost-cutting. DOGEled by the multibillionaire special government employee Elon Muskhas proceeded with zeal, working to scrap funding for veterans cancer treatments, reportedly cutting FDA employees directly working on Musks company Neuralink, slashing (and then walking back) layoffs in the National Nuclear Security Administration, cutting about 1,000 staff working for the National Park Service across the country, and this month, after a faltering start, beginning layoffs at NASA, the nations space agency. During the final week of February, hundreds of federal workers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration were firedabout 10% of the agency workforce. One of the affected employees was Andrew Hazelton, a meteorologist who grew up in Florida and until last month spent his days with the Hurricane Research Division Modeling Team, which helps NOAA understand these extreme storms and mitigate the worst of their impacts. Hazelton is now on administrative leavehes not allowed to worka temporary reinstatement position that could keep him (and many other NOAA staffers) in limbo as their situation works through the federal court system. Gizmodo spoke with Hazelton by phone this week to discuss the position that he and hundreds of other federal employees at NOAA are dealing with as the DOGE cuts roll through the federal workforce. Below is our conversation, lightly edited for clarity. Isaac Schultz, Gizmodo: I understand things have changed in the last day with a memo temporarily reinstating staff in paid, non-duty status, which potentially adds a new dimension to our conversation. Walk me through the timeline here, from your work at NOAA to the layoffs and basically how far along this rollercoaster we are now.Andrew Hazelton: Ive been with NOAA in varying capacities for over 8 years. After I got my PhD in 2016, I worked with a postdoc at Princeton University for the NOAA lab up there, NOAA GFDL in Princeton for 2 years, and then I went to AOML, the Hurricane Research Division, in 2018, working for the University of Miami. Last October I started the federal position, working for NOAAs Environmental Modeling Center doing hurricane models and model development. As of yesterday we areon paper at leastreinstated with admin leave, because of the court decision over the weekend. What that looks like exactly, though, theres still a lot of questions that well have to get answers about. It seems as though based on the wording of what they sent usthat theyre waiting for another court to say that they can go through with backpay. And right now were not allowed to work.I was a new federal employee even though Ive worked with NOAA for 8 years or more, and then February 27th we all got that mass email basically just informing us that we were being fired. It was sort of chaotic because they had about an hours notice.Weve been in this limbo state. I know some people filed appeals with the merit board. There was this preliminary injunction that allows us to be reinstated, but it seems like its going to depend on appeals of that. And theres still some uncertainty as to whether there could be a legal layoff process after that. Gizmodo: It seems like across a number of agencies, folks are not only being hit with these layoffs, but then being stuck in these situations where its very unclear exactly what their status is, and what the federal governments next move is going to be. Hazelton: Right. Its depending on court outcomes, and even across departments it seems like certain ones are responding to the rulings differentlysome more enthusiastically than others. There are a lot of unknowns.Gizmodo: We could speak about some more unknowns, frankly. Your focus is hurricanes. How many folks who work specifically on the hurricanes have been impacted, at least for the time being, and what this might mean for the publicpeople who need information about incoming storms? Hazelton: In my group, I was the main person doing hurricanes. There were other people doing other kinds of modeling: severe weather and ocean models, all sorts of things. There were other people in NOAA that were part of the hurricane hunters, the ones that fly into the hurricanes, and I did that as part of my last role. There were a few people from that group that were laid off. A couple dozen may have gotten reinstated as part of the judges decision, but there wasnt much communication about what criteria were used for that, but some were not fully reinstated. Theyve not given a lot of information about criteria or plans, but the big thing is that, if people arent fully reinstated, its going to be hard.These are people working on some of the computer models that are our main tools collecting data. I know people in the satellite division have been affected, and satellites are one of our big tools for monitoring all sorts of weather, not just hurricanes. Effects could be felt across the board, for anybody who relies on weather data. Gizmodo: Just because our readers are very familiar with hurricanesmany are in the American Southeastcan you name a couple of the storms that you flew through? Hazelton: Because I was there through last year, it was the first part of the hurricane season. I was in Helene last year, and then Ive also flown in storms like Michael in 2018, Dorian in 2019, Ian, which most of the Gulf people remember, Idalia. Ive flown in quite a few big ones and done work with the aircraft data and also the modeling.Gizmodo: What is it like to fly through a hurricane, and what storm was the most unnerving to go through? Hazelton: Most of the flight is just kind of like a bumpy commercial flight. Its a P-3 aircraft. Its a propeller planekind of a bumpy, noisy plane in generalbut very sturdy. But when you get in the eyewallthat ring near the center thats the most intense part of the hurricanethats where you can see some real bumps. I think Michael was probably the storm that was the bumpiest. I wasnt on the famous Ian flight where they got really rocked aroundI was the one before that. So Michael and also Helene last year was a pretty intense eyewall. We didnt want to fly through because it was just so gnarly looking on radar. Gizmodo: People in and affiliated with this administration talk a lot about privatizing weatherforecasting. What are your opinions on that, and what might that outlook mean for federal workers and for the way the public gets their weather information, depending on how successful you imagine that that effort being, should they proceed with it?Hazelton: The thing is theres already a pretty robust private weather enterprise. There are private companies that do good work. We work with them and a lot of them rely on NOAA data for their apps or different tools. Its really a pretty good public-private partnership that I think is honestly a model for that kind of thing. I dont think we want to get to a point where theres like a subscription-based model for warnings or any sort of life-saving data or information. Honestly, open access to data for the cost of your tax dollars is one of the things thats really been a model of NOAA. If you look at the numbers, it only costs 6 cents per American per day to fund all of NOAA at its current level. In a lot of ways, NOAA really pays for itself. Its a pretty minuscule cost when you look at like the dollars saved. Whenever theres a hurricane, better forecasts allow people to get outor vice versa, if theyre not going to be impacted, they dont have to close up their school or business. Better forecasts save lives and money. In a lot of ways, NOAA really pays for itself.Gizmodo: You mentioned that some folks were reinstated early on. It sounds like its kind of a black box as to how those decisions are being made. Is that a fair characterization? Hazelton: Yeah, there hasnt really been a whole lot of criteria or communication. I think there was supposed to be some veterans preference for prior federal service, but it really hasnt been made clear at all to us how these decisions are being made.Gizmodo: In that case, a silly question that Ill ask anyway: Is there any idea of how long this ambiguity will last? Hazelton: No, not really. I think its going to depend a lot on court cases and how those play out. Thats above my pay grade. Im just ready to get back to work doing what I love doing and what helps protect the American public. Gizmodo: Given the abruptness of these layoffs and your hands being tied with work, it sounds like you just have some stuff sitting on your desk waiting to be resumed, which with something as dynamic as weather, is probably not the best thing. Hazelton: Its tough. My coworkers, the ones that are still there, theyre great and theyre working hard, but its just hard when you have an agency thats already understaffed and just being stretched even thinner. Its hard to get everything done that you want and need to.Gizmodo: Is there anything you really want to get across about either your personal experience right now or the experience of federal workers more generally at this time? Hazelton: Most of us just want to get back to the work were doing to help the American public. NOAAs mission is to protect lives and property. We have a track record of doing that and thats what we want to get back to doing.

Turn any old TV into a smart TV with the help of a Fire TV Stick. Amazon has a variety of models all on sale for up to 43% off at the moment, making it very attractive to grab one. The basic Fire TV Stick HD which normally goes for $34 is down to just $19. The Fire TV Stick 4K (our favorite) dropped from $49 to just $29. And the Fire TV Stick 4K Max slashed down from $59 to just $39. Lets break down the differences between each as some are less obvious than others.See Fire TV Stick HD at AmazonSee Fire TV Stick 4K at AmazonSee Fire TV Stick 4K Max at AmazonThe starting Amazon Fire TV Stick HD is what it sounds like: Youll be able to stream all your favorite movies and shows in up to 1080p HD. Going with the Fire TV Stick 4K will bump you up to that brilliant 4K image, but what do you get with the 4K Max? Well, it does shift from Wi-Fi 6 to Wi-Fi 6E, the remote has some enhancements, and youll gain access to a library of 2,000 pieces of museum-quality art and photography which can be displayed as part of something called the Fire TV Ambient Experience.The new Fire TV Stick 4K and 4K Max support Dolby Atmos sound through select streaming services and when connected to compatible equipment. Enjoy cinematic sound in your own home when watching huge blockbusters like Dune: Part II. Also supported is full 4K Ultra HD resolution along with Dolby Vision, and HDR10+.A big bonus on the Fire TV Sticks is Xbox Game Pass Ultimate.No longer is it required to own an Xbox console to play Xbox games. You can stream games likeHalo InfiniteandCall of Duty Black Ops 6 through the cloud directly to your Fire Stick TV 4K. All you need to make is happen is subscribe to Xbox Game Pass Ultimate and grab yourself an Xbox controller or other compatible gamepad.See Fire TV Stick 4K at AmazonOver 300,000 Free Movies and TV ShowsAs one would expect, the Fire TV ecosystem supports all the popular streaming apps from Netflix to Hulu to Disney Plus to Max. With a subscription, youll be able to access all of those individual catalogues. However, there are also a ton of free movies and TV show episodes you can access via ad-supported apps like the various Fire TV Channels, Amazon Freevee, Tubi, and Pluto TV.The Alexa-enabled remote makes it super easy to find the show or movie your want to watch. Just hold down the microphone button and say the words Paddington 2. Next thing you know, youll be watching that silly bear get in all kinds of trouble across London.Right now, you can save a solid 43% on the Amazon Fire TV Stick. For a limited time, the streaming stick has be slashed in price down from $35 to just $20. Likewise, you can get the Fire TV Stick 4K and 4K Max models for reduced prices, now set at just $30 and $40 respectively.See Fire TV Stick HD at AmazonSee Fire TV Stick 4K at AmazonSee Fire TV Stick 4K Max at Amazon

Discover a new technique to achieve photorealistic interiors in Blender! This method will level up your renders and make your scenes look more realistic than ever. Perfect for architectural visualization and 3D artists looking for that pro-quality touch!Dont miss out on more Blender tutorials subscribe for more!#Blender #Shorts #NewTechnique #3DModeling #Realism #Rendering #BlenderTips #ArchitecturalVisualization #3DArt

Project Files: https://www.patreon.com/posts/124906418 .In this episode of unreal architectural design viewer, I am going to implement a photo gallery or image gallery widget. This will be used with the design viewer system we have been working on. Unreal Design Viewer - Full tutorial series: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNTm9yU0zou4W4rfbJbpmXzuN_2DOW-cN // ! https://www.patreon.com/codelikeme Patrons will have access to project files of all the stuff I do in the channel and other extra benefitsJoin this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClb6Jh9EBV7a_Nm52Ipll_Q/join Like my facebook page for more content : https://www.facebook.com/gamedevelopersclub/ Follow me on twitter : https://twitter.com/CodeLikeMe2 Follow me on reddit : https://www.reddit.com/user/codelikeme #CodeLikeMe #unrealengine #ue4 #indiegamedev