The ILM veteran and accomplished feature filmmaker enters the documentary space to tell the story of ILM and Lucasfilm’s digital filmmaking odyssey. By Lucas O. Seastrom Warning: This article contains spoilers from Light & Magic Season 2 Among the first group hired at Industrial Light & Magic in 1975, Joe Johnston began his career as a storyboard artist and concept designer. After 10 years with ILM on three Star Wars and two Indiana Jones films, among others, he went to the University of Southern California film school under George Lucas’ sponsorship. He’d go on to direct classics as varied as Honey, I Shrunk the Kids (1989), October Sky (1999), and Captain America: The First Avenger (2011).  Johnston’s directorial debut in the documentary medium, however, comes today, with the Season 2 premiere of Light & Magic on Disney+. The non-fiction series charts the storied legacy of Industrial Light & Magic, now celebrating its 50th anniversary, an unprecedented achievement in the history of visual effects. “I don’t have any experience in documentary or non-fiction filmmaking,” Johnston tells ILM.com. “When I was at Cal State Long Beach, I worked on a documentary that was directed by Tony Brennan called Hitler’s Secret Weapon. It was about the V2 rocket. Basically, my job was to do illustrations that explained some of the ideas he was trying to get across. That was my entire experience with documentary filmmaking, almost nil.” But Johnston does have experience as a storyteller. “While I had never worked on a documentary, I had a pretty good idea of how to tell a story, whether it’s real or fictional,” he says. “And you have to remember, especially with a project like this, though it’s true of all filmmaking, I had so much help. I had a supervising producer [Nicole Pusateri], story producer [Carly Baggett], a line producer [Andrew Hafnor], three great editors [Mike Long, Jennifer McGarrity, and Robinson Eng], and an archivist [Eugen Bräunig] whose job it was to go through thousands of hours of footage from ILM. It was more like a steering process, and I steered that process toward an ultimate goal. It was a real team effort all the way through.” Finding the Story After a successful first season directed by veteran screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan, Lucasfilm and Imagine Entertainment agreed to produce a second. It was then that Imagine producer Christopher St. John gave Johnston a call. The latter was surprised by the inquiry, thinking they wanted him to appear in Season 2 as an interview subject. “I said, ‘Guys, I’ve said everything I have to say about it in Season 1.’ And Chris said, ‘No, no, we want you to direct it.’ Well, okay. I had to think about that for a while. It sort of came out of nowhere. I wasn’t expecting it.” Johnston’s relatively distinct point-of-view helped motivate him to accept the offer. “Having been an insider for the first 10 years during the original Star Wars trilogy, maybe I could have a unique perspective on what Season 2 might look like, having not been around for any of that. I left in 1985, came back for a couple of projects afterwards, but the whole shift toward digital was all new to me. Once I was onboard, it was a matter of guiding it in the direction I thought it should, one goal of which was to tell George Lucas’ story as much as possible.” That story emerged as Johnston and team reviewed thousands of hours of archival footage preserved in ILM’s collection. “I recognized that one of the stories that needed to be told was how George Lucas had basically steered the entire motion picture industry – in a way he sort of dragged it kicking and screaming – into the digital age,” the director explains. “That was a story that I didn’t think had really been told before. Here was a chance to feature that aspect of ILM and Lucasfilm.”  This would chiefly center around the production of the Star Wars prequel trilogy, released between 1999 and 2005. The first entry, Star Wars: The Phantom Menace (1999), was the most ambitious visual effects project ever undertaken up to that time, counting more than 2,000 shots produced entirely within ILM. The middle entry, Star Wars: Attack of the Clones (2002), was the first blockbuster feature film made in a completely digital format and workflow. Surrounding these Lucasfilm productions were a bevy of groundbreaking achievements for client productions as varied as environmental effects in Twister (1996) and The Perfect Storm (2000) to performance capture in The Pirates of Caribbean trilogy (2003-07) and a fully-animated feature with Rango (2011). Master Yoda first appeared as an all-digital character in Star Wars: Attack of the Clones (Credit: Lucasfilm & ILM). Always a Student “What also appealed to me was the chance to interview these people, a lot of whom I’d known over the years, but hadn’t worked with,” Johnston adds. “Hearing their personal stories…. It was an education for me. I don’t know that much about visual effects, so it was interesting to learn how effects had evolved since my involvement in the 1980s.” Indeed, Johnston is keen to note that, although he’s had a reputation “as a visual effects person, I have to always remind people that I’m not at all. I was a designer, storyboard artist, sequence director, and stuff like that,” as he explains, “but I never really got involved in the visual effects. I was surrounded by people who could do that. My designs were used in those sequences, but once I was happy with the design, I’d hand it off to people like Richard Edlund and Dennis Muren to make it work.” As a feature film director, Johnston collaborated with ILM on The Rocketeer (1991), Jumanji (1995), and Jurassic Park III (2001), providing him with first-person, client-side experience during the era covered in Light & Magic Season 2. He describes how Jumanji, for example, took place during a transitional moment “where it wasn’t always cheaper to do it digitally, or it wasn’t necessarily cheaper to do something with an analog solution. We had to figure out which method was the best to achieve a certain effect.” Johnston worked alongside visual effects supervisor Ken Ralston on that film, a former colleague from the original trilogy.  “I am a proponent of the idea that any film should not have one more visual effect than it needs,” Johnston comments. “You have the minimal number to help you tell the story and move on. I don’t like films that are all about the visual effects; spectacle for the sake of spectacle. It’s such a waste. You’re not telling the story; you’re just trying to impress people.” Effects progression from The Perfect Storm (Credit: Warner Bros. & ILM). The People Come First Working across three one-hour episodes, each with its own editor, Johnston followed a number of the precedents established by Kasdan in Season 1, not least of which was the emphasis on individual stories of the artists, filmmakers, and other talent involved in ILM’s work.  “I hope the audience will recognize that these people at ILM who are revered by visual effects fans are basically just like anybody else,” Johnston says. “They grew up making models or loving technology or whatever it was, and they found a way to make their dreams come true by coming to ILM. It’s interesting because that’s not the way it was on the original trilogy. Nobody knew what they were doing. They didn’t know what they would do when they got hired. That in itself was a voyage of discovery for people. ‘Why am I here, what am I doing? Oh you want me to do that – I guess I better figure it out and learn how.’” But despite the generational distinction, Johnston does identify the central constant in ILM’s story. “There is an attitude of ‘I know you can do it because it’s impossible.’ That was the spirit in the original trilogy, analog days, and it was during the start of the digital era as well. ‘How are we going to do this? Let’s jump in and figure it out.’ I find that story appealing and interesting. Several of the interviewees talk about it. ‘We didn’t know how we were going to do it. We were running out of time. We’ve got this deadline, we’re working seven days a week, but somehow, we figured it out.’ I think that’s a great story to tell. It’s fun. It’s scary. Scary is good.” Visual effects supervisor John Knoll with high definition monitors on the set of Star Wars: Attack of the Clones (Credit: Lucasfilm & ILM). Piecing the Story Together “Like a lot of feature films, this project was definitely made in the cutting room. You’re assembling so much footage from the last 20 years and beyond,” says Johnston. Documentary filmmakers often have very distinct processes in terms of assembling their narrative elements. For Johnston, this meant close collaboration with the editors to help realize the story he wanted to tell. “I can’t give the editors enough credit. A lot of the ideas came up in the cutting room. They did a fantastic job. They’re semi-sung heroes.” Johnston also found ways to collaborate more directly with his interview subjects. “At one point, we decided that we needed someone to help tie all of these loose ends together. So we did a second interview with [former ILM general manager] Jim Morris and explained the story we were trying to tell. He got it, of course, being who he is, and he really helped us to cement some of these ideas into a story. It’s always like that in my limited experience. You don’t write a script beforehand like a feature; you write a script in the making of the film itself.” Johnston was adamant about leaning into the drama of the story, including the challenges that ILM, Lucasfilm, and Jar Jar Binks actor Ahmed Best faced during the release of The Phantom Menace. In Jar Jar, the creative team had pioneered what was the first all-digital main character in a feature film using performance capture technology, which later became industry standard. But some in the press and the audience struggled to accept Jar Jar’s role in the film’s story. “The whole Jar Jar Binks thing was probably the most controversial feature of the prequels,” Johnston says. “As with any filmmaking project, without conflict there is no drama. I wanted to highlight that.” It was important to be honest about the creative process, which is full of discussion and compromise.  “Interviewing [Star Wars producer] Rick McCallum was a similar choice,” Johnston adds. “Rick played a huge role in getting the prequels produced. Most people had a problem with Rick McCallum at some point because he was trying to get everything done as cheaply as he possibly could. He’s an interesting character. I wanted to hear his story.” Animation Rob Coleman (second from left) and actor Ahmed Best (third from right) with the ILM crew while shooting performance capture for Jar Jar Binks in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace (Credit: Lucasfilm & ILM). In addition to interviewing George Lucas, Johnston chose director Gore Verbinski as one of Light & Magic Season 2’s other filmmaker interview subjects. Verbinski collaborated with ILM on a watershed string of features, including three Pirates films and Rango. “The Pirates films that he directed were interesting because ILM had to keep besting themselves, and Gore tells that story quite well. “I wanted to feature Rango for the very reasons that Gore says in the interview, which is that ILM always had the ability but never the opportunity to be part of a project where they’re actually telling the whole story,” Johnston continues. “That was unique to ILM, and unique to that project. I came away, personally, hoping that ILM gets more opportunities to do things like that. Having experienced the situation that Gore explains where ILM does a shot, and they don’t know exactly where it’s going to cut in, they’re basically working on something in isolation. For them to be able to not think that way and tell the whole story was groundbreaking for ILM. That’s another story that was important to tell.” Animator Maia Kayser during production of Rango (Credit: ILM). Concept art of Rango by Christian Alzmann (Credit: Paramount & ILM). Finding Inspiration With the open mind of an artist, Johnston reiterates that he “never walked into an interview or the cutting room knowing exactly what something was going to be. It was a process. There were tons of surprises, things I didn’t know. It was refreshing, in a way. It made me have a newfound love of documentary filmmaking.” As Johnston looks ahead to future non-fiction stories of his own, he shares his hopes that Light & Magic Season 2 will help to inspire the coming generation of storytellers. “I would hope that a lot of young, potential filmmakers or visual effects artists would watch this series and say, ‘That person who I really admire had no idea how they were going to get to ILM. They did this thing that they were good at, it was recognized, and they got a call.’ If this is something that people want to pursue, they should recognize that it’s possible. There’s a route to success. There might not necessarily be a formula for success, but there’s a way to find your path if that’s your dream.” Effects progression from Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest with actor Bill Nighy as Davy Jones (Credit: Disney & ILM). Light & Magic Season 2 is streaming now on Disney+. Visit Lucasfilm.com to learn more about the stories told in the series’ latest installment. New merchandise celebrating the 50th anniversary of Industrial Light & Magic is now available on Amazon.com. – Lucas O. Seastrom is the editor of ILM.com and a contributing writer and historian for Lucasfilm.

The Department of Education quietly made an update to how payments are calculated for certain users, then rolled it back.

April 18, 20254 min readPlant Leaves Absorb Microplastics—And They End Up in Our FoodNew evidence shows plant leaves absorb airborne microplastics, a previously overlooked route for the particles to enter crops that has implications for ecology and human healthBy Willie Peijnenburg & Nature magazine Plants can absorb plastic particles directly from the air. Ruben Bonilla Gonzalo/Getty ImagesPlastic production is increasing sharply. This has raised concerns about the effects of microplastics (typically defined as plastic particles smaller than 5 millimetres in diameter) and nanoplastics (smaller plastic particles that are less than 1,000 nanometres in diameter) on human health. These concerns are partly influenced by alarming findings of the presence of microplastics in various human tissues, including the brain and placenta. Continuing research is examining pathways of human exposure to microplastics, including through food sources. Most attention is focused on soil and water as common sources of plastics that enter the food chain. However, writing in Nature, Li et al. provide strong evidence supporting the air as being a major route for plastics to enter plants.Plants can absorb plastic particles directly from the air. Particles in the air can enter leaves through various pathways, such as through structures on the leaf surface called the stomata and through the cuticle. Stomata are small openings made of cells, and the cuticle is a membrane, covered in insoluble wax, that is well suited for absorbing microplastics.Once inside the leaf (Fig. 1), microplastics move through spaces between plant cells and can also accumulate inside tiny hair-like structures, called trichomes, on the surface of leaves. Microplastics can also travel to and enter the plant’s water- and nutrient-transporting system (called the vascular bundle) and from there reach other tissues. Trichomes are ‘sinks’ for external particles and they therefore reduce the efficiency of microplastic transport from leaves to roots. Given that leaves are a key part of the food chain, microplastic particles that accumulate here can easily pass to herbivores and crop leaves, both of which can be directly consumed by humans.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Microplastics can also travel to and enter the plant’s water- and nutrient-transporting system (called the vascular bundle). From there, microplastics can reach other tissues.Yuji Sakai/Getty ImagesLi and colleagues’ study demonstrates that the absorption and accumulation of atmospheric microplastics by plant leaves occurs widely in the environment, with the concentrations of these particles in plants being consistent with their concentrations in air at the sampling sites. The authors report that the concentrations of the microplastics polyethylene terephthalate and polystyrene were 10–100 times higher in open-air planted vegetables than in greenhouse-grown vegetables. Leaves with a longer growth duration and the outer leaves of vegetables contained higher microplastic concentrations than did younger leaves and inner leaves. Microplastic concentration in plants increased with the duration of exposure to these particles.Although the efficiency of leaf uptake of microplastics is extremely low (around 0.05%), Li and colleagues’ findings provide evidence from fieldwork of accumulation of atmospheric microplastics in leaves. The relative importance of this airborne exposure to microplastics in plants compared with that of other uptake routes is difficult to assess, because information available on microplastic uptake through soil and water is sparse. Li et al. report concentrations of polystyrene nanoplastics of about 7–10 nanograms per gram of the dry plant weight for lettuce leaves after outdoor exposure in Tianjin, China.In the case of exposure to microplastics in the water, plastic concentrations similar to those found in plants by Li and colleagues after airborne deposition could only be obtained previously by exposing lettuce roots to polystyrene nanoplastics in water, at exposure levels as high as 5 milligrams of plastic per litre of water. Another study examining plant exposure to microplastics in water reported that there was no plant uptake of these plastics from water entering a wastewater treatment site. In soil cultivation experiments reported by Li and colleagues, the root absorption of polystyrene nanoparticles that ended up in the shoot was less efficient than the absorption of airborne nanoplastics. Li and colleagues found that the level of the plastics that reached leaves from roots were well below the 7–10 nanograms per gram of dry plant weight that is associated with airborne deposition of nanoplastics. Li et al. report that levels of microplastics in air-exposed plants at highly microplastic-contaminated sites increased mostly tenfold compared with levels at non-contaminated sites.Researchers have found that microplastics in the air can enter plants, including crops, through the outer layer of cuticle and epidermal cells. They can then move through spaces between plant cells to enter tiny hair-like structures on the leaf surface called trichomes. Alternatively, after entering the leaf, microplastics can move to cells in a system called the vascular bundle that transports water and nutrients to tissues elsewhere in the plant.NatureThese findings illustrate the potential implications of airborne microplastics and nanoplastics accumulating in leaves and being transferred to herbivores and humans. This highlights a possible yet understudied pathway of plastic exposure that might have ecological and health implications. However, key gaps remain in scientists’ understanding of the various factors that influence the uptake, accumulation and biological effects of microplastics in humans. These knowledge gaps include: the composition of the average human diet and its role in determining exposure levels; the efficiency with which plastics accumulate in the gut; and the extent to which these particles reach key organs. Furthermore, there is a major lack of data on the threshold levels at which microplastics and nanoplastics might begin to exert harmful effects on human health.The combination of these uncertainties severely hinders efforts to accurately quantify the potential risks posed by airborne microplastics. Without a comprehensive and systematic approach to studying plastic fate and toxicity, our understanding remains incomplete. The current body of knowledge about the environmental and physiological effects of plastics is full of gaps, with no consistent data available on plastics of well-defined compositions, sizes, shapes or densities.A conclusion to draw from Li and co-authors’ work is that, although there is no widely supported consensus on the risks to humans from exposure to plastics, the deposition of these substances from the air into human food is an exposure pathway not to ignore. Combining these concerns with considerations of direct exposure of humans to airborne plastics might suffice to prompt the adoption of precautionary measures. Although research on the long-term health effects of plastics is still continuing, preliminary research suggests possible links to problems with breathing, inflammation and other adverse health outcomes. Given these uncertainties, integrating precautionary approaches — such as reducing plastic use and increasing public awareness — might help to lessen potential risks. Proactive measures might also encourage further scientific investigation into the extent of microplastic exposure and its health implications, ensuring better protection for individuals and for the environment.This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on April 9, 2025.

You can trust VideoGamer. Our team of gaming experts spend hours testing and reviewing the latest games, to ensure you're reading the most comprehensive guide possible. Rest assured, all imagery and advice is unique and original. Check out how we test and review games here The confusion regarding the Nintendo Switch 2 continues as it appears some – if not all – Nintendo Switch 2 Edition cartridges of existing Switch games will work on the original 2017 console.  In a statement from Marvelous Games, as spotted by Does it Play, the physical cartridge for Rune Factory: Guardians of Azuma Switch 2 Edition will work on every Switch console.  Marvelous confirms that the new red cartridges for the new console can be inserted into the old console and play just fine. Despite a new notch in the cartridge design, the new game cartridges are not restricted from playing on the old hardware if they hold compatible software.  “The Nintendo Switch 2 Edition is a red 64GB game card that includes, in full, the Nintendo Switch game and the Upgrade Pack,” the publisher writes. “There’s no need to download the full game: simply insert the card into either a Nintendo Switch or Nintendo Switch 2 console, and the correct version will launch automatically.”  This means that Nintendo Switch 2 Editions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Pokemon Legends: Z-A and Metroid Prime 4: Beyond should also work in the same way.  As the full game and the Upgrade Pack for the games are both included on the cartridges of the new releases, this means that the cartridges should also be cross-compatible. However, that’s yet to be confirmed by Nintendo in any official capacity.   The news that Switch 2 cartridges also work on the original Switch consoles for compatible software is another stumble in Nintendo’s messaging for the new console.  For more coverage of the upcoming console, read about how MicroSD Express cards are selling out worldwide in anticipation of the new release. Additionally, read about how game developers are very happy with the power of the new console, describing it as a small “mid-range PC”.  Subscribe to our newsletters! By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and may receive occasional deal communications; you can unsubscribe anytime. Share

When a full-scale bathroom renovation isn’t in the cards, simply sprucing up your hardware selection can pack a serious punch. According to experts, homeowners are moving away from sleek, minimalist pulls, knobs, and fixtures, instead leaning into the highly decorative, handcrafted, antique, and unusual. “Anything that looks different from what you see in the masses is what I aim for sourcing!” says AD PRO Directory designer Ann Gottlieb.“Hardware is becoming more jewelry-like,” adds Virginia-based designer Laura Hildebrandt. “Especially in spaces where there are only a few places for hardware, the idea is to make it more of a statement, as one would while dressing.” Interiors experts are looking to antique and hand-hewn hardware with rich patinas to communicate this couture sensibility. Fine and Taft-Gersten have sourced more than a few favorites from Sydney-based Studio Henry Wilson. “The metal on their hooks and pulls has such a tactile quality,” they say.Another trending practice is to opt for unusual applications, says Davis, who, in addition to running her interior design studio, also acts as creative director for the boutique hardware company Nest Studio. “More people are embracing asymmetry when it comes to hardware and fixtures,” she says. To keep things interesting, her firm has been opting for corner or off-center mountings.Subtle techIn the primary bathroom of a Michigan house by architect Adam Jordan, grooved white oak wraps the cantilevering vanity, and Vancouver quartzite caps it. Bastion Double sconces by Allied Maker installed atop the mirror supplement the daylight streaming in from an expansive skylight. Photo: Eric Petschek / Styling: Katja GreeffSeveral designers voiced the opinion that hiding technology—or at least keeping it super sleek—is a priority. Keeping electrical products off the countertop is essential according to both Davis and Shin, who always specify docking drawers to free up additional space. Having a dedicated and connected place to store devices like hair dryers and electric toothbrushes can also “encourage tidy habits,” according to Britt.Finding the right fixtures can go a long way in the quest for quiet tech, designers say. Hildebrandt shares that her clients are all in on bidets—and that the Toto Washlet has become a go-to for her firm, thanks to its understated profile and cleaning and deodorizing abilities. “Believe it or not,” says Hildebrandt, “my clients are obsessed with toilets!”

Last year, a coterie of tech billionaires rallied behind Donald Trump’s candidacy. Many had not been lifelong Republicans. In 2016, the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen declared Hillary Clinton the “obvious choice” for president, saying Trump’s immigration agenda “makes me sick to my stomach.” Elon Musk, meanwhile, had once been an Obama-supporting climate hawk. Yet they, and many others in their circles, found their way to supporting an openly authoritarian insurrectionist in 2024. They offered many explanations for this decision, some of which were unabashedly self-interested — Trump had promised to limit regulatory scrutiny of their companies and taxation of their capital. But right-wing tech moguls generally insisted that their fundamental concern was for the country, not their profits: Trump’s pro-business policies would accelerate economic growth and technological progress — thereby ensuring America’s prosperity and global supremacy. Three months into his presidency, Trump has delivered on many of the so-called tech right’s requests for regulatory relief. Yet, to the extent that their faction genuinely cares about maximizing American economic growth, technological progress, and global standing, their investment in Trump has been an utter disaster.RelatedWhy Big Tech turned rightWhy the tech right backed TrumpIt isn’t hard to see why right-wing tech moguls believed Trump’s election would advance their interests. To some in their circles, the Democratic Party had become a financial threat. Many venture capitalists were heavily invested in the crypto industry, which the Biden White House regarded as “rife with bad actors.” The Democratic administration therefore discouraged banks from serving many crypto businesses and prosecuted some of its moguls for money laundering. What’s more, Joe Biden chilled mergers through vigorous antitrust enforcement, proposed new regulations on AI development, and suggested taxing unrealized capital gains. All this was antithetical to many tech billionaires’ material interests. And this financial injury was compounded by cultural insults. In the tech right’s view, the “woke” left seemed to disdain success in general and successful white males in particular. And social justice ideology didn’t just irritate the Silicon Valley superrich online; it increasingly fomented insubordination within their workplaces.Donald Trump credibly promised to advance the tech right’s interests along all these fronts. But some Silicon Valley moguls weren’t content to rest their case for Trumpism on grounds of narrow self-interest or cultural grievance. Rather, Andreessen and his fellow VC Ben Horowitz insisted Trump’s election was necessary for safeguarding nothing less than “the future of America.”In their account, the United States was suffering from a crisis of low economic growth and stagnating productivity. Unwise government policies were not merely stymying crypto’s profitability but American innovation writ large. And this posed a threat to liberty both within America’s borders and beyond them. After all, “Low economic growth also means the rise of smashmouth zero-sum politics” in which people come to believe that “gains for one group of people necessarily require taking things away from other people,” Andreessen and Horowitz wrote in a pre-election manifesto. More critically, the United States would not be able to maintain geopolitical supremacy without retaining economic and technological preeminence. And if America did not reign supreme, the Chinese Communist Party would be able to impose its “much darker, more totalitarian” view of global governance upon the world. Trump understood how important it was for the US to “win” in its techno-scientific race against the CCP, according to Andreessen and Horowitz. His election would, therefore, accelerate American economic growth and technological progress while enhancing US power on the global stage.Thus far, Trump has delivered many of the tech right’s narrow demands. Crypto and AI startups face little regulatory scrutiny or pressure to implement DEI programming. But Trump has simultaneously sabotaged America’s economic growth, scientific prowess, and geopolitical influence. Trump’s trade war is undermining American economic growth — in both the short and long termThe president’s decision to put across-the-board tariffs on virtually all foreign imports — and 145 percent duties on Chinese ones — has already cost many tech investors and founders dearly. Startups reliant on Chinese inputs have found themselves abruptly on the brink of insolvency. Other firms have been forced to cancel their IPOs amid bearish investor sentiment. The tech right hoped Trump’s election would clear the way for a wave of mergers, enabling venture-funded startups to cash out by selling their businesses to Big Tech firms. Yet his tariffs have eroded the value of major US tech companies, sapping their interest and capacity to buy out startups (while his administration’s approach to antitrust enforcement has proven more adversarial than anticipated).But Trump’s trade war has been even more damaging to the tech right’s high-minded goals than to its narrow pecuniary ones. Bitcoin is still more valuable today than it was before November’s election. The same cannot be said of the S&P 500, which more closely tracks American economic performance. Trump’s tariffs have not accelerated US economic growth. Rather, they have likely ground it to a halt. The Atlanta Fed’s economic growth tracker currently predicts that GDP will contract by 2.2 percent this quarter. Many analysts believe the US economy is already in recession. Perversely, Trump’s trade policies have been especially harmful to American manufacturers, who are more vulnerable to surging input costs than many other businesses. New orders from manufacturers in New York state hit the lowest level on record this month, according to Federal Reserve data. Service-sector businesses have also drastically scaled back capital investment plans in the face of rising costs.Trump’s culpability for this downturn is unambiguous. It is his trade war that is depressing consumer confidence and deterring business investment by driving up costs and increasing economic uncertainty.Needless to say, if a politician unilaterally orchestrates a recession through trade policies he can’t coherently explain, it is difficult to say that his election was vital for economic growth.But what makes Trump’s tariffs truly antithetical to Andreessen and Horowitz’s purported goals is that they are jeopardizing America’s long-term economic performance and geopolitical stature. One source of American economic might is the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. And Trump’s erratic and belligerent trade policies have shaken global faith in the dollar’s safety. Normally, in times of financial volatility, demand for US dollars and Treasury bonds spikes, as investors seek the security of our currency and debt. But during today’s crisis, the dollar’s value has fallen, while yields on US Treasurys have surged. Many financial analysts believe this could be the beginning of a shift away from the dollar, as global investors rethink the reliability of America’s economic and political institutions. If that proves right, America’s borrowing costs would durably increase while its consumers’ purchasing power would lastingly fall, trends that would undermine the nation’s long-term growth. Meanwhile, it is hard to see how anyone preoccupied with enhancing American global power — particularly, relative to China — could be pleased with Trump’s first three months. By violating the terms of America’s existing trade agreements — including some he personally negotiated — Trump undermined our nation’s diplomatic credibility. And by imposing across-the-board tariffs on core US allies, he led European and Asian powers to consider the possibility that China is the more stable and reliable global superpower.In recent days, the Trump administration sought to rally America’s allies into a united front against Chinese trade abuses. But it is struggling to mount such an alliance, according to the Wall Street Journal, because “many European and Asian partners aren’t sure to what extent they are still allied with Washington.” Rather than becoming more adversarial to Beijing, some in the EU are calling for the bloc to end its cooperation with American efforts to starve China of cutting-edge technology.Trump is gutting the tech right’s favorite kind of government spendingTrump’s assault on American economic performance and technological progress extends beyond the realm of trade policy. His haphazard cuts to federal funding for both government agencies and private research have been similarly devastating. In their manifesto last year, Andreessen and Horowitz attributed “American technology leadership” partly to “our higher education system, and long-term government investment in scientific research.”Yet the Trump administration has sought to choke off funding to these sources of innovation. Since taking office, it has canceled or frozen billions of dollars in federal science funding and choked off further funds to top research universities, such as Harvard. Economists widely believe this general austerity will slow technological progress and economic growth. Research has estimated that every dollar invested in scientific research and development yields $5 in economic gains.What’s worse, the Trump administration has specifically targeted some of the most promising lines of medical research. Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines are among the greatest medical breakthroughs of the past decade. They promise to limit the toll of future pandemics and advance treatments for some of the world’s worst diseases. One recent study suggested an mRNA-based therapy inhibited the recurrence of pancreatic cancer in some patients.Nevertheless, the Trump administration has discouraged universities from seeking grants for mRNA research, announcing all such grants would be reported to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — a staunch critic of mRNA technology — for review.Trump’s spending cuts have undermined economic progress on other fronts. For example, the administration has proposed $20 billion in cuts to the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO), which provides long-term capital to domestic energy projects that advance America’s strategic interests. Its lending has successfully promoted nuclear energy (one of Andreessen’s avowed causes), mineral mining, and gas infrastructure. Even before Trump, it was already leanly staffed. According to Thomas Hochman of the Foundation for American Innovation, most asset management firms employ roughly 500 employees for every $100 billion in managed assets; LPO has employed closer to 350. In a letter to the administration, 30 think tanks and energy companies suggested that large cuts to LPO’s funding could undermine American energy production.Meanwhile, Trump’s layoffs at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are slowing drug development. With the FDA too short-staffed to fulfill its core functions in a timely manner, companies have been forced to postpone clinical trials and drug testing for new medical treatments. The administration is chasing scientific talent out of the USFinally, the Trump administration is jeopardizing America’s access to the most fundamental economic resource: skilled labor. Among the list of pro-growth policies that Andreessen and Horowitz endorsed in their “Little Tech Agenda” last year was an “Expansion of high-skilled immigration to encourage foreign graduates of American universities and others to build new companies and industries here.”But Trump has done the very opposite, exiling foreign students and recent graduates from the United States, thereby discouraging others from immigrating to the country.Specifically, his administration has taken to abruptly terminating foreign students’ visas and ordering them to leave the country. According to a database from Inside Higher Ed, the State Department has changed the legal status of more than 1,000 students and recent graduates at over 170 colleges and universities. In some of these cases, no clear rationale for the visa revocation has been articulated. In many, the cause seems to be the most minor legal infractions, such as receiving a speeding ticket. The White House has also seemingly empowered immigration officials to menace legal immigrants, including esteemed scientists. Kseniia Petrova graduated from a renowned Russian physics and technology institute before being recruited by Harvard Medical School. When Trump took office, she had been working on an investigation into slowing cellular damage from aging. But in February, she was detained at Boston Logan International Airport for failing to declare frog embryos she had transported from France at her university’s request. Normally, this would incur a small fine. Instead, the customs official terminated her visa on the spot and initiated deportation proceedings. Now, she is stuck in a detention center in Louisiana. All this has sent a very clear message to talented, foreign-born scientists both in the US and abroad. A recent poll by the journal Nature found that 75 percent of US-based scientists say they are considering leaving the country. In response, European countries have been aggressively seeking to lure top scholars out of the United States. There is no high-minded case for TrumpThere are other ways the Trump administration has subverted the tech right’s ostensible ideals. In a post-election podcast, Andreessen and Horowitz complained that, even as the Biden administration had allegedly cracked down on legitimate crypto businesses, it did nothing to combat “all the crazy, fly-by-night meme coins”; Trump proceeded to launch a shady meme coin of his very own.Andreessen also complained that the Biden administration had undermined the rule of law, pressuring businesses into agreements that “you voluntarily agree to it but in an atmosphere of coercion.” This would seem like a fitting description of the Trump White House withholding funds and federal contracts from universities and law firms until those entities agreed to implement the administration’s ideological priorities or provide it with pro bono legal assistance.But it seems unlikely the tech right was ever under the misimpression that Donald Trump had a deep-seated commitment to ethical business practices or lawful government. They were all sentient on January 6, 2021. It is more plausible though that reactionary tech billionaires genuinely believed the Republican would accelerate economic growth and tech progress through tax cuts and deregulation — this is, after all, what global investors seemed to believe in the immediate wake of Trump’s election, if stock market trends are any guide.But Trump has swiftly invalidated the tech right’s high-minded reasons for supporting him. What remains is the grubby, self-interested argument that the crypto industry’s short-term profits matter more than America’s long-term economic health or geopolitical influence. This seems to be a difficult case to make. As Politico has observed, Andreessen’s X feed grew quiet in the wake of “Liberation Day” after he served as one of Trump’s loudest tech evangelists on social media for months. As of this writing, the mogul has not published a post on the platform in over a week.See More:

Shot in the Dark As someone who hates extraction shooters, there's actually a very good reason I'm willing to give Marathon a shot Bungie has been through a lot, but I still trust that those developers still working at the studio can make a killer new game, extraction shooter or no. Image credit: VG247 Article by Connor Makar Staff Writer Published on April 18, 2025 If you've spent any amount of time on the internet as of late, you'll have seen the big game on everyone's mind: Marathon. It's Bungie's next big release, and last week, the whole world was able to sit down and gorge themselves on new gameplay footage. The game looks pretty darn good, if I say so myself. It looks as though we might be getting a new avenue for that Bungie quality that has kept fans loyal all these years. But, some are skeptical. There's good reason why, but after weighing up both sides, I'm still moving forward with optimism when it comes to Marathon. I was shocked to find myself excited at the gameplay trailer. I have struggled more with extraction shooters than I'd care to admit. I came too late to Escape from Tarkov, only dipping my toes in when cheating issues were at their problematic height, and what time un-murdered I did spend in the game felt largely unappealing. The Forever Winter nearly won me over, with its doomed future of a world in the midst of permanent robot holocaust, but once the aesthetics wore off I grew tired of scavenging for scraps. This happened over and over, and each time I just could feel the same hooks others had in me. It seemed to me that it wasn't meant to be. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. Yet, for some reason, Marathon has caught my interest. I am not a diehard Destiny fan. I played a bit of the game for work, and have enjoyed the odd exotic quest here and there, but I've never dropped more than a month or so into the game at a time, with yearly chasms between my sessions. I have always admired the work Bungie has done from afar, though, and I think maybe it's some of that Bungie magic that could make all the difference. I should clarify straight away, I'm not referring to the magic that execs seem to believe their staff can use to put out a growing game while slashing budgets. I refer - of course - to the talent of their artists, combat designers, and countless others. What we saw from recent Marathon gameplay is exactly what I expected from Bungie. A game that's visually stunning, and not just in a "look at all that raytracing" kind of stunning. I mean like a real distinct art direction. There's no game really out there at the moment that gives off the same vibe, certainly not one with Bungie's budget. When hopping into a new genre and taking on the big hitters that've already fostered a community, you can't just push out something that'll blend into the crowd. I mean look at this. You can't say it's not unique, and intriguing to look at. | Image credit: Bungie The weapons, environments, and the characters themselves all scream out "hey look, I'm something new". It all blends together an obvious futuristic aesthetic with hints of retro tech here and there. It's set in what looks to be this far-future space dystopia, sure. But it contrasts that with a vibrancy that pops out and drowns out the sort of dreary misery you'd see from other developers looking to make a game in a similar setting. The artists at Bungie have, through the Destiny series, proven that when given freedom to push the boundaries in a new setting that they can really release some extraordinary work. From the small glimpse we have, I'm getting that same wanderlust I felt back when I saw The Hive for the first time. Then there's the action we see. Tight, fast, co-operative first person shooting that makes good use of the setting with interesting abilities and quirky takes on modern weaponry. The gameplay trailer is sure to emphasize that Bungie is bringing its "best-in-class first person multiplayer action to the forefront", and yeah while that stuck me as a little self-congratulatory for my British sensibilities this pat on the back isn't exactly undeserved. Destiny has had absolutely killer PvP for years upon years. Many players don't care for the raids and narrative Destiny is better known for (instead sticking to the Crucible), and it's hard to argue they're in the wrong for doing so. This will only help Marathon. The extraction shooters we have right now are predominantly military sims, or at least somewhat grounded in realistic gunplay. What Bungie has is decades of sci-fi FPS experience that it can use to make sure Marathon doesn't just look like something fresh, but that it feels like something fresh too. That, I feel, will be the bigger reason folks will stick around rather than hop back into more senior titles in the genre. // Bungie also has ample three player team experience too, which can only help with Marathon. | Image credit: Bungie I think the game looks totally solid, I think Bungie has earned some trust when it comes to creating a FPS that feels good to play, especially in a futuristic setting. What I do concede may be the game's biggest barrier is its price point. Look, it's no secret that live service games have a hard time gaining a significant following. That's been the case for years, as evidenced by an ever-growing graveyard of admirable attempts that have come out and wasted away. It's likely worse now than it's ever been, with a potential recession coming on, consoles and PC parts potentially getting more expensive, and everyone pinching pennies. It's not an easy thing to sell people on a multiplayer only game with no offline single player content whatsoever. Titanfall struggled to do it, and that was a game so good it should have defined a generation. Here's my counter argument. Bungie, through Destiny 2, certainly has had practice rolling out an engaging narrative through limited-time major updates. While many out there will jump into a major expansion, play the new raid and dip out, those who stick around know that the team can keep interesting threads going. These aren't just for story nerds too, interesting new game modes come hot and ready from Bungie's oven all the time. This, in spite of multiple waves of layoffs and a reduction in Destiny 2's scope. If there's any FPS company out there who I believe has a good shot at actually making a live service extraction shooter with compelling enough updates to warrant a buy-in, it's Bungie. Now, this is something the Marathon team will have to prove to people, and continue proving for months. I surely hope they've got staff working hard on post-launch plans as we speak. If they can walk the walk, with Marathon looking how it's looking, I've got to say I'm officially excited for Marathon. Past experiences aside.

Image: Sony Computer EntertainmentIf you owned a PlayStation in the mid-'90s to early 2000s, you'll likely be aware of PaRappa the Rapper. This wacky rhythm game from musician Masaya Matsuura sees you play as a hip-hop hound trying to win the love of his life, a humanoid flower (yes, really). It's often considered the title that kickstarted the rhythm genre and, if our brief description hadn't teased it already, it was properly weird. The question is, why are we talking about this classic PS1 game on a Nintendo site? Bear with us, there is a connection here. Our good friends over on our sister site Time Extension were recently lucky enough to sit down with Matsuura-san himself to talk all things PaRappa, game development and music. Towards the end of the interview, the conversation moved to Switch 2 and, as you might expect from the mind behind the rapping dog, Matsuura-san has some pretty trippy hopes for the upcoming console. While the dev shot down any chatter about returning to the industry any time soon ("I don't have anything in mind, so I guess not"), he had the following to say when asked if Switch 2 could tempt him back: "I'm not interested in a 'switch' itself. I am interested in the darkness that is illuminated by the light that it turns on". Woah. Not the kind of down-to-earth response we usually hear. And there's even more! Time Extension inquired whether this means Matsuura-san is more interested in the act of creation rather than the tools themselves, to which he replied with an equally out-of-the-box statement. "That's true, but creation without tools is almost impossible, so tools are also important," Matsuura-san told Time Extension, "I want a mental switch that will turn on a new light inside me. I hope that Nintendo Switch 2 is that". Crikey. Here we were hoping Switch 2 would land a decent 3D Mario game, while the PaRappa creator is after something that triggers massive inspiration. No pressure, eh Nintendo? Of course, the "new light" that we're now all secretly hoping will be triggered inside Matsuura-san is a new PaRappa on Switch 2. It seems unlikely, we'll admit, but hey, we're getting Patapon, Everybody's Golf and Raidou, who's to say another PS joint won't join the list? Be sure to head over to Time Extension to read the full interview with Matsuura-san. And if you want to hear what even more developers made of the Switch 2 announcement, we recently spoke to a bunch of them about reactions, dev kits and plans for the future. What devs make of Switch 2 Are you hoping to be equally inspired by Switch 2? Let us know in the comments. [source timeextension.com] See Also Share:0 1 Jim came to Nintendo Life in 2022 and, despite his insistence that The Minish Cap is the best Zelda game and his unwavering love for the Star Wars prequels (yes, really), he has continued to write news and features on the site ever since. Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment... Related Articles Round Up: The First Impressions Of Donkey Kong Bananza Are In He's finally back... Where To Pre-Order Nintendo Switch 2 Where to buy Switch 2 consoles, accessories & games Round Up: The First Impressions Of 'Drag x Drive' For Switch 2 Are In "A showcase for dual-mouse mode" Gallery: Here's Switch 2 Compared To (Almost) Every Other Handheld ...including the Steam Deck

OpenAI is upgrading ChatGPT’s “memory” again. In a changelog and support pages on OpenAI’s website Thursday, the company quietly announced “Memory with Search,” a feature that lets ChatGPT draw on memories — details from past conversations, such as your favorite foods — to inform queries when the bot searches the web. The update comes shortly after OpenAI beefed up ChatGPT’s long-in-the-tooth memory tool with the ability to reference a user’s entire chat history. It’s seemingly a part of OpenAI’s ongoing effort to differentiate ChatGPT from rival chatbots like Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, the latter of which also offers a memory feature. As OpenAI explains in its documentation, when Memory with Search is enabled and a user types in a prompt that requires a web search, ChatGPT will rewrite that prompt into a search query that “may also leverage relevant information from memories” to “make the query better and more useful.” For example, for a user that ChatGPT “knows” from memory is vegan and lives in San Francisco, ChatGPT may rewrite the prompt “what are some restaurants near me that I’d like” as “good vegan restaurants, San Francisco.” Memory with Search can be disabled by disabling Memory in the ChatGPT settings menu. It’s not clear which users have it yet — some accounts on X report they began seeing Memory with Search earlier this week.

We’ve got a must see trailer! Learn how ILM made created the groundbreaking visual magic on some of Lucasfilm’s most memorable films in the three-part series, Light and Magic, produced by Imagine Documentaries. See industry stars like Hal Hickel, Doug Chiang, Rob Coleman, Dennis Muren, John Knoll, and the great George Lucas talk about the most challenging and revolutionary period in VFX history: the dawn of digital. Now streaming on Disney+. From creating the first fully realized CG character to solving the challenge of digital water, it is an era that finds ILM scaling new heights of innovation despite dramatic setbacks. The second season once again puts you front and center in how the magic was made! Joe Johnston directs; the executive producers are Brian Grazer, Ron Howard, Justin Wilkes, Sara Bernstein, Johnston, Lawrence Kasdan, Kathleen Kennedy and Carrie Beck. Jacqui Lopez, Ted Schillinger and Michael Garcia serve as co-executive producers. The series producers are Meredith Kaulfers and Christopher St. John, and Nicole Pusateri is the supervising producer. Source: Disney+ Dan Sarto is Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Animation World Network.