WTF?! Garbage collectors often stumble upon valuable or undamaged items, but finding a mostly functional, high-end PC might rank among one of the luckiest recent finds. Although the components are a few years old, the system booted flawlessly after a few smart repairs and minor replacements. Redditor and garbage truck driver "Siezio" recently shared, then deleted, photos of a gaming PC he salvaged from the trash and easily restored. The rig included an AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X, a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti with 11GB of VRAM, and 32GB of DDR4 RAM.The only missing component was internal storage, and Siezio replaced the water-damaged power supply unit (PSU) as a precaution. After thoroughly cleaning the other components with isopropyl alcohol and letting them dry for two days, the system powered on without issue.While Siezio had previously found other PCs in the trash, they were either severely damaged or decades out of date. In contrast, the 3970X and 2080 Ti are relatively modern, only five and six years old, respectively. Both were enthusiast-class components at launch and still hold up well today.The Threadripper 3970X is a 32-core monster that debuted in 2019 with a $1,999 price tag. We gave the workstation processor a glowing review upon its 2019 release.Meanwhile, the GPU, initially priced at $999, was a flagship beast when it debuted in 2018. It last appeared in our benchmark tests for Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 last September, where it performed similarly to recent mid-range graphics cards like the RTX 3060 Ti. Purchasing a used 3970X and 2080 Ti together in 2024 would likely cost around $1,000. // Related StoriesUnsurprisingly, many commenters responded to Siezio's discovery with jealousy, wondering why someone would throw away a PC that likely cost over $3,000 without at least attempting to sell it. The hardware was released just before events like the cryptocurrency mining boom, import tariffs, and supply chain disruptions drove up electronics prices.Though the PC is the most valuable salvage from Siezio's three-and-a-half-year career, it is far from the only useful discovery. The truck driver has also found a power drill worth 250, multiple ratchet sets, an unopened Bluetooth keyboard that now controls his TV, and a chainsaw that only required a new spark plug.Furthermore, nearly all of Siezio's car tools were rescued from the trash. While most of the items were initially broken, repair guides on YouTube made restoring them straightforward.Images via Tom's Hardware

AI startup Perplexity has launched a new shopping feature that it describes as a one-stop solution where you can research and purchase products.Available initially for U.S.-based users of its paid Pro subscription tier before expanding soon internationally, Perplexity Shopping is a shot across the bows of rival services like Google and Amazon as the company seeks to attract more users to its AI chatbot while building out related services like search and online shopping.Recommended VideosYou can use it to research and make purchases on all things like building your library, buying electronics for throwing a party, and so on, the San Francisco-based company said in a thread on X that also included a short video (below) showing the new feature in action. Introducing Perplexity Shopping: a one-stop solution where you can research and purchase products. It marks a big leap forward in how we serve our users empowering seamless native actions right from an answer. Shopping online just got 10x more easy and fun. pic.twitter.com/gjMZO6VIzQ Perplexity (@perplexity_ai) November 18, 2024The video shows how you can enter queries in a conversational way, just as you would with any other AI chatbot. It also lets you refine results via follow-up responses like, Under $100.Perplexity Shopping includes features such as a one-click checkout designed to save you time by having purchases fully processed within the app instead of being transferred across to the merchants site. Just save your shipping and billing information through our secure portal and select Buy with Pro to place your order, the company explained, adding that all Buy with Pro orders come with free shipping. In cases where Buy with Pro isnt available, you will be redirected to the merchants website to complete the purchase.The new tool also includes a Snap to Shop visual search tool that shows you relevant products in response to any images that you upload, helping you to find an item even when you dont have a name for it.In an apparent swipe at Google, Perplexity points out that its shopping suggestions arent sponsored, describing its results as unbiased recommendations that are powered by AI and based on in-platform reviews. When you ask Perplexity a shopping question, youll still get the precise, objective answers you expect, plus easy-to-read product cards showing the most relevant items, along with key details presented in a simple, visual format.Away from shopping, however, Perplexity recently revealed that it will start inserting ads into its general chatbot responses for users in the U.S. in the form of sponsored follow-up questions and paid media positioned to the side of an answer.Editors Recommendations

Stunning footage from the International Space Station (ISS) shows a glorious-looking aurora shimmering above our planet.Captured last month and shared by the ISS on X over the weekend, the footage (below) begins with a faint green tinge on Earths horizon as seen from the space station some 257 miles up. But as the video continues, the green tinge develops into something far more spectacular, all against a gorgeous star-filled backdrop.Recommended VideosThe International Space Station soars above an aurora blanketing the Earth underneath a starry sky before orbiting into a sunrise 257 miles above Quebec, Canada, on October 30, 2024, NASA said in a message accompanying the 60-second video.RelatedThe International Space Station soars above an aurora blanketing the Earth underneath a starry sky before orbiting into a sunrise 257 miles above Quebec, Canada, on Oct. 30, 2024. pic.twitter.com/fqp7tu57CZ International Space Station (@Space_Station) November 16, 2024Aurora, which are caused by the interaction of solar wind with the Earths magnetic field and atmosphere, are a common sight for astronauts aboard the ISS, especially during periods of heightened solar activity.NASA astronaut Matthew Dominick, who recently departed the station after a six-month stay in orbit, referred to aurora as insane, and shared an incredible video showing one streaming behind Boeings Starliner spacecraft when it was docked at the ISS earlier this year.After witnessing aurora from the orbital outpost, another NASA astronaut, Jasmin Moghbeli, commented, Every single time Im amazed at how alive and beautiful our planet is, while current ISS astronaut Don Pettit described a recent experience as, stunning. He added: We were not flying above the aurora, we were flying in the aurora. And it was blood red.Just last month, Pettit, who at 69 is NASAs oldest serving astronaut, expressed the phenomenon in his own unique way, saying: The sun goes burp and the atmosphere turns red.Editors Recommendations

Tis the season for sleuths and secrets.

Meditations on the way songs affect us at the deepest level, and reflections on the joys of performing and composing.

Humbling findings Trust in scientists hasnt recovered from COVID. Some humility could help. Intellectual humility could win back much-needed trust in science, study finds Beth Mole Nov 18, 2024 4:52 pm | 110 Illustration of a scientist speaking in front of an audience. Credit: Getty | BRO Vector Illustration of a scientist speaking in front of an audience. Credit: Getty | BRO Vector Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreScientists could win back trust lost during the COVID-19 pandemic if they just showed a little intellectual humility, according to a study published Monday in Nature Human Behavior.It's no secret that scientistsand the science generallytook a hit during the health crisis. Public confidence in scientists fell from 87 percent in April 2000 to a low of 73 percent in October 2023, according to survey data from the Pew Research Center. And the latest Pew data released last week suggests it will be an uphill battle to regain what was lost, with confidence in scientists only rebounding three percentage points, to 76 percent in a poll from October.Building trustThe new study in Nature Human Behavior may guide the way forward, though. The study encompasses five smaller studies probing the perceptions of scientists' trustworthiness, which previous research has linked to willingness to follow research-based recommendations."These are anxiety-provoking times for people, and they feel uncertain about who to trust and which recommendations to follow," said study co-author Karina Schumann, a psychology professor at the University of Pittsburgh. "We wanted to know what can help people feel more confident putting their faith in scientists working to find solutions to some of the complex global challenges we are facing."Schumann and her colleagues homed in on the role of intellectual humility. Unlike general humility, intellectual humility focuses on the limitations of one's knowledge. Specifically, a scientist with high intellectual humility would show a willingness to admit gaps in their knowledge, listen to input from others, and update their views based on new evidence. These characteristics may be viewed by the public as particularly critical among scientists, given that science is rife with uncertainties and lacks complete and unequivocal conclusions, especially from individual studies.There's also good reason to think that scientists may be doing a poor job of displaying intellectual humility. The latest survey data from Pew found that 47 percent of Americans perceive scientists as feeling superior to others, and 52 percent indicated that scientists communicate poorly.Study seriesFor a look into how intellectual humility could help, Schumann and her colleagues first surveyed 298 people and looked to see if there was a link between viewing scientists as intellectually humble and believing in scientific topics considered polarizing. The sub-studystudy 1found strong links between the perceived intellectual humility of scientists, trustworthiness, and support for human-driven climate change, lifesaving vaccinations, and genetically modified foods.In studies 2 through 4, the researchers experimentally tested expressions of intellectual humility (IH)either high or low levelsand how they affected perceived trustworthiness. In study 2, for instance, 317 participants read one of three articles involving a fictional scientist named Susan Moore, who was researching treatments for long COVID. There was a neutral article that functioned as a control, and articles with cues that Dr. Moore had either high or low IH. The cues for high IH included text such as: "Dr. Moore is not afraid to admit when she doesnt yet know something." For low IH, the article included statements such as: "Dr. Moore is not afraid to assert what she knows."The high IH article spurred significantly more trust in Dr. Moore than the low IH articles, the researchers found. However, there wasn't a statistically significant difference in trust between the control and high IH groups. This might suggest that people may have a default assumption of high IH in scientists without other cuesor they are especially annoyed by low IH or arrogance among scientists.Study 3 essentially replicated study 2, but with the tweak that the articles varied whether the fictional scientist was male or female, in case gendered expectations affected how people perceived humility and trustworthiness. The results from 369 participants indicated that gender didn't affect the link between IH and trust. Similarly, in study 4, with 371 participants, the researchers varied the race/ethnicity of the scientist, finding again that the link between IH and trust remained."Together, these four studies offer compelling evidence that perceptions of scientists IH play an important role in both trust in scientists and willingness to follow their research-based recommendations," the authors concluded.Next stepsIn the final study involving 679 participants, researchers examined different ways that scientists might express IH, including whether the IH was expressed as a personal trait, limitations of research methods, or as limitations of research results. Unexpectedly, the strategies to express IH by highlighting limitations in the methods and results of research both increased perceptions of IH, but shook trust in the research. Only personal IH successfully boosted perceptions of IH without backfiring, the authors report.The finding suggests that more research is needed to guide scientists on how best to express high IH. But, it's clear that low IH is not good. "[W]e encourage scientists to be particularly mindful of displaying low IH, such as by expressing overconfidence, being unwilling to course correct or disrespecting others views," the researchers caution.Overall, Schumann said she was encouraged by the team's findings. "They suggest that the public understands that science isnt about having all the answers; it's about asking the right questions, admitting what we dont yet understand, and learning as we go. Although we still have much to discover about how scientists can authentically convey intellectual humility, we now know people sense that a lack of intellectual humility undermines the very aspects of science that make it valuable and rigorous. This is a great place to build from."Beth MoleSenior Health ReporterBeth MoleSenior Health Reporter Beth is Ars Technicas Senior Health Reporter. Beth has a Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attended the Science Communication program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She specializes in covering infectious diseases, public health, and microbes. 110 Comments

Allergic to "3" Valve developers discuss why Half Life 2: Episode 3 was abandoned Anniversary doc also includes footage of unused ice gun, blob enemies. Kyle Orland Nov 18, 2024 4:06 pm | 32 The ice gun would have been the main mechanical gimmick in Half-Life 2: Episode 3. Credit: Valve The ice gun would have been the main mechanical gimmick in Half-Life 2: Episode 3. Credit: Valve Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreAfter Ars spent Half-Life 2's 20th anniversary week looking back at the game's history and impact, Valve marked the occasion with a meaty two-hour YouTube documentary featuring insider memories from the team behind the game itself. Near the end of that documentary, longtime Valve watchers also get a chance to see footage of the long-promised but never-delivered Half-Life 2: Episode 3and hear more about what led the project to be abandoned.The Episode 3 footage included in the documentary focuses heavily on a new ice gun that would have served as the episode's main new feature. Players would have been able to use that gun to freeze enemies, set up ice walls as makeshift cover, or construct icy ledges to make their way down sheer cliff faces. The developers also describe a so-called "Silver Surfer mode" that would have let players extrude a line of ice in their path then slide along it at slippery speeds.The Episode 3 developers were also working on a new, blob-like enemy that could absorb other blobs to grow or split into segments to get around small barriers or pass through grates.Missing the momentAccording to the documentary, Valve spent about six months working on Episode 3 before deciding to pull all hands in to work on Left 4 Dead. At that point, the Episode 3 project was still an unordered set of playable levels set in the Arctic, with few story beats and concepts between them. Developers quoted in the documentary said it would have taken years of more work to get the episode into a releasable state.By the time work on Left 4 Dead was wrapping up in 2008, Valve was still publicly saying that it hoped Episode 3 would be ready by 2010. But after so much time spent away from the Episode 3 project, developers found it was hard to restart the momentum for a prototype that now felt somewhat dated. The technology behind these blob-like enemies ended up being reused for the paint in Portal 2. Credit: Valve Looking back, Valve Engineer David Speyrer said it was "tragic and almost comical" that "by the time we considered going back to Episode 3, the argument was made like, 'Well, we missed it. It's too late now. And we really need to make a new engine to continue the Half-Life series and all that.' And now that just seems, in hindsight, so wrong. We could have definitely gone back and spent two years to make Episode 3."Despite the new weapons and mechanics that were already in the works for Episode 3, many developers quoted in the documentary cite a kind of fatigue that had set in after so much time and effort focused on a single franchise. "A lot of us had been doing Half-Life for eight-plus years" designer and composer Kelly Bailey noted.That lengthy focus on a single franchise helps explain why some Valve developers were eager to work on anything else by that time in their careers. "I think everybody that worked on Half-Life misses working on that thing," Engineer Scott Dalton said. "But it's also hard not to be like, 'Man, I've kind of seen every way that you can fight an Antlion,' or whatever. And so you wanna get some space away from it until you can come back to it with fresh eyes."After the first two Half-Life 2 episodes were received less well than the base game itself, many developers cited in the documentary also said they felt pressure to go "much bigger" for Episode 3. Living up to that pressure, and doing justice to the fan expectations for the conclusion of the three-episode saga, proved to be too much for the team."You cant get lazy and say, 'Oh, were moving the story forward,' Valve co-founder Gabe Newell said of the pressure. "Thats copping out of your obligation to gamers, right? Yes, of course they love the story. They love many, many aspects of it. But sort of saying that your reason to do it is because people want to know what happens next... you know, we couldve shipped it, like, it wouldnt have been that hard."You know, the failure wasmy personal failure was being stumped," Newell continued. "Like, I couldnt figure out why doing Episode 3 was pushing anything forward."Kyle OrlandSenior Gaming EditorKyle OrlandSenior Gaming Editor Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, writing primarily about the business, tech, and culture behind video games. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He once wrote a whole book about Minesweeper. 32 Comments Prev story

It can be hard to keep weight offTero Vesalainen/Getty ImagesPeople with obesity who lose weight often put it back on, which may partly be driven by lasting changes to the DNA within their fat cells, a discovery that could one day lead to new treatments.Around 85 per cent of people with overweight or obesity who lose at least a tenth of their body weight regain it within a year. AdvertisementThat is partly because it is hard to maintain low-calorie diets for a long period of time, though that probably plays a relatively small role, says Laura Catharina Hinte at the Federal Institute of Technology Zurich in Switzerland. It cant be that we all dont have enough willpower to maintain lost weight.Studies have also shown that the brain interprets a sharp drop in body fat as dangerous and responds by making the body burn less energy.To learn more about this process, Hinte and her colleagues analysed fat tissue collected from 20 people with obesity just before they had bariatric surgery, which shrinks the stomach to make people feel fuller sooner, and again two years later, when they had lost at least a quarter of their initial body weight. They also looked at fat tissue from 18 people with a healthy weight. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday.Sign up to newsletterThe researchers sequenced a type of genetic molecule called RNA, which encodes proteins, in fat cells. They found that people with obesity had increased or decreased levels of more than 100 RNA molecules compared with people of a healthy weight, and these differences persisted at two years after weight loss.These changes seem to ramp up inflammation and disrupt how fat cells store and burn fat, both of which raise the risk of future weight gain, says team member Ferdinand von Meyenn, also at the Federal Institute of Technology Zurich.To explore whether these RNA changes might drive rebound weight gain, the researchers first confirmed that similar changes persisted after obese mice lost weight. They then fed these mice and mice of a healthy weight a high-fat diet for one month. While the previously obese mice gained 14 grams of weight, on average, the other mice gained just 5 grams.The team also found that fat cells from the previously obese mice took up more fat and sugar when grown in a lab dish than those from the other mice. Together, the results show how obesity-linked RNA changes may increase future weight gain, says von Meyenn.Finally, the team found that molecular tags, or epigenetic marks, on DNA in the fat cells seemed to drive the obesity-linked RNA changes. These alter RNA levels by changing the structure of the DNA that encodes them.While the study didnt look for these molecular tags in the people they studied, or examine whether they regained the weight they lost, the findings probably translate from mice to humans, says Henriette Kirchner at the University of Lbeck in Germany.This is based on similarities between the physiology of these species and how the environment can change the way their genes work, known as epigenetics, she says. In the decades to come, drugs that target epigenetics could help treat obesity, says Kirchner.Journal reference:Nature DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-08165-7Topics:obesity

Russias plan to reach net zero by 2060 relies on existing forests to absorb ongoing carbon emissionsVarnakovR/ShutterstockCountries are taking a shortcut to net-zero emissions by including forests and other passive carbon sinks in their climate plans, in a tactic that will thwart global efforts to halt climate change, leading researchers have warned.Relying on natural carbon sinks to soak up ongoing carbon emissions from human activity will condemn the world to continued warming. That is according to the researchers who first developed the science behind net-zero emissions, and who have today launched a highly unusual intervention to call out nations and companies for misusing the concept. AdvertisementThis paper is a call to clarify to people what was originally meant by net zero, Myles Allen at the University of Oxford told a press briefing on 14 November.Natural sinks such as forests and peat bogs play a vital role in Earths natural carbon cycle by absorbing some of the carbon in the atmosphere. But existing sinks cannot be relied upon to offset ongoing greenhouse gas emissions.If they are used in this way, global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide will remain stable once net zero is reached, and warming will continue for centuries because of the way the oceans absorb heat, Allen warned. You could think you are on a path of 1.5C, and end up with warming of well over 2C, he said. This ambiguity could, in effect, cost us the goals of the Paris Agreement. Get a dose of climate optimism delivered straight to your inbox every month.Sign up to newsletterTo stop global temperatures rising, emissions need to reach net zero without relying on passive uptake by the land and oceans. This allows existing natural sinks to continue absorbing excess CO2, bringing down atmospheric concentrations of the gas and offsetting ongoing warming from the deep ocean.However, many countries already count passive land sinks such as forests as greenhouse gas removal in their national carbon accounts. Some, including Bhutan, Gabon and Suriname, have even declared themselves to be already net zero, thanks to their existing extensive forest cover.Others have set long-term net-zero targets based on this approach. Russia, for example, has promised to reach net-zero emissions by 2060, but the plan relies heavily on using its existing forests to absorb ongoing carbon emissions.Maybe you will get some countries deliberately using this in a mischievous way, Glen Peters at the CICERO Center for International Climate Research in Oslo, Norway, told the briefing. This is going to be more problematic in countries with large forest areas as a share of their total land.The team fears this issue will become more acute as carbon markets develop and the pressure on nations to decarbonise intensifies. As carbon becomes more valuable, the pressure to define any removal you can as a negative emission, in order potentially to be able to sell it on the carbon offset markets, will become much stronger, said Allen.Nations and companies with net-zero targets in place should revise their approach to exclude passive carbon uptake from their account, the team says.Natural sinks can count as carbon removal if they are additional to what already exists: for example, a new forest is planted or a peat bog is rewetted. However, these kinds of natural carbon sinks are vulnerable to climate impacts such as wildfires, droughts and the spread of invasive species, making them unreliable for long-term sequestration.This hasnt stopped nations from leaning heavily on these natural sinks in their net-zero strategies. One 2022 study found many countries, including the US, France, Cambodia and Costa Rica, plan to rely on forest carbon or other nature-based removal to balance out ongoing emissions. Many national strategies bet on the increase of carbon sinks in forests and soils as a means of achieving long-term targets, the studys authors wrote.Natural carbon sinks must be preserved, but should not be relied on to balance out ongoing emissions, stressed Allen. Instead, he urges nations to aim for geological net zero, which would ensure that all ongoing carbon emissions are balanced with long-term carbon sequestration in underground stores.Countries need to acknowledge the need for geological net zero, he said. Which means if you are still generating carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels by mid-century, you need to have a plan to put the carbon dioxide they generate back into the ground.Geological net zero seems a sensible global goal for countries to aim for, says Harry Smith at the University of East Anglia, UK. It helps clarify a lot of the ambiguity that plagues the way countries currently account for removals on land.But that could have knock-on consequences for climate ambition, he warns. What might the new politics of geological net zero be? How might this impact the climate ambitions of governments if geological net zero moves the goalposts on their climate strategy?Journal reference:Nature DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-08326-8Topics:

Many major companies are asking employees to return to the office full or part-time.In-person work can aid mentoring, communication, and camaraderie among staff.But problems in these areas may persist if bosses lack key skills and don't focus on the future.Companies are betting that asking employees to return to the office will help boost creativity. HR pros say that's only the start.While being physically present may boost collaboration and the flow of ideas, workplace specialists told Business Insider that RTO mandates alone might not be the answer.To get the rest of the way, companies need bosses and a culture that fosters creativity."You can have a fully in-person organization and still not optimize those things because your culture and your leadership don't bring them out in their people," said Leena Rinne, the vice president of coaching at the corporate training platform Skillsoft."If you have a really stifling and unsafe culture, but you're trying to get more creativity, bringing people back together is not going to get you there."'Water cooler effect'Amazon CEO Andy Jassy recently told all corporate employees they had to be in the office five days a week. Goldman Sachs, Salesforce, and JPMorgan have done the same.Bosses want "the water cooler effect" of spontaneous collaboration, said Cary Cooper, a professor of organizational psychology and health at the Manchester Business School.Whether they get it is another question research on RTO benefits has been inconclusive.Some studies found that returning to the office doesn't really improve employee performance and may drive them to quit. Others suggest it can improve collaboration and strengthen bonds between employees.Alongside any office-return rules, employers should "rethink the role of the manager," Cooper said. He recommended prioritizing soft skills that will help leaders motivate their teams, particularly Gen Zers new to the workplace."We've been recruiting the wrong kind of manager for this generation," he said.Those staff "want a better work-life balance," Cooper said."And they want a good quality of working life. That means somebody has to create that, and that somebody has to have good social skills."Workers often don't love being asked to return to the office. At Dell, almost half of US staff rejected the back-to-office call. At Amazon, some employees have joked that they would rather be fired than comply.Jeri Doris, the SVP of people at the HR and payroll platform Justworks, said companies need to justify the working setup they choose, not just mandate it."We need to treat people like adults," Doris said. The goal should be "creating an environment where people can grow, thrive, and feel seen."Doris recommended tying office attendance to particular tasks, like coming in for particular meetings.The pull of 'executive nostalgia'Rinne, the workplace-coaching pro, cautioned against an "executive nostalgia" that pushes old-school bosses to want workers where they can see them."We're not going back to the workplace of yesteryear," she said. "It's different now. We feel different. We have different skills."She said that creativity and personal resilience at work both proliferated with the rise of remote work. Poorly-executed returns can erode them."If we want more collaboration, what do our people and our leaders need to be doing to accelerate collaboration?" Rinne said. "Because it's not just me and you sitting in the same room that makes us collaborate."Overall, strategy isn't what gets results, Rinne said. "It's your people who get your results," she said."How I show up to work every day drives what I accomplish and how I contribute to this organization," she added. "If I'm leaning in and excited about it, that's very different from leaning out and doing the bare minimum."