Strands presents another scrambled letter grid concealing a series of themed words. In this advanced word search, you must identify the theme and solve all words using just one clue and the letters provided.

Physical Nintendo Switch 2 Edition games might just be original Switch cartridges with a download code for the upgrade.

An outbreak of extreme weather has roiled the country with deadly dust storms in the plains and hundreds of tornadoes across the eastern U.S. over the past few weeks.Now, heavy rainfall across parts of the South and Midwest is prompting comparisons with some of the worst flooding on record for the region.Very moist air from the record-warm Gulf of Mexico is being drawn northward into a stalled frontal system creating a perfect recipe for torrential rains. Parts of the Ohio and Mississippi River Valleys received more than 15 inches of rain over the past four days.High water swept away buildings, forced water rescues in river towns, and cut off rural areas when roads flooded. More than 18 people have died, just days after damaging tornadoes swept through some of the same locations.The rains prompted dire wording from the National Weather Service including warnings of a potentially historic, prolonged flash flood event and serious concern of catastrophic, life-threatening consequences from generational rainfall.This isnt routine. This is a rare, high-impact, and potentially devastating event, said a social media post from the Memphis office of the National Weather Service.This weeks floods are set to reach a mark set only a handful of times over the past 200 years. The regions last floods of this magnitude were in 1997 and 2011. In 1997, parts of western Kentucky received more than 10 inches of rain in a single day, which created turbulent currents on the Ohio River strong enough to flood the lock-and-dam infrastructure that allows barge traffic to operate. In 2011, water rose so rapidly that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had to blast a hole in levees along Mississippi River farmland in rural southern Missouri in a last-ditch effort to avoid an uncontrolled breach of the levees further downstream in Memphis, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans.The worst-case scenario for the Ohio River was the flood of 1937in which the river peaked about 10 feet higher than current forecasts. Although that magnitude isnt expected this time, a similar amount of rain felljust about 100 miles further north than this weeks storms, enough so nearly all runoff went into the Ohio River. More than a million people were homeless after the 1937 flood, and only one bridge was left intact between Pittsburgh and Memphis. The flood struck during the middle of the Dust Bowl and at the end of the Great Depression, and it paved the way for the modern system of flood control through levees and dams.Although weather forecasts for the rains have been reliable, the National Weather Service continues to be stretched thin due to Trumps budget cuts.A staffing assessment gathered by NWS employees and published by the Associated Press on Friday found that nearly half of all local forecast offices are now critically understaffed, reducing meteorologists ability to interface with the public and local emergency management.Detailed vacancy data for all 122 weather field offices show eight offices are missing more than 35% of their staffincluding those in Arkansas and Kentucky where tornadoes and torrential rain hit this week, said the report.A four-day total rainfall of 15 inches is more than Memphis, Tennessee, typically receives in April, May, and June combined. According to NWS data, in a stable climate, that kind of rainstorm is only expected to recur approximately once every 500 to 1,000 years.This is exactly the sort of extreme weather event that our infrastructure isnt built to handle. According to the Corps of Engineers, many of the locks and dams along the Ohio River are beyond their 50-year lifespan. Climate change increases the risk of extreme rainfall events, and the Corps is in the process of updating its flood maps to account for those changes nationwide.This weeks rains have already created major flash flooding in cities and smaller rivers from Texas to Ohio. Near the confluence with the Mississippi River, the Ohio River is expected to crest by mid-April at its highest level since 2011just a few feet below the tops of the levees there.All that water will gradually make its way into the Mississippi and out to the Gulf of Mexico through Louisiana. In addition to physical damages, the flooding could bring weeks of shipping delays for companies that rely on the roads and river barges that form the backbone of the Midwests economy. This weeks flooding could add to supply chain chaos as Trumps latest tariffs go into effect.The governors of Arkansas, Kentucky, and Tennessee have asked the federal government for help, and Kentucky has also activated its National Guard to help respond to the floods. The governors have also declared states of emergency as waters continue to rise.

When audio engineering meets natural stone artistry, something magical happens. Bang & Olufsen has partnered with Italian stone specialists Antolini to create the Beosound Balance Natura speaker, a breathtaking fusion of acoustic excellence and natural materials at Milan Design Week. This collaboration brings together two masters of their craft, combining B&Os renowned sound expertise with Antolinis exceptional stonework in a limited-edition offering that transforms the listening experience into something truly extraordinary.The Beosound Balance Natura stands apart with its innovative pedestal design, where the speaker appears to float above a base crafted from some of natures most remarkable materials. Available in select varieties from Antolinis Exclusive Collection and Precioustone Collection, each speaker showcases either luminous quartz or 160-million-year-old petrified wood, materials that tell a geological story while supporting cutting-edge audio technology. The result is not merely a speaker but a sculptural centerpiece that commands attention even when silent.Designer: Bang & Olufsen, AntoliniWhat truly distinguishes this collaboration is the meticulous attention to transitional elements. An anodized aluminum ring creates a visual bridge between the stone pedestal and the speaker body, with precise color matching that harmonizes the natural and engineered components. This seemingly simple detail has a deep meaning that exemplifies the design philosophy behind the partnership: finding beauty in the conversation between contrasting materials while maintaining a cohesive visual language that speaks to discerning collectors.The material selection process reveals the depth of this collaboration. Options include the crystalline transparency of Cristallo Iceberg, the dramatic patterning of Cristallo Vitrum Wow, and the warm tones of Cristallo Rosa Wow quartz. For those drawn to organic history, the petrified wood options of Retro Grey, Retro Brown, and Retro Fancyblack showcase natures patient artistry, with distinctive patterns formed through mineralization processes spanning millions of years.Beyond its visual impact, the pedestal design serves a crucial acoustic function by positioning the speaker at its optimal height for sound distribution. This marriage of form and function typifies Bang & Olufsens approach to product development, where aesthetic considerations never compromise audio performance. The stone base provides stability and natural dampening properties while creating a striking visual foundation that complements contemporary interior design sensibilities.As part of Bang & Olufsens Atelier Bespoke program, the Beosound Balance Natura represents a new frontier in personalized luxury audio. Each speaker becomes a unique creation, with the natural variations in stone ensuring that no two pieces are identical. It adds an element of exclusivity that will appeal to collectors who value both technological sophistication and natural beauty, positioning these speakers as heirloom pieces that will retain their visual and acoustic appeal for generations.The post Beosound Balance Natura Speaker Stands on a Stunning Stone Pedestal first appeared on Yanko Design.

Wolf Olins' executive creative director discusses the importance of "evolving without losing your essence."

As states legislate against products containing PFAS, the chemical and consumer products industries are deploying lawyers and lobbyists to protect their investments.

The social media platform has experienced a return in advertisers and new exposure as an official source of government news.

Mesmerized by the scalability, efficiency and flexibility claims from generative AI (genAI) vendors, enterprise execs have been all but tripping over themselves trying to push the technology to its limits.The fear of flawed deliverables based on a combination ofhallucinations, imperfect training data and a model that can disregard query specificsand can ignore guardrails is usually minimized.But the Mayo Clinic is trying to push back on all those problematic answers.In an interview with VentureBeat,Matthew Callstrom,Mayos medical director, explained: Mayo paired whats known as the clustering using representatives (CURE) algorithm with LLMs and vector databases to double-check data retrieval.The algorithm has the ability to detect outliers or data points that dont match the others. Combining CURE with a reverse RAG approach, Mayos [large language model] split the summaries it generated into individual facts, then matched those back to source documents. A second LLM then scored how well the facts aligned with those sources, specifically if there was a causal relationship between the two.(Computerworldreached directly to Callstrom for an interview, but he was not available.)There are, broadly speaking, two categories for reducing genAIs lack of reliability: humans in the loop (usually, an awfullotof humans in the loop) or some version of AI watching AI.The idea of having more humans monitoring what these tools deliver is typically seen as the safer approach, but it undercuts the key value of genAI massive efficiencies. Those efficiencies, the argument goes, should allow workers to be redeployed to more strategic work or, as the argument becomes a whisper, to sharply reduce that workforce.Butat the scale of a typical enterprise, genAI efficienciescouldreplace the work of thousands of people. Adding human oversight might only require dozens of humans. It still makes mathematical sense.The AI-watching-AI approach is scarier, althougha lot of enterprisesare giving it a go. Some are looking to push any liability down the road bypartnering with others to do their genAI calculationsfor them. Still others are looking topay third-parties to come in and try and improvetheir genAI accuracy. The phrase throwing good money after bad immediately comes to mind.The lack of effective ways to improve genAI reliability internally is a key factor in why so many proof-of-concept trialsgot approved quickly, but never moved into production.Some version of throwing more humans into the mix to keep an eye on genAI outputs seems to be winning the argument, for now. You have to have a human babysitter on it. AI watching AI is guaranteed to fail, said Missy Cummings, a George Mason University professor and director of Masons Autonomy and Robotics Center (MARC).People are going to do it because they want to believe in the (technologys) promises. People can be taken in by the self-confidence of a genAI system, she said, comparing it to the experience of driving autonomous vehicles (AVs).When driving an AV, the AI is pretty good and it can work. But if you quit paying attention for a quick second, disaster can strike, Cummings said. The bigger problem is that people develop an unhealthy complacency.Rowan Curran, a Forrester senior analyst,said Mayos approach might have some merit. Look at the input and look at the output and see how close it adheres, Curran said.Curran argued that identifying the objective truth of a response is important, but its also important to simply see whether the model is even attempting to directly answer the query posed, including all of the querys components. If the system concludes that the answer is non-responsive, it can be ignored on that basis.Another genAI expert is Rex Booth, CISO for identity vendor Sailpoint. Booth said that simply forcing LLMs to explain more about their own limitations would be a major help in making outputs more reliable.For example, many if not most hallucinations happen when the model cant find an answer in its massive database. If the system were set up to simply say, I dont know, or even the more face-saving, The data I was trained on doesnt cover that, confidence in outputs would likely rise.Booth focused on how current data is. If a question asks about something that happened in April 2025 and the model knows its training data was last updated in December 2024 it should simply say that rather than making something up. It wont even flag that its data is so limited, he said.He also said that the concept of agents checking agents can work well provided each agent is assigned a discrete task.But IT decision-makers should never assume those tasks and that separation will be respected. You cant rely on the effective establishment of rules, Booth said. Whether human or AI agents, everything steps outside the rules. You have to be able to detect that once it happens.Another popular concept for making genAI more reliable is to force senior management and especially the board of directors to agree on a risk tolerance level, put it in writing and publish it. This would ideally push senior managers and execs to ask the tough questions about what can go wrong with these tools and how much damage they could cause.Reece Hayden,principal analyst with ABI Research, is skeptical about how much senior management truly understands genAI risks.They see the benefits and they understand the 10% inaccuracy, but they see it as though they are human-like errors: small mistakes, recoverable mistakes, Hayden said. But when algorithms go off track, they can make errors light years more serious than humans.For example, humans often spot-check their work. But spot-checking genAI doesnt work, Hayden said. In no way does the accuracy of one answer indicate the accuracy of other answers.Its possible the reliability issues wont be fixed until enterprise environments adapt to become more technologically hospitable to genAI systems.The deeper problem lies in how most enterprises treat the model like a magic box, expecting it to behave perfectly in a messy, incomplete and outdated system, said Soumendra Mohanty, chief strategy officer at AI vendor Tredence. GenAI models hallucinate not just because theyre flawed, but because theyre being used in environments that were never built for machine decision-making. To move past this, CIOs need to stop managing the model and start managing the system around the model. This means rethinking how data flows, how AI is embedded in business processes, and how decisions are made, checked and improved.Mohanty offered an example: A contract summarizer should not just generate a summary, but it should validate which clauses to flag, highlight missing sections and pull definitions from approved sources. This is decision engineering defining the path, limits, and rules for AI output, not just the prompt.There is a psychological reason execs tend to resist facing this issue. Licensing genAI models is stunningly expensive. And after making a massive investment in the technology, theres natural resistance to pouring even more money into it to make outputs reliable.And yet, the whole genAI game has to be focused on delivering the goods. That means not only looking at what works, but dealing with what doesnt. Theres going to be a substantial cost to fixing things when these erroneus answers or flawed actions are discovered.Its galling, yes; it is also necessary. The same people who will be praised effusively about the benefits of genAI will be the ones blamed for errors that materialize later. Its your career choose wisely.

Its been just over two months since Kathleen Hicks stepped down as US deputy secretary of defense. As the highest-ranking woman in Pentagon history, Hicks shaped US military posture through an era defined by renewed competition between powerful countries and a scramble to modernize defense technology.Shes currently taking a break before jumping into her (still unannounced) next act. Its been refreshing, she saysbut disconnecting isnt easy. She continues to monitor defense developments closely and expresses concern over potential setbacks: New administrations have new priorities, and thats completely expected, but I do worry about just stalling out on progress that weve built over a number of administrations.Over the past three decades, Hicks has watched the Pentagon transformpolitically, strategically, and technologically. She entered government in the 1990s at the tail end of the Cold War, when optimism and a belief in global cooperation still dominated US foreign policy. But that optimism dimmed. After 9/11, the focus shifted to counterterrorism and nonstate actors. Then came Russias resurgence and Chinas growing assertiveness. Hicks took two previous breaks from government workthe first to complete a PhD at MIT and the second to join the think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), where she focused on defense strategy. By the time I returned in 2021, she says, there was one actorthe PRC (Peoples Republic of China)that had the capability and the will to really contest the international system as its set up.In this conversation with MIT Technology Review, Hicks reflects on how the Pentagon is adaptingor failing to adaptto a new era of geopolitical competition. She discusses Chinas technological rise, the future of AI in warfare, and her signature initiative, Replicator, a Pentagon initiative to rapidly field thousands of low-cost autonomous systems such as drones.Youve described China as a talented fast follower. Do you still believe that, especially given recent developments in AI and other technologies?Yes, I do. China is the biggest pacing challenge we face, which means it sets the pace for most capability areas for what we need to be able to defeat to deter them. For example, surface maritime capability, missile capability, stealth fighter capability. They set their minds to achieving a certain capability, they tend to get there, and they tend to get there even faster.That said, they have a substantial amount of corruption, and they havent been engaged in a real conflict or combat operation in the way that Western militaries have trained for or been involved in, and that is a huge X factor in how effective they would be.China has made major technological strides, and the old narrative of its being a follower is breaking downnot just in commercial tech, but more broadly. Do you think the US still holds a strategic advantage?I would never want to underestimate their abilityor any nations abilityto innovate organically when they put their minds to it. But I still think its a helpful comparison to look at the US model. Because were a system of free minds, free people, and free markets, we have the potential to generate much more innovation culturally and organically than a statist model does. Thats our advantageif we can realize it.China is ahead in manufacturing, especially when it comes to drones and other unmanned systems. How big a problem is that for US defense, and can the US catch up?I do think its a massive problem. When we were conceiving Replicator, one of the big concerns was that DJI had just jumped way out ahead on the manufacturing side, and the US had been left behind. A lot of manufacturers here believe they can catch up if given the right contractsand I agree with that.We also spent time identifying broader supply-chain vulnerabilities. Microelectronics was a big one. Critical minerals. Batteries. People sometimes think batteries are just about electrification, but theyre fundamental across our systemseven on ships in the Navy.When it comes to drones specifically, I actually think its a solvable problem. The issue isnt complexity. Its just about getting enough mass of contracts to scale up manufacturing. If we do that, I believe the US can absolutely compete.The Replicator drone program was one of your key initiatives. It promised a very fast timelineespecially compared with the typical defense acquisition cycle. Was that achievable? How is that progressing?When I left in January, we had still lined up for proving out this summer, and I still believe we should see some completion this year. I hope Congress will stay very engaged in trying to ensure that the capability, in fact, comes to fruition. Even just this week with Secretary [Pete] Hegseth out in the Indo-Pacific, he made some passing reference to the [US Indo-Pacific Command] commander, Admiral [Samuel] Paparo, having the flexibility to create the capability needed, and that gives me a lot of confidence of consistency.Can you talk about how Replicator fits into broader efforts to speed up defense innovation? Whats actually changing inside the system?Traditionally, defense acquisition is slow and serialone step after another, which works for massive, long-term systems like submarines. But for things like drones, that just doesnt cut it. With Replicator, we aimed to shift to a parallel model: integrating hardware, software, policy, and testing all at once. Thats how you get speedby breaking down silos and running things simultaneously.Its not about Move fast and break things. You still have to test and evaluate responsibly. But this approach shows we can move faster without sacrificing accountabilityand thats a big cultural shift.How important is AI to the future of national defense?Its central. The future of warfare will be about speed and precisiondecision advantage. AI helps enable that. Its about integrating capabilities to create faster, more accurate decision-making: for achieving military objectives, for reducing civilian casualties, and for being able to deter effectively. But weve also emphasized responsible AI. If its not safe, its not going to be effective. Thats been a key focus across administrations.What about generative AI specifically? Does it have real strategic significance yet, or is it still in the experimental phase?It does have significance, especially for decision-making and efficiency. We had an effort called Project Lima where we looked at use cases for generative AIwhere it might be most useful, and what the rules for responsible use should look like. Some of the biggest use may come first in the back officehuman resources, auditing, logistics. But the ability to use generative AI to create a network of capability around unmanned systems or information exchange, either in Replicator or JADC2? Thats where it becomes a real advantage. But those back-office areas are where I would anticipate to see big gains first.[Editors note: JADC2 is Joint All-Domain Command and Control, a DOD initiative to connect sensors from all branches of the armed forces into a unified network powered by artificial intelligence.]In recent years, weve seen more tech industry figures stepping into national defense conversationssometimes pushing strong political views or advocating for deregulation. How do you see Silicon Valleys growing influence on US defense strategy?Theres a long history of innovation in this country coming from outside the governmentpeople who look at big national problems and want to help solve them. That kind of engagement is good, especially when their technical expertise lines up with real national security needs.But thats not just one stakeholder group. A healthy democracy includes others, tooworkers, environmental voices, allies. We need to reconcile all of that through a functioning democratic process. Thats the only way this works.How do you view the involvement of prominent tech entrepreneurs, such as Elon Musk, in shaping national defense policies?I believe its not healthy for any democracy when a single individual wields more power than their technical expertise or official role justifies. We need strong institutions, not just strong personalities.The US has long attracted top STEM talent from around the world, including many researchers from China. But in recent years, immigration hurdles and heightened scrutiny have made it harder for foreign-born scientists to stay. Do you see this as a threat to US innovation?I think you have to be confident that you have a secure research community to do secure work. But much of the work that underpins national defense thats STEM-related research doesnt need to be tightly secured in that way, and it really is dependent on a diverse ecosystem of talent. Cutting off talent pipelines is like eating our seed corn. Programs like H-1B visas are really important.And its not just about international talentwe need to make sure people from underrepresented communities here in the US see national security as a space where they can contribute. If they dont feel valued or trusted, theyre less likely to come in and stay.What do you see as the biggest challenge the Department of Defense faces today?I do think the trustor the lack of itis a big challenge. Whether its trust in government broadly or specific concerns like military spending, audits, or politicization of the uniformed military, that issue manifests in everything DOD is trying to get done. It affects our ability to work with Congress, with allies, with industry, and with the American people. If people dont believe youre working in their interest, its hard to get anything done.

Plenty of games generated buzz during last weeks Nintendo Switch 2 Direct, but the announcement of FromSoftwares The Duskbloods felt noteworthy. Perhaps its because of the concept or its exclusivity status a first for the developer on Nintendo platforms.However, there was some trepidation after it was announced as an eight-player PvEvP title. With Elden Ring: Nightreign on the horizon, was the developer focusing more on online experiences for the foreseeable future?Well, no. In a new Creators Voice interview with Nintendo, director Hidetaka Miyazaki said, This is an online multiplayer title at its core, but this doesnt mean that we as a company have decided to shift to a more multiplayer-focused direction with titles going forward.The Nintendo Switch 2 version of Elden Ring was also announced, and we still intend to actively develop single-player focused games such as this that embrace our more traditional style.Though its action and art style scream FromSoftware, The Duskbloods sees the team venturing into interesting new directions. There are over a dozen playable characters with unique abilities and weapons, and players can customize them to some extent.You can also adjust their blood history, marking others as your rival or companion (and earning rewards). The range of traversal options is also distinctly superhuman compared to the developers previous titles.The Duskbloods launches in 2026 for Nintendo Switch 2. Stay tuned for more details in the coming months.