EarthIn Land of Marble, photographer Alessandro Gandolfi explores the past and future of Italy's striking marble quarries 8 January 2025 The town of Colonnata (Italy),Alessandro Gandolfi/Panos PicturesAt the foot of striking marble quarries in central Italys Apuan Alps sits the village of Colonnata (pictured above) a quaint place famed for its pork lard and quarry workers. The stone extracted from outside the nearby city of Carrara, including from the white marble quarry in the image below, is widely regarded as the purest and most valuable in the world.Alessandro Gandolfi/Panos PicturesBefore modern technology, enormous blocks of marble were transported down the mountainside manually with cables, ropes and a sled in a method known as lizzatura, as recreated in the image below.AdvertisementParticipants take part in the historic lizzatura,Alessandro Gandolfi/Panos PicturesSince the time of the Roman Empire, the marble was considered the best in the world, says photographer Alessandro Gandolfi, who documented the story of the highly sought-after material in his project Land of Marble. The best sculptors in the world, like Michelangelo, came personally to choose these marbles for their sculptures.Sculpture students work on clay models at the Academy of Fine Arts.Alessandro Gandolfi/Panos PicturesSeveral centuries after the Italian Renaissance, marble remains a staple material for artists. In the image aboove, students at Carraras Academy of Fine Arts first hone their sculpting skills on clay.Beyond its use in art, Carraras marble is often pulverised and used as calcium carbonate to make products such as paper, paint, fertiliser and toothpaste.But the extraction of marble isnt without impact on the environment. We are extracting a little bit too much marble today, says Gandolfi. If we keep going at this rate, you will see the mountains totally destroyed in 500 years time.Topics:

A 'Super Scooper' firefighting plane was grounded after hitting a drone in the skies over LA.It's one of only two Super Scooper planes helping fight the wildfires ravaging the area.The FAA has placed flight restrictions over much of LA's airspace since Thursday afternoon.One of only two Super Scooper planes helping to fight the Los Angeles wildfires has been taken out of action after it collided with a drone.In a statement, the Federal Aviation Administration said that the aircraft landed safely, but LA County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone told the LA Times that it was damaged in the encounter on Thursday."We hit a drone this afternoon first one," Marrone said."It put a hole in the wing," he added. "It's grounded now."The aircraft, named the Quebec 1, struck the drone at around 1 p.m. Thursday, according to the LA County Fire Department.Fire services have been operating two Canadair CL-415 firefighting aircraft, known as Super Scoopers, as well as several other aircraft to try to combat the massive wildfires ravaging Southern California.The planes are fitted with tanks that skim from large bodies of water to "scoop" it up and then drop it on fires from above. A Canadair CL-415 Super Scooper firefighting plane dropping water on a California fire in 2014. REUTERS/Jonathan Alcorn "Flying a drone near a wildfire is dangerous and can cost lives," the FAA said in its statement, adding that it's a federal crime to interfere with firefighting efforts on public lands, punishable by up to a year in prison.There's also a civil penalty of up to $75,000 for drone operators who interfere with emergency and wildfire responders during temporary flight restrictions, it said.As of 4.18 p.m. local time on Thursday, the FAA issued the first of three NOTAM flight operating restrictions over large areas above the fires, to allow firefighting aircraft to operate.The FAA statement said that when people fly drones near wildfires, fire response agencies often ground their aircraft to avoid the potential for a midair collision."Delaying airborne response poses a threat to firefighters on the ground, residents, and property in nearby communities, and it can allow wildfires to grow larger," it said. A house burning during the Palisades Fire in California on January 8, 2025. AGUSTIN PAULLIER/AFP/Getty Images California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection spokesperson Chris Thomas told military news site The War Zone that the damaged Super Scooper was one of only two in its arsenal.He also said that other aircraft fighting the blazes had been temporarily grounded as well."This is creating a huge danger," Thomas added. "This is an unprecedented fire. When we ground all aircraft, it could be anywhere from 15 minutes to half an hour. You know how far a fire can spread in half an hour."As of early Friday, almost 36,000 acres had been set on fire, according to official figures.The drone operator has not been identified, but there has been speculation online, with many social media users pointing to photography accounts that have posted aerial images of the fires.Consumer drones hit the headlines last month after a spate of drone sightings over the East Coast raised public anxiety, even after the White House and Pentagon said the drones didn't pose a threat.

Tesla has launched a refreshed Model Y in China as it fights off fierce competition from local rivals.The new Model Y is also available to order in Australia and parts of Asia, but there's no sign of a US release yet.Tesla is under pressure, with annual sales falling even as Chinese competitors like `BYD report booming demand.Tesla has launched an updated version of its most successful car but you can't order it in the US yet.The Elon Musk-run automaker unveiled a long-rumored refresh of the Model Y on Friday, with deliveries set to begin in China in March as the company fights off fierce competition from local EV rivals.The new Model Y will have a longer range than its predecessor and an updated design that includes a Cybertruck-style light bar, according to Tesla's Chinese website.The updated EV is currently available to order in China, parts of Southeast Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. There is currently no word on when it will come to the US or Europe.In China, it will cost 263,500 yuan ($35,900), around $3,000 more expensive than the current starting price of the existing model.The new Model Y's first appearance in China is no surprise, as Tesla is locked in a brutal price war with local EV companies in the world's largest auto market.BYD, Nio, and Zeekr all reported big increases in annual electric vehicle sales earlier this month, with Tesla nemesis BYD announcing it had sold 1.76 million EVs in 2024 on the back of strong demand for its affordable models.Tesla still leads the way, selling 1.79 million vehicles last year, but the carmaker reported its first-ever decline in annual sales in 2024, and is under pressure to meet Elon Musk's ambitious target of 20-30% sales growth this year.Tesla will be hoping a refresh to the Model Y will help it hit that lofty target and refresh an increasingly stale product lineup.The last new vehicle released by the company in 2023 was the Cybertruck, which isn't sold in China and has failed to significantly boost Tesla's sales figures.Some workers on the Cybertruck line in the US have been moved to Model Y production, employees at Tesla's Austin factory told Business Insider.The automaker has said it will release new, affordable EV models in the first half of this year but is yet to share any details, with Musk focusing instead on the steering wheel-less Cybercab he unveiled in October.Tesla did not respond to a request for comment, sent outside normal working hours.

My mom had me when she was 32, and I'm an only child.My dad died when I was 19, and it was just the two of us with my mom.I'm 32 now and don't have kids, but I have two cats that my mom calls grandcats.Last month, I turned 32.My mom gave birth to her only child at 32, and my grandma had my mom, the last ofherseven children, at 32.As an only child, I'm confronting pressure to bring a child into our increasingly thorny world.When I was 19, on a rare vacation without my dad, my mom and I got a call. My dad had died of a brain aneurysm. Losing a parent prematurely sends you reeling. The missing parent, the remaining parent, your family, and genetics all become more precious.Before that, I'd lived in an insulated, attended world. Both parents were the proverbial "helicopters" that circle many only children. In our little unit, my mom (then a nurse practitioner) was the breadwinner. My dad, a writer, was able and willing to handle childcare.Because of rising costs and maternal health risks in the US, I probably won't have children. My parents never overtly pressured me to do anything I didn't want to do. Still, as their only child, I feel guilty for depriving them.My parents encouraged me to achieve my goalsBy definition, my family structure (with a breadwinner mom and stay-at-home dad) was quietly defiant, leaving me pretty unfazed by social gender norms.But societal norms aren't the only source of pressure to reproduce. My parents' priorities were selfless: They prioritized my happiness and career and supported me far beyond the legally required 18 years. Neither demanded that I start my own family or carry on theirs.Falling short of my parents' deepest inner hopes, though, or depriving my mom of some fulfillment she'd never ask of me that's a different form of guilt altogether.Being an only child means I bear sole responsibility for our family's grandchildren. It's dizzying when my only childhood fostered high expectations about parenthood's depth and lifespan.It's all the more melancholy when I see how my mom delights in her two "grand-cats." Over Thanksgiving, as we devised food combinations and presentations they'd find palatable, I could feel the joy a grandchild would bring.My parents elevated my wants for decades. Am I failing them by not reciprocating with my own child?My mom has helped me financiallyAs I've transitioned out of law practice, I've taken only reproductive justice cases in Arizona. I've seen the costs and crises parents must navigate, from health and safety to education and employment. When systems fail or children fall through the cracks, it's hard not to imagine my potential kids in that position.My mom has supported me as I've started a new career in media. Both public interest law and media are career paths equated with austerity. I worry that I'll never be able to afford the same financial support for my own child. As my mom nears retirement, would we have to choose between elder care and childcare? Neither my parent nor my child would deserve that existential threat.I can't afford to be the only parent eitherMy parents' roles sheltered me from the reality of many heterosexual parents. My dad was often the only male parent in sight after school or supervising playdates. He was reliable and attentive to non-verbal communication. He even French-braided my hair.I knew then that we were unusual (and frankly, I heard my dad get disproportionate praise for parenting his own child), but I didn't realize the extent until I began dating. My male partners across states, schools, families of origin, and on-paper beliefs brought baffling paradigms into our relationships. My experiences represent a larger trend of labor division for heterosexual couples. Many women like me aren't seeking partnership with any man who's tacitly accepted this culture.That's a challenge. Without a partner and without a large network of siblings and grandparents, I can't afford parentalcosts of livingon one income.It's me and my catsI want to honor the family that reared (only) me with children, but looking at 32 and 2025, it's unrealistic.My parents are the main reason I feel guilty for not having my own child. Ironically, it's also their intentionality and support that made me reticent to parent if I can't offer the same.When Mom and I wrangle her grand cats to an annual check-up one carrier each our hearts break at their anxiety, and we ask the vet excessive questions. We laugh about how my dad would delight in these fuzzy freaks. I'm grateful for what we have and what we could give if cost were no object.Beyond guilt as a childless only child, I lament timing. Ultimately, this moment's political greed took this from my parents, who put all their love and time into one basket.Mackenzie Joy Brennan is a writer, commentator, and lawyer. Find her work at MkzJoyBrennan.com or @MkzJoyBrennan on social media.

Robert Eggerss Nosferatu is about so many things, but perhaps most urgently this: Never tell an old, ugly man you are interested in him because hell never leave you alone.He will abandon the small town hes terrorizing and immigrate as difficult as organizing a coffin shipment by naval vessel can be to a new country. He will partake in shady real estate deals. He will bring plague. He will embarrass you and torment your friends. He will try to kill your husband but also maybe have sex with him too. He will send you inappropriate messages and haunt your dreams. And he will not stop until he dies. Perhaps even more undying than a vampire living in snowy Carpathian Mountains is the never-ending discourse about inappropriate age-gap relationships. (And isnt every vampire story, at its heart, about age gaps?) A common refrain of late: that the younger people involved in these relationships are being taken advantage of; that these relationships are inherently problematic. Even when both people involved are above the age of consent, even decades removed from age 18, the younger person is often infantilized and the older of the pair is deemed predatory. Examining and questioning relational power dynamics is part of the legacy of the Me Too movement.At the same time, age gaps have captured Hollywoods imagination, especially in the last few years. This has received some probing treatment Todd Hayness 2023 film May December comes to mind. Recently, theres been a spurt of rom-coms where an older woman pursues a younger man, changing the power dynamic and imagery we usually think of: older men, suffering a midlife crisis of sorts, pursuing much younger women. Ushering us into 2025, however, weve seen a new, somewhat bleak cohort: age gap relationships that seem to simply destroy the romances elder. Not unlike Nosferatus Count Orlok, the older people in Queer and Babygirl are down bad. The three movies all explore the idea of desire, especially for youth, being tethered to humiliation. Even if theyre centuries older than the objects of their desire, these mature partners dont hold the power. Its an inversion of the recent discourse and a return to an earlier stereotype.The immortal embarrassment of NosferatuThe arduous, debilitating affair between melancholic 1830s waif Ellen (Lily-Rose Depp) and her vampire lover-enemy Count Orlok (Bill Skarsgrd, under tons of prosthetics) begins with deception. Years before the main events of the film, when she was younger and ostensibly underage, Ellen calls out for a guardian angel, a spirit of comfort, a spirit of any celestial sphere in order to be less alone. Answering her message on the astral plane is Orlok, a 16th-century Transylvanian nobleman-turned-vampire who appears to her in silhouette, a veiled shadow form. You are not for the living. You are not for human kind, he tells her, seducing her and making her sleepwalk. And shall you be one with me ever-eternally. Do you swear it? Believing him an angel or some otherworldly being, she agrees.Arent all vampire stories, at their heart, about a problematic age-gap relationship? Courtesy of Focus FeaturesAt this, Orlok takes advantage of their connection sending her into pleasure and pain, orgasm and seizure. Several years later, Ellen has moved on from the one night when Orlok catfished her. Unfortunately for her, the mustachioed undead Transylvanian has never stopped thinking about their time together, and when he learns that shes happily married to a real estate agent named Thomas (Nicholas Hoult), Orlok plans to immigrate to Ellen and Thomass new home of Wisburg, Germany, to physically consummate the promise she made to him years ago. Of course, Orlok represents a multitude of metaphors. He can be seen as an embodiment of Ellens darker sexual desires, ones that society rarely makes room for. He can be read as the shame from those desires. Perhaps hes mental illness or a death wish. All of these possible, overlapping interpretations have made Orlok an ironic romance icon. Eggers is purposely ambiguous when it comes to Ellen and Orloks connection. We know theres pleasure and pain, obliterating violation and welcoming desire, but its impossible to separate all these parts from one another. This isnt to say Orlok isnt evil, but that his evilness does not exclude him from being pitiful.He spends the entire movie stalking Ellen to make good on her vow. After his machinations bring Thomas to Transylvania, Orlok mesmerizes him into signing a strange document that seemingly gives his wife away. (Orlok enjoys predatory legal practices.) Orlok then somehow packs himself up in his coffin on a ship to Wisburg, and starts showing up in Ellens dreams, either attempting to nocturnally seduce her or possessing her to freakily seduce her husband. I am an appetite. Nothing more, Orlok tells her, trying to explain how she isnt like the other potential vessels of plague that he wants to gnaw on. Shes special. Oer centuries, a loathsome beast I lay within the darkest pit til you did wake me, enchantress, and stirred me from my grave. You are my affliction.All that paperwork, sorcery, and immigration for one pre-teen girl he met on the astral plane is so embarrassing. Can you say obsessed? Its fully understandable why Ellen wouldnt want to tell her rich friends about the extremely weird, eternal, plague-carrying Eastern European creep she had a violent, psychic tryst with years ago. There would be a lot of questions. For all of his dark power, Orlok is not in command when it comes to Ellen. His obsession with Ellens consent, with her admission that she wants him as bad as he does, is his doom. Ellen realizes that in order to rid herself of Orlok and save Wisburg, she needs to make him believe she desires him in the way he desires her. As the sun vaporizes him, he shrivels and liquefies happily, still believing she wants this as badly as he does. Pathetic Count Orlok isnt that different from Daniel Craigs Lee in Queer. In the film adaptation of William S. Burroughss novel, Lee desperately chases the icy Allerton (played by Drew Starkey) in and out of the gay nooks and crannies of 1950s Mexico City. Lees day doesnt start until hes seen the younger man and doesnt end until hes said goodnight. Lee cant even enjoy the time they spend together because hes so worried about when theyll see each other next. Their relationship is a negotiation. Lee struggles with ideas of sexuality and companionship, both his own and Allertons. Lee is unhappy, and we see the link between his agony and drug use; how much of that stems from his queerness isnt clear. Allerton represents a revelation of sorts, a possibility that Lee doesnt have to be so lonely. Thats why he matters so much and why Lee is so invested, addicted even. Its more difficult to see what Allerton sees in Lee, a man whos often so sweaty, exhausting, drunk, and obsessive. In an attempt to solidify whatever they may have, Lee invites Allerton for a trip to South America on his dime. He begs for the opportunity to throw money at their relationship, only to be shunned and teased throughout their journey. Everyone is so beautiful in Queer that you might be fooled into thinking its some dreamy romance. Courtesy of A24The more Allerton pulls away, the more humiliation Lee subjects himself to. Hes at the bar because he thinks Allerton might show up. Hes sitting in windows hoping Allerton will stroll by. He stares at the moon they share. Under Luca Guadagninos direction, that desperate, earnest yearning doesnt ever come across as sympathetic the way it might in a conventional romantic story. Queer requires a little suspension of disbelief. Craig is handsome and is (along with everyone else) beautifully styled. How pathetic could a beautiful man in a beautiful movie really be? But Lees meant to be seen as someone that resembles the way we used to think about single, down bad, older men before we dubbed so many of them daddy and the others problematic. If you squint, you can see the tracings of a man in mid-life crisis trying, desperately, to woo and buy affection from a much younger girlfriend or boyfriend who may or may not actively partake in a little gold-digging. The more hes taken for a ride, the more harmless he becomes. Its a figure weve seen in some form from literature like Lolita (even if Humbert Humbert was only harmless in his own mind), to films like Some Like It Hot and Best in Show, to the contemporaneous cultural understanding of the late Anna Nicole Smiths marriage. Starkeys Allerton is cut from the same opaque cloth as another young lover from this winters film season: Harris Dickinson as Samuel in Halina Reijns Babygirl. We dont know much about either (perhaps because both Queer and Babygirl are a tad underwritten). The little we do know: Instead of haunting midcentury Mexico City, Samuel works as an intern in modern day New York City for Tensile, an Amazon-like tech conglomerate. At the top of Tensiles corporate ladder is Nicole Kidmans Romy, its shivery CEO. Its impossible to tell whether Romy is enamored with Samuel because shes genuinely attracted to him or if shes just so sexually unhappy with her playwright husband (Antonio Banderas) that anyone with a little oomph would do. With so much of her life in check, Romy thirsts for chaos. Samuels subordinate position maximizes that. He comes to represent both relief and danger an escape from the responsibilities of Romys girlboss existence and the threat to her money, family, and career if he ever tells his and Romys company about their relationship. Their first meeting is in a dark, gross hotel. He tells her to get on her knees. They both giggle, and, at first, find the whole role-play a little awkward. Perhaps its all a bit ridiculous. But something about following orders makes her feel like an animal, and carnally fulfills her. He tells her to crawl to him. He tells her to undress, and show him her body, her vulnerabilities. He tells her to lap up milk, like a kitten, from a saucer at his feet. Romy submits every time, finding thrill in the passivity. Nicole Kidman in Babygirl learns to crawl. Courtesy of A24Samuel has nothing to lose and she has everything. When he withdraws his affection, she comes crawling. Romy continually finds herself at Samuels beck and call, whether its at her own house, a hip hotel, or a rave, which she attends in a pussybow blouse. Its a distinct departure from Kidmans other 2024 age-gap romance, A Family Affair, which fell into the empowering category. At the end of the film, Romy ships Samuel away and figures out how to have sex with Antonio Banderas. She learns what she saw in Samuel, and what she got out of their relationship a moment of self-discovery about her own unspoken desires and repression. And were left with maybe our own small revelation: Perhaps being embarrassing is one of the wrinkles an age-gap romance can never totally get rid of.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

In the wake of Donald Trumps victory last November, Matthew Yglesias published a manifesto imploring the Democratic Party to reembrace common sense. Specifically, in his Slow Boring newsletter, Yglesias called on Democrats to redouble their partys commitment to economic growth, honor the electorates moral values, reject identity politics, abandon language policing, and moderate on a wide assortment of issues.Many moderates have since rallied behind Yglesiass vision for remaking the Democratic Party. Progressives, meanwhile, have made a priority of trying to discredit his critiques of Democratic governance and electioneering. To both factions, the debate over where the Democratic Party goes from here is, in no small part, a debate over whether Yglesias is right. Earlier this week, I spoke with Yglesias, who co-founded Vox, about his indictment of Democratic policymaking, whether moderation actually works, the tensions between increasing economic growth and pandering to voters, and why hes pessimistic about moderates prospects for winning the battle for the soul of blue America, among other things. Our conversation has been edited for concision and clarity.In your view, what are the biggest political mistakes that the Democratic Party has made since the Obama era?The big picture thing is: Starting in the 2016 campaign and continuing afterwards, Democrats talked a lot about the idea of Donald Trump as an outlier threat to the country but in practice, they treated his flaws as an opportunity to be more boldly and aggressively progressive across a whole bunch of fronts. And they got some mileage out of that. They almost won in 2016 at a time when the thermostatic public opinion had been against them. They did win in 2020. They lost, but it was narrow in 2024. But what weve seen with Trump getting steadily more popular over this time is that youve run out of string on that play, and I think need to come back to the reality that Obama-era Democratic party politics was where a robust national political party can be.Where specifically do you think that Democrats got too left-wing during the Biden years?I think that the Green New Deal concept made a lot of sense as an effort to square reducing climate change with addressing peoples material economic needs. But it was designed for a specific moment in time. The premise of a Green New Deal is that you have a depression and so youre going to address peoples depression-induced material problems with a new deal. And then youre going to make that new deal green. So it all makes perfect sense except there wasnt a depression. And that then requires new thinking. But instead, we wound up pursuing energy-efficiency rules for dishwashers and blocking offshore drilling in different places and blocking pipelines, which was all out of line with the official idea that we wanted to address climate in a way that was good for jobs.A lot of thinking around criminal justice and immigration enforcement issues has proven to be pretty much a total dead end. The desire to bring more humanity to these systems is understandable and correct. And for a while, progress was being made: We had less crime and incarceration rates were falling in the United States. But starting in 2014 and accelerating in 2020, you just had a move to say, Well, we should care less about crime outcomes. And people notice that and dont like it. Crime came back on the table as an issue. Its good that the homicide rate has fallen again from its 2021 peak, but theres all these other concerns that people have about shoplifting and public disorder and people breaking immigration laws, etc.And its just going to be tough, I think, for Democrats to rebuild trust on those kinds of issues once its lost. You should be lenient to criminals isnt really part of the core suite of ideas that gets people invested in progressive politics. And the criminal justice system is probably the single biggest thing because it impacts both actual state governance and political perceptions very, very heavily.I think some on the left (and perhaps, the right) would argue that leniency toward criminal offenders and undocumented immigrants does follow logically from the core ideas of progressive politics. Many progressives see themselves as fighting for the most marginalized and disadvantaged in society. And arguably, few populations in the US are more vulnerable and dehumanized than the incarcerated or undocumented. Look, theres a reason why these kinds of concerns attach themselves to a broader progressive project. On crime, I think there is a clear dichotomy: Fighting racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is a core Democratic value. It relates to the civil rights movement, etc. Thats always something that is worth looking into and being vigilant about. But there really was a turn to the idea that being tough on crime is per se unprogressive. And I think a big part of the message of the movement of nonwhite voters toward Trump in the last election is the actual communities that we are talking about dont see it that way. These are the people who are most exposed to public disorder and to crime problems. Left-wing people expressed a lot of concern in recent years that Democrats were going to abandon the working class substantively, as a result of attracting this more upscale voting base.And I think on economic policy, that really hasnt happened. Democrats continue to be the party that cares about progressive taxation, Social Security, and Medicaid. To the extent that the party has abandoned the working class as its grown more affluent, its done so on climate by not caring that much about peoples energy costs and its really been on public order: Its not affluent suburbanites who bear the consequences, if shoplifting explodes out of control in urban neighborhoods.Immigration is a tough one. I feel the pull of totally cosmopolitan values that say the life of a person seeking asylum in the United States is every bit as much a human life as that of anybody else, and we need to care about all of the people of the world. I feel the pull of that.Its also just true that in democratic politics, you have to govern in the interests of the citizens who you are dealing with, and you need to be willing to say that thats what youre going to do. Not that I think we should be hardcore anti-immigration because I think immigration is mostly beneficial to the country. But a totally uncontrolled system or people pretty clearly exploiting loopholes in the law its a burden on people. I think Democrats broadly agree with you that their partys political trajectory since 2016 is concerning. Theyve lost a lot of ground with working-class voters in general and nonwhite ones in particular. But some question whether substantially shifting the partys policy positions is necessary or even, especially helpful for winning back these defectors. One argument against the utility of moderation goes like this: The fine details of Democratic and Republican policy positions are not salient with most swing voters, who are largely ignorant of them. Indeed, according to the Democratic consultant David Shor, Democrats did well with voters who read the news in 2024, but suffered massive losses among those who pay little attention to politics.So, what matters then isnt policy details but broad partisan stereotypes Democrats are the party thats more supportive of immigration, Republicans are the party more supportive of business, etc. And with the rise of cable news and then the internet, voters have grown more conscious of the fact that the Democrats are the socially liberal, cosmopolitan party. This has led culturally conservative voters to defect to the GOP. But Democrats cant actually reverse that exodus merely by moving a little to the right. So long as they are liberal on immigration relative to the GOP, they are going to be stereotyped as soft on the border. So, when the public is in a nativist mood, they are going to lose votes on that issue no matter what they do. Given this, the thinking goes, theres little point in moving right substantively. Instead, the party should just strive to increase the salience of topics that work well for it and exploit cycle-specific issues, such as the pandemic in 2020 or financial crisis in 2008.I think that theres definitely some truth to that worldview.But the Bill Clinton experience is instructive here. He did certain things in the 1992 campaign that I think progressive intellectuals found distasteful at the time and continue to find distasteful today, but he was trying to drive salient shifts in how the Democratic Party was perceived and it worked. I think that when people try, they can shift things.Donald Trump in the very recent past meaningfully altered how the Republican Party is perceived in both positive and negative ways. These perceptions are changeable, and I think that theyre grounded in real things that happen. Somebody like Jon Tester really frustrated me in 2010 by voting against the DREAM Act. But it was really important to that iteration of Jon Tester that he not be seen as part of a cosmopolitan soft on immigration enforcement kind of coalition.He changed on that after winning a couple of reelection bids, and I sympathize substantively with that evolution. But I think it would be better for Democrats to be electorally competitive in Montana even if that meant Montana Democrats having terrible immigration ideas because they could be with you on taxes and many other things that also matter in the world. For a political party to have a coherent vision and identity, it needs to have some non-negotiable ideological principles and policy positions though, right? Are there any ideological litmus tests that you do support?I thought that Kamala Harris had a good line, when she was asked about flip-flopping: She said that her values hadnt changed. And the values of the Democratic Party are that Democrats care about poor people, about inclusiveness on identity topics, about pollution. And we worry about unbridled corporate power. That was true of Bill Clinton in 1996, just as it was true of Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. The leftward movement isnt really that. I think the anchor values of the coalition have been with us for a long time and are compatible with being much more moderate across the board, depending on: Whats the terrain that youre running in? Whats the actual issue landscape? Whats the empirical truth about these kinds of things?And the trajectory has been to say, Well, if you really care about X, you have to sign your name on the dots of 80 bajillion different things. And thats just not a great way to think about politics. Theres such a wide range between total indifference to climate change issues and we need a crash program of decarbonization by 2035. And thats true across issues. People can operate within that, picking their exact position on the basis of what they think is most important, what they think their constituents want, etc.As youve already suggested, you dont merely believe that Democratic policymaking over the past decade has been politically damaging you also think much of it has been bad on the merits. Whats the short version of your indictment of Democratic governance?If you look at the most progressive states the states where the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is most entrenched and empowered the population of those places is generally declining. A lot of that is housing policy. But its also not the case that the K-12 schooling outcomes are systematically better in the states that are spending more money. The commutes arent necessarily shorter, things like that. I think it calls into question what the purpose of the post-2012 project of building up progressive institutions and clout inside the Democratic Party is, right? What is the paradise that we are pointing to that if we cast off the constraints of a Mary Landrieu or a Joe Manchin were going to be able to deliver?Why cant you show me in New Jersey or Washington state that were doing this, and its working great? Wouldnt that be a more reasonable way to build long-term political power: to show youre doing something and its working really well and people like it, and then it spreads to more places and it entices people in the purple states? You have maybe a few things like that. But on the biggest-picture policy issues of our time, we just dont really see those kinds of successes in the places where its easier for Democrats to win elections.Are there tensions between your vision for how Democrats can better deliver prosperity and how they can best win elections? Two of your signature policy causes liberalizing zoning laws to abet housing construction and massively increasing legal immigration dont seem like surefire political winners. Theres a lot of backlash at the local level to new housing construction. And at the national level, voters evince little enthusiasm for increasing immigration.I think thats true on immigration. You have to tread carefully. But its interesting that we had Elon Musk and Donald Trump seemingly endorsing higher levels of employment visas for skilled workers recently. So maybe you just do that on a bipartisan basis if you can. It doesnt need to be the central piece of partisan campaigns.In housing, I mean, people will talk about this all day and all night, but if you look at the states where housing growth is very rapid, I do not see there being massive political backlash against the Republican governors of those states. I also dont see the Democratic governors of very housing-constraining states being hailed as heroes by anybody. Theyre not progressive heroes, theyre not moderate heroes. They just mostly look like failures who are presiding over high taxes, strained public services, and lots of disputes about legacy pension obligations because running a low-growth state is a bummer.It would be much easier to do the things that progressives want to do if you had more construction and more growth in those states. Fundamentally, what are we doing here as a movement or as a political party if the idea is, nobodys going to come to the states that we govern and everybody will leave, and the cost of living will be super high. But dont worry, people arent leaving because of our high taxes, theyre leaving because of our zoning policies. A thing thats in the discourse constantly is Democrats should do populism on economics and help working class people with their material interests.And I think thats great. I agree with that 5,000 percent. But the people who use those words often tend to espouse public policy ideas that are very bad for economic growth. And I just want to remind people that the state of the economy is really important over and above the social safety net and transfer payments. A lot of people earn a living by working. A lot of working-class people benefit from rapid economic growth. And rapid economic growth makes the welfare state more sustainable.So, when youre making energy policy or if youre thinking about Davis-Bacon rules or about antitrust or whatever it is then, Well, is this going to be good for growth or not? is an important question for populists to ask. The people want a robust, growing economy that provides them with a lot of opportunities.That makes sense. But I still feel like there may be some tensions between the projects of improving Democratic performance in red areas and implementing your vision for a pro-growth agenda. Youve argued that there are deep complementaries between these two endeavors. And youve cited Democratic Congressman Jared Golden who won a Trump district in Maine as one model for a brand of liberalism that can do both. Yet Golden recently introduced legislation that would establish a 10 percent tariff on all imported goods (including commodities that cannot be produced in America at scale, such as coffee beans) and then increase that tariff by 5 percent a year, every year, until the United States eliminates its trade deficit. Thats a policy that would increase costs for consumers and reduce economic growth. So, should that give us a pause about how complementary your political and substantive goals are?I will defer to Representative Golden on what he thinks his constituents want to hear. His idea doesnt make any sense on the merits. If you actually did it, I think that consequences would be quite dire, and people would not be happy with them. And I think that that is always an important tension in politics. Theres a difference between what people want to hear and what outcomes people will actually enjoy. I think a big problem that Democrats have is that theyve decided that theres certain moral and cultural issues on which it is unacceptable to pander to public opinion. So they want to do their pandering on economic policy instead. Which is fine if youre Jared Golden, and youre introducing bills that have no chance of passing because, what difference does it make? But its challenging in terms of governance. I mean, Trump is facing this problem, right?He and his advisers seem to be going back and forth every day between, Should we do the thing we campaigned on in terms of across the board tariffs or Should we worry that that will immediately crash the stock market? And I think Trump rightly feels that if he crashes the stock market, people arent going to say, Oh, I forgive you Mr. President. After all, I answered yes to that in the polls. People want good outcomes. But this is obviously just a tension that elected officials need to navigate all the time. I just think the most reasonable way to approach these things is to try to pander to people on largely symbolic cultural-type issues and then make empirically grounded policy decisions on complicated economic issues.What makes you most optimistic about your factions prospects for bending the Democratic Party in your direction between now and 2028? And what makes you most pessimistic?I think the Iraq War was just a millstone around the necks of moderate Democrats for a long, long time. That was a very serious substantive error that angered lots and lots of people. And I think it is good that the clock has turned and were now looking at generations of people unlike Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton who were not personally associated with that thing. What makes me pessimistic is that I hear positive things from a lot of people I have a lot of good conversations but I do not yet see any meaningful institutionalization of a more pragmatic approach to politics. And so its easy for elected officials to in the abstract say, Okay, we need to stop listening to these groups. We need to get real. We need to be in touch with the voters. But when push comes to shove, these fights get nasty and politics happens. And if nobody has your back, the tendency is always going to be to find reasons to slide further left.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

Ubisoft reportedly held an emergency conference call yesterday following Assassin's Creed: Shadows being delayed here's all we know about reports that the company is looking to sellTech10:46, 10 Jan 2025Assassins Creed Shadows will feature two protagonists(Image: Ubisoft)Assassin's Creed publisher Ubisoft announced yesterday that Assassin's Creed: Shadows (which was delayed to February 2025) will now launch in March 2025.This was followed by an 'emergency' conference call with investors who reportedly asked CEO Yves Guillemot and CFO Frederick Duguet for answers regarding reports that the company is looking to sell to Tencent.Bloomberg previously reported that the company could go private after a series of misfires. Reports have suggested that Ubisoft lost more than half of its market value in 2024, with Star Wars Outlaws reportedly underperforming.On the call, Duguet said "we will inform the market if and when a transaction materialises" when asked about a potential deal with Chinese investor Tencent, which owns around 40% of Fortnite developer Epic Games.Star Wars Outlaws underperformed(Image: Ubisoft)"With the appointment of leading advisors, we are actively exploring various transformational strategic and capitalistic options to extract the best value for stakeholders," Guillemot said."We are convinced that there are several potential paths to generate value for Ubisoft assets and franchises. This process will be overseen by the independent members of the board of directors."Star Wars: Outlaws' launch was described as "softer than expected" in September's earnings call, and in recent months Ubisoft has announced plans to shut down its first-person shooter, XDefiant, while also closing down multiple studios.Skull and Bones, which had been in development for years, launched this year to middling reviews despite being described as Guillemot as a 'AAAA' video game.As for Tencent, the US Department of Defense has recently deemed the company as potentially working with China's military, meaning any potential sale may face additional hurdles or scrutiny.A report from Insider Gaming has suggested the fate of Ubisoft's deal with Tencent could come down to the response to Assassin's Creed Shadows a game we dubbed one of the most anticipated of 2025.Article continues belowIf it performs well, Ubisoft may have additional leverage for negotiations. If it doesn't, Tencent is likely to be able to count on the company's share value dropping.Ubisoft have been contacted for comment.RECOMMENDED

The Switch 2 announcement might be very soon (Nintendo)The avalanche of Switch 2 leaks has prompted a response from Nintendo, as a reveal for the console looks imminent.While some details around new consoles usually leak ahead of their official reveal, theres been an unprecedented amount in the build-up to Nintendos Switch successor.Weve seen clips of the seemingly magnetic Joy-Cons, a bunch of images showing replicas of the console and dock, along with the alleged pictures of the logo. All these leaks bubbled up at CES 2025 this week, where an accessory company showed a very convincing mock-up and even appeared to reveal an April launch window.Following the leaks at CES, Nintendo has responded and while its difficult to say how upset they are, they havent denied any of it is real.Speaking to Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun, Nintendo stated on January 9 that the images and videos are not official. This is through a machine translation, so there might be some nuance lost in the process, but its very unlike Nintendo to offer any response to leaked materials.The lack of any firm denial around the images suggests they are at least somewhat close to the final product, which was already assumed to be the case as there have been so many overlapping details.View post on imgur.comWhile all the images of the console so far have been mock-ups based on details sent to accessory manufacturers, an image has popped up online which appears to show an actual Switch 2 console for the first time.Posted by Famiboards user lanamoon, who has previously shared leaks around the Switch 2, the image appears to show the top-right corner of the console with the screen turned on. A top flap is also opened, which is believed to be the cartridge slot, like on the original Switch.The main indicator that this isnt a picture of the original Switch is the curve on the Joy-Con, which doesnt have as sharp an angle and appears to be larger. This would match up with the replica designs of the Switch 2 Joy-Cons which have circulated over recent months.Nintendo hasnt confirmed anything about its next console, aside from it being backwards compatible. Its set to be revealed at some point before April, but with the amount of leaks which have emerged recently, many are expecting an unveil this month.More TrendingThe big question is when it will launch, with insiders claiming it could be anywhere between April and sometime in June. Mario & Luigi: Brothership may have been the last original Switch game (Nintendo)Emailgamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below,follow us on Twitter, andsign-up to our newsletter.To submit Inbox letters and Readers Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use ourSubmit Stuff page here.For more stories like this,check our Gaming page.GameCentralExclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy

Ifdoor cameras fail to dissuade porch pirates, perhaps a giant, pin-code-locked package safe will. TheHyve delivery pod asks drivers to drop packages in a bin secured to your doorframe. Even if pirates manage to take the pod, the safe will scream at them until they put it down. Hyve isnt just another attempt to shake up the home delivery market. Its a good way to reveal the many problems with todays online retail environment. The startup Hyve showed off its first solar-powered patio-based lockbox for deliveries during CES 2025. It can connect to other Matter-enabled smart security systems, though the delivery pod is relatively low-tech compared to Ring-type door cams. Theres a pin code and app-activated lock on the outside, but the pod itself is tied to a quarter-inch carbon fiber cable you screw to the inside of your front doorframe. You may be able to get through it with industrial-sized bolt cutters, but theres added security with an in-built accelerometer. If you start to move it, the pod issues a high-pitched screech. It then sends an alert to the owner or any connected neighbors through an app. You can give any number of users Bluetooth or WiFi access to the pod so they can retrieve packages. Hyve pods would also need to rely on drivers to do their part. You could leave your PIN and delivery instructions with your online order, but drivers are not guaranteed to follow those instructions. At least the pod includes a window allowing drivers to snap a photo of delivered packages.Hyve co-founder Melissa Kieling told Gizmodo that the startup is currently finalizing a deal with one delivery company to allow drivers access to the pods without needing homeowners pin codes. The other end of these partnerships is the possibility that Amazon or other online retailers wont need individual boxes for each order. However, that would also require companies to modify their distribution processes.But if the Hyve does get popular, it may eventually work with returns. The device could ping nearby drivers to inform them of a returned package rather than companies requiring customers to drop it off. Hyve will ship in June this year. Its starting price is $300, and the app requires a yearly subscription fee.