The Yiddish Book Centers permanent exhibition offers much to kvell about, including a wide-ranging collection of volumes and tributes to Yiddish theater, music and history.

Michigans Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park focuses on the artists three-dimensional works in a show that highlights their elegant evocation of landscapes.

ye olde skynet 161 years ago, a New Zealand sheep farmer predicted AI doom Butler's "Darwin among the machines" warned of a future mechanical race that could subjugate humanity. Benj Edwards Jan 11, 2025 7:15 am | 0 Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreWhile worrying about AI takeover might seem like a modern idea that sprung from War Games or The Terminator, it turns out that a similar concern about machine dominance dates back to the time of the American Civil War, albeit from an English sheep farmer living in New Zealand. Theoretically, Abraham Lincoln could have read about AI takeover during his lifetime.On June 13, 1863, a letter published in The Press newspaper of Christchurch warned about the potential dangers of mechanical evolution and called for the destruction of machines, foreshadowing the development of what we now call artificial intelligenceand the backlash against it from people who fear it may threaten humanity with extinction. It presented what may be the first published argument for stopping technological progress to prevent machines from dominating humanity.Titled "Darwin among the Machines," the letter recently popped up again on social media thanks to Peter Wildeford of the Institute for AI Policy and Strategy. The author of the letter, Samuel Butler, submitted it under the pseudonym Cellarius, but later came to publicly embrace his position. The letter drew direct parallels between Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and the rapid development of machinery, suggesting that machines could evolve consciousness and eventually supplant humans as Earth's dominant species."We are ourselves creating our own successors," he wrote. "We are daily adding to the beauty and delicacy of their physical organisation; we are daily giving them greater power and supplying by all sorts of ingenious contrivances that self-regulating, self-acting power which will be to them what intellect has been to the human race. In the course of ages we shall find ourselves the inferior race."In the letter, he also portrayed humans becoming subservient to machines, but first serving as caretakers who would maintain and help reproduce mechanical lifea relationship Butler compared to that between humans and their domestic animals, before it later inverts and machines take over."We take it that when the state of things shall have arrived which we have been above attempting to describe, man will have become to the machine what the horse and the dog are to man... we give them whatever experience teaches us to be best for them... in like manner it is reasonable to suppose that the machines will treat us kindly, for their existence is as dependent upon ours as ours is upon the lower animals," he wrote.The text anticipated several modern AI safety concerns, including the possibility of machine consciousness, self-replication, and humans losing control of their technological creations. These themes later appeared in works like Isaac Asimov's The Evitable Conflict and the Matrix films. A model of Charles Babbage's Analytical Engine, a calculating machine invented in 1837 but never built during Babbage's lifetime. Credit: DE AGOSTINI PICTURE LIBRARY via Getty Images Butler's letter dug deep into the taxonomy of machine evolution, discussing mechanical "genera and sub-genera" and pointing to examples like how watches had evolved from "cumbrous clocks of the thirteenth century"suggesting that, like some early vertebrates, mechanical species might get smaller as they became more sophisticated. He expanded these ideas in his 1872 novel Erewhon, which depicted a society that had banned most mechanical inventions. In his fictional society, citizens destroyed all machines invented within the previous 300 years.Butler's concerns about machine evolution received mixed reactions, according to Butler in the preface to the second edition of Erewhon. Some reviewers, he said, interpreted his work as an attempt to satirize Darwin's evolutionary theory, though Butler denied this. In a letter to Darwin in 1865, Butler expressed his deep appreciation for The Origin of Species, writing that it "thoroughly fascinated" him and explained that he had defended Darwin's theory against critics in New Zealand's press.What makes Butler's vision particularly remarkable is that he was writing in a vastly different technological context when computing devices barely existed. While Charles Babbage had proposed his theoretical Analytical Engine in 1837a mechanical computer using gears and levers that was never built in his lifetimethe most advanced calculating devices of 1863 were little more than mechanical calculators and slide rules.Butler extrapolated from the simple machines of the Industrial Revolution, where mechanical automation was transforming manufacturing, but nothing resembling modern computers existed. The first working program-controlled computer wouldn't appear for another 70 years, making his predictions of machine intelligence strikingly prescient.Some things never changeThe debate Butler started continues today. Two years ago, the world grappled with what one might call the "great AI takeover scare of 2023." OpenAI's GPT-4 had just been released, and researchers evaluated its "power-seeking behavior," echoing concerns about potential self-replication and autonomous decision-making.GPT-4's release inspired several open letters signed by AI researchers and tech executives warning of potential extinction-level risks posed by advanced artificial intelligence. One of the letters, reminiscent of fears about nuclear weapons or pandemics, called for a global pause on AI development. Around the same time, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman testified of AI dangers in front of the US Senate.A year later, California legislator Scott Wiener proposed a bill to regulate AI, backed by prominent figures that critics labeled as "AI doomers"those who feared the uncontrolled progression of machine intelligence. Opponents of the bill argued such measures were overblown and could stifle innovation, much as Butlers fictional society had done. Yet his 19th century call for pausing mechanical progress bears a striking resemblance to recent open letters and policy proposals about AI safety.Perhaps the great AI takeover scare will one day be viewed as another chapter in humanitys long struggle to reconcile progress with appropriate human oversighta struggle Butler foreshadowed over 160 years ago. But in some ways, even if machines never become truly intelligent, he was still eerily accurate about our dependence on the ways they algorithmically regulate our lives."Day by day, however, the machines are gaining ground upon us; day by day we are becoming more subservient to them," Butler wrote in 1863. "The upshot is simply a question of time, but that the time will come when the machines will hold the real supremacy over the world and its inhabitants is what no person of a truly philosophic mind can for a moment question."Butler didn't end his letter with passive acceptance of this fate. Somewhat like Eliezer Yudkowsky's 2023 proposal of bombing data centers to prevent AI takeover, Butler's letter concluded with a dramatic call to arms: "War to the death should be instantly proclaimed against them. Every machine of every sort should be destroyed by the well-wisher of his species. Let there be no exceptions made, no quarter shown; let us at once go back to the primeval condition of the race."Even then, he feared it might already be too late, writing that if such destruction proved impossible because of our growing dependency on them: "This at once proves that the mischief is already done, that our servitude has commenced in good earnest, that we have raised a race of beings whom it is beyond our power to destroy."Benj EdwardsSenior AI ReporterBenj EdwardsSenior AI Reporter Benj Edwards is Ars Technica's Senior AI Reporter and founder of the site's dedicated AI beat in 2022. He's also a tech historian with almost two decades of experience. In his free time, he writes and records music, collects vintage computers, and enjoys nature. He lives in Raleigh, NC. 0 Comments

physics, abstracted Did Hilma af Klint draw inspiration from 19th century physics? Diagrams from Thomas Young's 1807 Lectures bear striking resemblance to abstract figures in af Klint's work. Jennifer Ouellette Jan 11, 2025 6:45 am | 1 Hilma af Klint's Group IX/SUW, The Swan, No. 17, 1915. Credit: Hilma af Klimt Foundation Hilma af Klint's Group IX/SUW, The Swan, No. 17, 1915. Credit: Hilma af Klimt Foundation Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreIn 2019, astronomer Britt Lundgren of the University of North Carolina Asheville visited the Guggenheim Museum in New York City to take in an exhibit of the works of Swedish painter Hilma af Klint. Lundgren noted a striking similarity between the abstract geometric shapes in af Klint's work and scientific diagrams in 19th century physicist Thomas Young's Lectures (1807). So began a four-year journey starting at the intersection of science and art that has culminated in a forthcoming paper in the journal Leonardo, making the case for the connection.Af Klint was formally trained at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts and initially focused on drawing, portraits, botanical drawings, and landscapes from her Stockholm studio after graduating with honors. This provided her with income, but her true life's work drew on af Klint's interest in spiritualism and mysticism. She was one of "The Five," a group of Swedish women artists who shared those interests. They regularly organized seances and were admirers of theosophical teachings of the time.It was through her work with The Five that af Klint began experimenting with automatic drawing, driving her to invent her own geometric visual language to conceptualize the invisible forces she believed influenced our world. She painted her first abstract series in 1906 at age 44. Yet she rarely exhibited this work because she believed the art world at the time wasn't ready to appreciate it. Her will requested that the paintings stay hidden for at least 20 years after her death.Even after the boxes containing her 1,200-plus abstract paintings were opened, their significance was not fully appreciated at first. The Moderna Museum in Stockholm actually declined to accept them as a gift, although it now maintains a dedicated space to her work. It wasn't until art historian Ake Fant presented af Klint's work at a Helsinki conference that the art world finally took notice. The Guggenheim's exhibit was af Klint's American debut. "The exhibit seemed to realize af Klint's documented dream of introducing her paintings to the world from inside a towering spiral temple and it was met roundly with acclaim, breaking all attendance records for the museum," Lundgren wrote in her paper.A pandemic projectLundgren is the first person in her family to become a scientist; her mother studied art history, and her father is a photographer and a carpenter. But she always enjoyed art because of that home environment, and her Swedish heritage made af Klint an obvious artist of interest. It wasn't until the year after she visited the Guggenheim exhibit, as she was updating her lectures for an astrophysics course, that Lundgren decided to investigate the striking similarities between Young's diagrams and af Klint's geometric paintingsin particular those series completed between 1914 and 1916. It proved to be the perfect research project during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Excerpt from Plate XXIX of Thomas Young's Lectures Niels Bohr Library and Archives Excerpt from Plate XXIX of Thomas Young's Lectures Niels Bohr Library and Archives af Klint's Group X, No. 1, Altarpiece, ca. 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation af Klint's Group X, No. 1, Altarpiece, ca. 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation Excerpt from Plate XXIX of Thomas Young's Lectures Niels Bohr Library and Archives af Klint's Group X, No. 1, Altarpiece, ca. 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation Lundgren acknowledges the inherent skepticism such an approach by an outsider might engender among the art community and is sympathetic, given that physics and astronomy both have their share of cranks. "As a professional scientist, I have in the past received handwritten letters about why Einstein is wrong," she told Ars. "I didn't want to be that person."That's why her very first research step was to contact art professors at her institution to get their expert opinions on her insight. They were encouraging, so she dug in a little deeper, reading every book about af Klint she could get her hands on. She found no evidence that any art historians had made this connection before, which gave her the confidence to turn her work into a publishable paper.The paper didn't find a home right away, however; the usual art history journals rejected it, partly because Lundgren was an outsider with little expertise in that field. She needed someone more established to vouch for her. Enter Linda Dalrymple Henderson of the University of Texas at Austin, who has written extensively about scientific influences on abstract art, including that of af Klint. Henderson helped Lundgren refine the paper, encouraged her to submit it to Leonardo, and "it came back with the best review I've ever received, even inside astronomy," said Lundgren.Making the caseYoung and af Klint were not contemporaries; Young died in 1829, and af Klint was born in 1862. Nor are there any specific references to Young or his work in the academic literature examining the sources known to have influenced the Swedish painter's work. Yet af Klint had a well-documented interest in science, spanning everything from evolution and botany to color theory and physics. While those influences tended to be scientists who were her contemporaries, Lundgren points out that the artist's personal library included a copy of an 1823 astronomy book. Excerpt from Plate XXIX of Young's Lectures Niels Bohr Library and Archives/AIP Excerpt from Plate XXIX of Young's Lectures Niels Bohr Library and Archives/AIP Detail from af Klint's, Group IX/UW, The Swan, No, 10, 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation Detail from af Klint's, Group IX/UW, The Swan, No, 10, 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation af Klint, Group IX/UW, The Dove, No. 14, 1915. Hilma af Klimt Foundation af Klint, Group IX/UW, The Dove, No. 14, 1915. Hilma af Klimt Foundation Detail from af Klint's, Group IX/UW, The Swan, No, 10, 1915 Hilma af Klimt Foundation af Klint, Group IX/UW, The Dove, No. 14, 1915. Hilma af Klimt Foundation Af Klint was also commissioned to paint a portrait of Swedish physicist Knut Angstrom in 1910 at Uppsala University, whose library includes a copy of Young's Lectures. So it's entirely possible that af Klint had access to the astronomy and physics of the previous century and would likely have been particularly intrigued by discoveries involving "invisible light" (electromagnetism, x-rays, radioactivity, etc.).Young's Lectures contain a speculative passage about the existence of a universal ether (since disproven), a concept that fascinated both scientists and those (like af Klint) with certain occult interests in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In fact, Young's passage was included in a popular 1875 spiritualist text, Unseen Universe by P.G. Tait and Balfour Stewart, that was heavily cited by Theosophical Society founder Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Blavatsky in turn is known to have influenced af Klint around the time the artist created The Swan, The Dove, and Altarpieces series.Lundgren found that "in several instances, the captions accompanying Young's color figures [in the Lectures] even seem to decode elements of af Klint's paintings or bring attention to details that might otherwise be overlooked." For instance, the caption for Young's Plate XXIX describes the "oblique stripes of color" that appear when candlelight is viewed through a prism that "almost interchangeably describes features in af Klint's Group X., No. 1, Altarpiece," she wrote (a) Excerpt from Young's Plate XXX. (b) af Klint, Parsifal Series No. 68. (c and d) af Klint, Group IX/UW, The Dove, No. 12 and No. 13. Credit: Niels Bohr Library/Hilma af Klint Foundation Art historians had previously speculated about af Klint's interest in color theory, as reflected in the annotated watercolor squares featured in her Parsifal Series (1916). Lundgren argues that those squares resemble Fig. 439 in the color plates of Young's Lectures, demonstrating the inversion of color in human vision. Those diagrams also "appear almost like crude sketches of af Klint's The Dove, Nos. 12 and 13," Lundgren wrote. "Paired side by side, these paintings can produce the same visual effects described by Young, with even the same color palette."The geometric imagery of af Klint's The Swan series is similar to Young's illustrations of the production and perception of colors, while "black and white diagrams depicting the propagation of light through combinations of lenses and refractive surfaces, included in Young's Lectures On the Theory of Optics, bear a particularly strong geometric resemblance to The Swan paintings No. 12 and No.13," Lundgren wrote. Other pieces in The Swan series may have been inspired by engravings in Young's Lectures.This is admittedly circumstantial evidence and Lundgren acknowledges as much. "Not being able to prove it is intriguing and frustrating at the same time," she said. She continues to receive additional leads, most recently from an af Klint relative on the board of the Moderna Museum. Once again, the evidence wasn't direct, but it seems af Klint would have attended certain local lecture circuits about science, while several members of the Theosophy Society were familiar with modern physics and Young's earlier work. "But none of these are nails in the coffin that really proved she had access to Young's book," said Lundgren.Jennifer OuelletteSenior WriterJennifer OuelletteSenior Writer Jennifer is a senior reporter at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban. 1 Comments

Agents are the hottest thing in tech right now. Top firms from Google DeepMind to OpenAI to Anthropic are racing to augment large language models with the ability to carry out tasks by themselves. Known as agentic AI in industry jargon, such systems have fast become the new target of Silicon Valley buzz. Everyone from Nvidia to Salesforce is talking about how they are going to upend the industry. We believe that, in 2025, we may see the first AI agents join the workforce and materially change the output of companies, Sam Altman claimed in a blog post last week. In the broadest sense, an agent is a software system that goes off and does something, often with minimal to zero supervision. The more complex that thing is, the smarter the agent needs to be. For many, large language models are now smart enough to power agents that can do a whole range of useful tasks for us, such as filling out forms, looking up a recipe and adding the ingredients to an online grocery basket, or using a search engine to do last-minute research before a meeting and producing a quick bullet-point summary. In October, Anthropic showed off one of the most advanced agents yet: an extension of its Claude large language model called computer use. As the name suggests, it lets you direct Claude to use a computer much as a person would, by moving a cursor, clicking buttons, and typing text. Instead of simply having a conversation with Claude, you can now ask it to carry out on-screen tasks for you. Anthropic notes that the feature is still cumbersome and error-prone. But it is alreadyavailable to a handful of testers, including third-party developers at companies such as DoorDash, Canva, and Asana. Computer use is a glimpse of whats to come for agents. To learn whats coming next, MIT Technology Review talked to Anthropics cofounder and chief scientist Jared Kaplan. Here are five ways that agents are going to get even better in 2025. (Kaplans answers have been lightly edited for length and clarity.) 1/ Agents will get better at using tools I think there are two axes for thinking about what AI is capable of. One is a question of how complex the task is that a system can do. And as AI systems get smarter, theyre getting better in that direction. But another direction thats very relevant is what kinds of environments or tools the AI can use. So, like, if you go back almost 10 years now to [DeepMinds Go-playing model] AlphaGo, we had AI systems that were superhuman in terms of how well they could play board games. But if all you can work with is a board game, then thats a very restrictive environment. Its not actually useful, even if its very smart. With text models, and then multimodal models, and now computer useand perhaps in the future with roboticsyoure moving toward bringing AI into different situations and tasks, and making it useful. We were excited about computer use basically for that reason. Until recently, with large language models, its been necessary to give them a very specific prompt, give them very specific tools, and then theyre restricted to a specific kind of environment. What I see is that computer use will probably improve quickly in terms of how well models can do different tasks and more complex tasks. And also to realize when theyve made mistakes, or realize when theres a high-stakes question and it needs to ask the user for feedback. 2/ Agents will understand context Claude needs to learn enough about your particular situation and the constraints that you operate under to be useful. Things like what particular role youre in, what styles of writing or what needs you and your organization have. ANTHROPIC I think that well see improvements there where Claude will be able to search through things like your documents, your Slack, etc., and really learn whats useful for you. Thats underemphasized a bit with agents. Its necessary for systems to be not only useful but also safe, doing what you expected. Another thing is that a lot of tasks wont require Claude to do much reasoning. You dont need to sit and think for hours before opening Google Docs or something. And so I think that a lot of what well see is not just more reasoning but the application of reasoning when its really useful and important, but also not wasting time when its not necessary. 3/ Agents will make coding assistants better We wanted to get a very initial beta of computer use out to developers to get feedback while the system was relatively primitive. But as these systems get better, they might be more widely used and really collaborate with you on different activities. I think DoorDash, the Browser Company, and Canva are all experimenting with, like, different kinds of browser interactions and designing them with the help of AI. My expectation is that well also see further improvements to coding assistants. Thats something thats been very exciting for developers. Theres just a ton of interest in using Claude 3.5 for coding, where its not just autocomplete like it was a couple of years ago. Its really understanding whats wrong with code, debugging itrunning the code, seeing what happens, and fixing it. 4/ Agents will need to be made safe We founded Anthropic because we expected AI to progress very quickly and [thought] that, inevitably, safety concerns were going to be relevant. And I think thats just going to become more and more visceral this year, because I think these agents are going to become more and more integrated into the work we do. We need to be ready for the challenges, like prompt injection. [Prompt injection is an attack in which a malicious prompt is passed to a large language model in ways that its developers did not foresee or intend. One way to do this is to add the prompt to websites that models might visit.] Prompt injection is probably one of the No.1 things were thinking about in terms of, like, broader usage of agents. I think its especially important for computer use, and its something were working on very actively, because if computer use is deployed at large scale, then there could be, like, pernicious websites or something that try to convince Claude to do something that it shouldnt do. And with more advanced models, theres just more risk. We have a robust scaling policy where, as AI systems become sufficiently capable, we feel like we need to be able to really prevent them from being misused. For example, if they could help terroriststhat kind of thing. So Im really excited about how AI will be usefulits actually also accelerating us a lot internally at Anthropic, with people using Claude in all kinds of ways, especially with coding. But, yeah, therell be a lot of challenges as well. Itll be an interesting year.

Dana Bull plans to optimize her real estate portfolio in 2025 rather than acquiring more properties.She aims to increase revenue by focusing on insurance, taxes, and renovation costs.With insurance costs on the rise, any investor can benefit from shopping around.Dana Bull isn't looking to acquire any more properties in 2025.The experienced investor built wealth by buying primarily multi-family properties in Massachusetts. She's also a real-estate agent and consultant, and a mother of four. Between her various work projects and renovating her primary residence, she says she has plenty to keep her busy in 2025.While she's not expanding her doors, she still expects to grow her revenue in the new year.Any investor can benefit from optimizing what they already own, said Bull: "If you're not going to buy right now for personal reasons or you just don't like the interest rates or whatever is going on this could be a good year to just focus on your business, your expenses, and tighten up what you already have."Specifically, she's looking to optimize in three categories, which could improve her returns significantly.1. InsuranceLike many investors and homeowners, Bull has seen her insurance rates rise over the past couple of years.The general trend is that "insurance is harder to get and it's more expensive," she said. "That cost for me has just jumped. It's a big line item. I have had the same provider for the past 10 years, and I need to just go out there and procure quotes and make sure that I'm not getting overcharged for what's being covered."It can be time-consuming to keep track of each policy and its changes, especially if you own a lot of properties."I feel like it's the wild, wild west," said Bull of navigating the insurance world. "Many times, a program that we have a property covered by will just be dropped, or they'll no longer cover that property for reason X, Y, or Z, so it's like this revolving door of making sure that the properties all have coverage and the right coverage."She says she's been more "passive" about optimizing insurance in the past, but now that prices are soaring, she plans to shop around and do her due diligence in 2025.2. TaxesIn addition to insurance, her property taxes have gone up."The tax rate has not gone up, but the value of the properties has gone up so significantly that you're just paying thousands more a year for taxes," explained Bull. One of her properties, for example, will cost an extra $2,000 a year. "If I multiply that across my whole portfolio, that's a lot of money."If you think your property is overvalued, you can appeal your property assessment."I think I have a few properties that are overvalued," said Bull. "Some aren't, so obviously there's nothing to do there. But if I can make a case and bring in comps and show them this is an overvaluation and now I'm being taxed higher than I probably should, I have found in the past that if you're just a squeaky wheel, they'll work with you."3. Renovation costsBull has seen the availability and cost of hiring contractors vary dramatically over her investing career."When I first started in real estate, which was at the tail end of the recession, contractors were out of work, and they needed work, so the pricing was way different 10 years ago than it is today," she said. "And then during the pandemic, everybody was renovating their home and contractors had such a surplus of work that they could basically charge whatever they wanted, and you were going to pay it because you were desperate."Heading into 2025, "the tides are kind of turning," she said, in that contractors won't be able to pick their price.It's worth it to shop around, said Bull, adding that you may be surprised by the varying prices you receive. For example, she had to replace three roofs for one of her multi-family properties: "One quote came in at $30,000, another came in at $21,000, and then another came in at $12,000. And I'm reviewing the quotes and pretty much everything is the same. The product is the same."While meeting with multiple contractors can be "a pain in the butt," she acknowledged, it could mean tens of thousands of dollars in savings.

The war in Ukraine has given rise to explosive-packed drones modified with fiber-optic cables.These drones are dangerous, as they can't be jammed with electronic warfare and are harder to detect.But one Ukrainian company is developing a solution so front-line soldiers can find the drones.Russian forces are using explosive-packed drones connected to their operators by fiber-optic cables to deliver unjammable precision strikes on Ukrainian troops and military equipment, and Kyiv is looking for a fix to fight back.Fiber-optic drones have been increasingly appearing in combat over about the last year, and they're a challenge. These drones are dangerous because they can't be jammed with traditional electronic warfare and are difficult to defend against, highlighting the need for a solution.The drones are "a real problem" because "we cannot detect and intercept them" electronically, Yuriy, a major in an electronic-warfare unit of the Ukrainian National Guard, told Business Insider. "If we can see, we can fight."The problem is one that the defense industry is looking into closely. Kara Dag, for instance, is an American-Ukrainian technology company that's developing software and hardware to defend against Russian drones for the military and working on a solution, but it's still early days.The company's chief technology officer, who goes by the pseudonym John for security purposes, said the ongoing conflict is a "war of drones." He told BI Ukraine had managed this fight well with jamming techniques, but Russia has found ways to slip past some of its defenses.Fiber-optic drones, which Russia appears to have started flying into battle last spring, are first-person view, or FPV, drones, but rather than rely on a signal connection, they are wired with cables that preserve a stable connection. As a result, these drones are resistant to electronic warfare, like radio frequency jammers, and produce high-quality video transmissions. A Russian soldier launches an FPV drone at an undisclosed location in November 2024. Russian Defense Ministry Press Service via AP In August, combat footage from Russian fiber-optic drones began to circulate, indicating a more lasting presence on the battlefield. Now, both militaries are using these drones.Fiber-optic drones are highly dangerous, John said, as they can fly in tunnels, close to the ground, through valleys, and in other areas where other drones might lose connection with their operators. They are also tough to detect because they don't emit any radio signals.Russia can use these drones to destroy Ukrainian armored vehicles and study its defensive positions, he said. Since they don't have bandwidth problems, these drones "can transmit very high-quality picture and they literally see everything."The drones aren't without their disadvantages, though. Yuriy shared that the fiber-optic drones are slower than the untethered FPV drones and unable to make sharp changes in direction. He said that Russia does not have too many of these drones, either, nor does it use them in every direction of the front lines. But where they are used, they're a problem.Because jamming doesn't work on fiber-optic drones, there are efforts underway to explore other options for stopping these systems, such as audio and visual detection. But this kind of technology can be expensive and hard to manufacture. A Ukrainian fiber-optic drone is seen during a test flight in the Kyiv region in December 2024. Photo by Viktor Fridshon/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images John said that the company has developed a low-cost solution to find fiber-optic drones. One element of this system is an array of dozens of microphones that can be focused on one point in the sky to listen for any nearby drones. The second element is an unfocused infrared laser that highlights any object in a certain area of the sky while a camera records any reflected light coming back.It's a single device that can be placed around a kilometer from troop positions. John said the device is in lab testing, and the next step is to deploy it in real combat conditions on the front lines next month. The plan is to eventually produce several thousand of these devices every month.The introduction of fiber-optic drones into battle and Ukraine's subsequent efforts to counter them underscores how both Moscow and Kyiv are constantly trying to innovate with uncrewed systems before the enemy can adapt, a trend that has been evident throughout the war.In a previous interview with BI, Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine's minister of digital transformation, described the technology and drone race playing out in this fight as a "cat-and-mouse game." He said that Kyiv is trying to stay several steps ahead of Moscow at all times.The Ukrainian military said last month that it was testing fiber-optic drones, adding that "FPV drones with this technology are becoming a big problem for the enemy on the front line."On Tuesday, a Ukrainian government platform that facilitates innovation within the country's defense industry shared new footage of fiber-optic drone demonstrations on social media. Russia, if it's not already, may soon find itself working to counter these new drones as well.

While struggling with parenting duties, Babette Lockefeer considered quitting her business.Her husband didn't agree with her decision to stop work and be a stay-at-home mom.Lockefeer was angry at first but later realized she wouldn't be happy if she wasn't working.This as-told-to essay is based on a transcribed conversation with Babette Lockefeer, 35, from the Netherlands, about navigating motherhood alongside her career. The following has been edited for length and clarity.Four months after my second child was born, I wasn't living life as I'd envisioned it.I was in the midst of a big project for my business as a leadership and team facilitator and struggling to balance my career and motherhood. I felt overwhelmed, stressed, and sleep-deprived.In the summer of 2021, I told my husband I wanted to quit the business. He immediately said no.At first, I was angry. I'd always valued doing important work and my career, and I was willing to stop doing that for our family, but felt he wasn't letting me.Over time, I realized he was right: I wouldn't have been happy as a stay-at-home mom. Talking with my husband and processing my feelings helped me realize that being a mother wasn't a detriment to my career. I had to deal with some insecurities and make some changes at home to understand I could do both.I was always a high achiever at workI started my career in 2014 as a consultant at McKinsey. I spent two and a half years there, but in 2016, I joined Alibaba as a global leadership associate. I spent around half a year in their Dutch office, helping Dutch e-commerce players connect to the Chinese market.In the summer of 2017, my husband, who I'd met as a student, and I moved to China, and I worked for Alibaba in Hangzhou.I really enjoyed it. We had monthly trainings where we learned more about China, e-commerce, and leadership. The training made me realize that my real interests lay in leadership development. In 2018, I left Alibaba and started my own business in the leadership space, TheoryY.I was also pregnant with my first child at that time. Five months after his birth, in December 2019, we decided to leave China and move back to the Netherlands.Soon after we returned, the COVID-19 pandemic hit. I got pregnant again and had a second child in February 2021. Because of the pandemic, it was difficult to have family assistance with childcare or access to day care.Around 10 weeks after giving birth, I started a new project with my business after being referred to a new client. Our newborn wasn't fond of sleeping, so we had a lot of broken nights.For me, motherhood was about having a healthy attachment with my children, being present, and attending to all of their needs.This was impossible to achieve all the time. I was too tired, overwhelmed, and full of doubt. With hindsight, I still did a good job as a mother, but I'd internalized the perfect mother myth.Society's picture of an ideal mother is in direct conflict with that of an ideal employee. The employee is always available and wants to go the extra mile, but the mom also needs to be fully committed and always have the space to attend to her children's needs.I was always a high achiever at work, but now, I had less time and energy to go the extra mile. I was working fewer hours than before having children, but when I was with my kids I wasn't always present because I was thinking about work. I felt like I wasn't doing a good job on the work front or the motherhood front.My husband didn't think quitting would make me happyMy husband worked full-time. He was very involved as a dad. When our second child was born, he took some parental leave, spread across the year, plus six weeks of birth leave. But because I was self-employed and had more flexibility, I was always picking up things that fell off the wagon which was a lot of the time during COVID.I would spread my hours around, sometimes working in the evenings so I could still do the tasks I was hired to do. We never had a consistent schedule, and I felt like I was firefighting. Whenever a child was ill or had a doctor's appointment, the mental load was predominantly on my shoulders.When I spoke to my husband about quitting, he said he didn't think it was the right decision. He also wanted to spend time with our kids and thought it wasn't fair if he was the sole breadwinning parent.He also said he didn't think I'd be happy as a stay-at-home mom. I disagreed, saying I wasn't happy as it stood.I spoke with my husband, processed my feelings and decided to continue workingFrom our first conversation, it was clear we weren't aligned, so we continued to discuss it. I shared that I felt I was undervalued and wasn't appreciated by him unless I was achieving something professionally. He told me he still appreciated me now that I was a mom and wasn't on a steep career trajectory at the time.I decided to continue working, but we also changed some practical things about our household. When our third child was born in July 2023, my husband was granted 26 weeks of parental leave by his new company, and he took all of it, taking full end-to-end responsibility for the household for the first time.It allowed me to trust him fully with the kids and family chores going forward, so our dynamic has become more equal. We don't split things 50-50 all the time, but regularly discuss how best to divide responsibilities between us.Looking back, I'm grateful that my husband could see that, in the long term, it wasn't a good idea for me to quit working. I need the intellectual stimulation that comes from a job, and my work fills me with the energy to show up as the mom and partner I want to be.Do you have a story about balancing parenting with your career? Email Charissa Cheong at ccheong@businessinsider.com

It is an era of superpower conflict and competition for natural resources. Newly accessible sea routes are transforming the worlds political geography. The US government eyes a strategically located island territory, currently under the control of the Kingdom of Denmark, which Washington believes is necessary for its national security and economic interests. After first making an offer to buy the territory one rejected by Copenhagen the US suggests that it wont rule out the use of military force to take it. The Danes, in response, grudgingly take the deal. The year is 1915 and the territory in question is the Danish West Indies, known today as the US Virgin Islands. In the wake of the sinking of the passenger ship Lusitania by German submarines, President Woodrow Wilsons administration wanted control of the Caribbean islands out of fear they could be annexed by Germany, and used as a base to attack shipping through the recently opened Panama Canal. That deal which was finalized in 1917 for $25 million, or a bit less than $600 million in todays money was the last major territorial purchase by the United States.Such territorial acquisitions were a relatively common practice in the age of overseas empires, but its nearly unheard of today.That musty topic, though, s unexpectedly back in the news, thanks to President-elect Donald Trumps very public coveting of Greenland: another Danish-administered island.Trump first publicly discussed the idea of the United States purchasing the worlds largest island back in 2019, during his first term. The idea was rejected out of hand by the government of Denmark at the time, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen saying she hope[s] that this is not meant seriously. Trump canceled a visit to Denmark in response. How serious Trump is now is known to him alone, but he has not let the idea go as he prepares to return to the White House. In December, in a social media post announcing his pick of PayPal co-founder Ken Howery to serve as ambassador to Denmark, Trump posted, For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.The Greenland proposal comes alongside Trump repeated is-he-joking-or-isnt-he suggestions that Canada be made the 51st state and demands that Panama return control of the Panama Canal altogether, an agenda for territorial expansion on a level not seen since the James K. Polk administration in the mid-19th century. The Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee posted on X then deleted a post praising Trumps plans for Greenland and Panama, writing that its un-American to be afraid of big dreams.Things got more serious on Tuesday at a press conference at Mar-a-Lago when Trump refused to rule out using military or economic coercion to take Greenland or the canal. (Canada, it seems, is off the hook for military force but not economic.) Also this past week, the president-elects son, Donald Trump Jr., visited Greenland for a brief and heavily documented stopover.. Now that the president-elect of the United States has refused to rule out military force against a NATO ally in Denmark, European leaders clearly no longer find this funny. Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany posted on X, Borders must not be moved by force the sort of admonition usually used against Russia and China. Even if we take Trump entirely at his word that he is serious about this and will make it a priority, the acquisition of Greenland is extremely unlikely to happen. But perhaps inadvertently, Trump has highlighted some thorny issues about geopolitics in a rapidly transforming and geopolitically important Arctic, and the suddenly contested borders of what had seemed like a settled world map. Greenlands political status, explainedGreenland, an 836,000-square-mile island mostly covered by ice, has been under Danish rule since the 18th century, except for a period of German occupation during World War II followed by brief US protectorate. As Trump has pointed out, President Harry Truman made an offer (rebuffed by the Danes) to take permanent control of Greenland after the war. But Greenland is also not simply property that Denmark could sell at will. In recent decades, Greenlands population, which is nearly 90 percent Inuit, has been moving gradually toward full independence. Greenland attained home rule, including its own parliament, in 1979, and took on even greater political autonomy following a 2008 referendum. Greenland now has its own prime minister, domestic laws, and court system. Its foreign and security policies are still dictated from Copenhagen, although Greenland is seeking more autonomy on those issues as well. In a New Years speech, made in the context of Trumps remarks, Greenland Prime Minister Mte Egede suggested the time may have come to move more quickly toward independence. The Greenland Self-Government Act, passed in 2009, stipulates that if the people of Greenland decide to move toward full independence, they will enter into negotiations with Denmark on making that happen. The push for independence has been coupled with a historical reckoning over colonial-era practices including the removal of Greenlandic children from their families to be raised by Danes. Greenlanders are very tired of being, in a sense, treated like second-class citizens or like teenagers that are not really responsible for their actions, said Ulrik Pram Gad, a senior researcher on Arctic issues at the Danish Institute of Security Studies. On the other hand, there are also reasons why full independence hasnt happened yet. For one thing, while Greenland would be one of the biggest countries in the world by land area (its larger than Mexico), it would be one of the worlds smallest by population with just 57,000 people (less than the capacity of an NFL football stadium). And that population is only shrinking. Despite some painful history, many Greenlanders also have close family and cultural ties to Denmark. The island also receives about $500 million per year in social welfare payments from the Danish state, and Greenlanders have access to free medical care and free tuition at Danish universities. (All of which is to say, Puerto Rico-like status in Trumps America might be a tough sell for a people used to the generous Nordic welfare state.)Of course, Greenland independence could become a lot more viable if the territory, which is currently reliant mainly on fishing for income, developed more independent sources of wealth. Which is where Trumps interest in the place comes in.Treasure beneath the ice Its not entirely clear when Trump decided that control of Greenland is an absolute necessity, for US national interests, but one theory, reported by the New York Times back in 2021, was that it came after a briefing at the White House by Greg Barnes, an Australian minerals prospector who has long touted Greenlands mining potential. (Cosmetics heir Ronald Lauder, an old friend of Trumps, also seems to have pushed the idea.) Greenland has substantial reserves of metals like lithium, niobium, and zirconium, which are used for producing batteries, as well as rare earth elements that are considered vital for the green energy transition, but which China currently enjoys a near monopoly over. Greenlands Arctic climate and geology make it a difficult place to extract these materials there are currently only two active mines on the island but as the ice sheet covering 80 percent of Greenland melts, the idea is that they will become more accessible. (Theres something a bit perverse about the notion of Greenlands shrinking glaciers, which could raise global sea levels by 20 feet if they melted entirely, as a solution to climate change.) This has attracted interest and investments from a number of mining companies and governments, including China likely another reason for Trumps interest. These projects have also encountered local resistance: In 2021, Greenlands parliament passed legislation banning uranium mining and halting a major rare earths mining project. On the less climate-friendly side, the US Geological Survey has also estimated that Greenland may have as many as 31 billion barrels of oil, though no oil has actually been found despite nearly 50 years of exploration, and the government ended exploration in 2021, citing environmental concerns.In an era of rising great power tension, governments around the world are also increasingly looking at the Arctic as an area of strategic importance and competition. Part of this is the regions potential mineral reserves. Part of it is shipping routes that have become newly navigable thanks to melting Arctic Sea ice. Russia, which generates much of its GDP from oil and gas extracted above the Arctic circle, has taken a particular interest in the region. Under President Vladimir Putin, the Russian government has reopened 50 previously shuttered Soviet-era military bases in the area. Perhaps not coincidentally, the Arctic has seen alleged gray zone attacks by Russia against telecommunications infrastructure and an increasing number of close encounters by military aircraft. Geopolitical tensions in the Arctic have only grown since Russias 2022 invasion of Ukraine. China, which describes itself as a near-Arctic state even though it is nearly a thousand miles away from the Arctic Circle at its closest point, has been increasing its economic and military assets in the region as well. Critics say the US, an Arctic power thanks to Alaska another old territorial purchase has been slow to respond to these developments: case in point, the US currently has only has one operational icebreaker in its fleet and likely wont have a new one until the 2030s. The Arctics geopolitical importance is also a reason why Denmark (as well as the European Union) would be reluctant to part with Greenland. Thanks to Greenland, Denmark is not only 50 times bigger than it would be otherwise, it is also the only European Union country with an Arctic coastline. (Arctic Norway is not an EU member.) This gives it a seat on the Arctic Council and a say on issues involving an increasingly contested region of the world. There has been a kind of Greenland card, which has made Denmark more important security-wise than a standard, small European country, Gad said. It should be noted that none of the reasons why Greenland is strategically important for the United States explain why it needs to be part of the United States. American companies, including a new mining venture backed by Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, are already investing in Greenlands minerals. The US also already has a military base in the country: Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base, is both the northernmost US military base in the world and a key node in Americas missile early warning system.The US benefits from Greenland being under the jurisdiction of a friendly NATO ally: In 2017, the Danish government blocked an effort by a Chinese mining company to acquire an abandoned military base in Greenland, in part out of a desire to maintain good relations with the US. These are the sort of relations that are potentially threatened by publicly musing about annexing territory by force. Trumps world of real estateIts worth briefly considering just why Trumps Greenland idea seems so bizarre. The United States acquired more than half of its current land mass by paying for it through transactions like the Louisiana Purchase, the Alaska Purchase, and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, under which Mexico ceded the territory for much of what became the American West. It was once relatively common for countries to trade, say, the north sea island of Heligoland for the African archipelago of Zanzibar, as Britain and Germany did in 1890. Britain acquired Bombay (now Mumbai) from Portugal as part of a wedding dowry for the marriage of a Portuguese princess to King Charles II. (Barron Trump is probably safe from being married off to a Danish princess as part of a deal, but never say never.)Borders are still sometimes redrawn by agreement these days: Tajikistan ceded some mountainous territory to China in 2011, India and Pakistan have exchanged some left over border enclaves, but theyre rare and the territories in question are usually pretty small. The main reason why the market for national sovereignty isnt what it used to be is probably that while much of the worlds landmass was once covered by colonial empires, it is now mostly covered by sovereign nation-states, in which citizens have some expectation of sovereignty which includes the right to not simply be sold off to the highest bidder. Greenlands political status makes it something of a holdover in this regard, but that doesnt mean its people and leaders whove been steadily moving toward greater political independence will simply acquiesce to being treated as an imperialist bargaining chip. We are a proud Indigenous people with a right to self-determination and not some sort of good that can be traded, Aaja Chemnitz, a member of Greenlands parliament, told NBC News. (Though Trump has claimed that the people of Greenland are MAGA and will benefit tremendously from US acquisition, its not clear if he envisions them having any say in the matter.)As for Trumps refusal to rule out military force, wars of territorial conquest are thankfully also a lot more rare than they used to be and a lot less likely to be successful. Thats one reason why Russias invasion and annexation of parts of Ukraine has been such a shock to the international system. At least since the days of Woodrow Wilson, US governments have with some notable exceptions had a bias toward preserving international borders rather than redrawing them. But Trump, who broke from most of the international community by recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and Moroccan control of Western Sahara during his first term, clearly has a far more transactional view of borders and sovereignty than the last century of American presidents. Describing his Greenland plan, the former developer has compared it to a real estate deal: I look at a corner, I say, Ive got to get that store for the building that Im building, etc. Its not that different, he told reporters interviewing him for a book at the end of his first term.The risk of treating the world map like a game of Risk, even just in rhetoric, is not merely that it strains relations with US allies. Its that it could validate territorial claims by US enemies. Its hardly surprising that Russian pundits and politicians have taken a keen interest in Trumps Greenland plans. As The Economists Shashank Joshi writes, If the next US government normalises the idea of absorbing territory by force it makes it more likely that China will believe that the US will ultimately stand aside during an invasion of Taiwan.Back in 2014, when Russia first annexed Crimea, then Secretary of State John Kerry scoffed, You just dont in the 21st century behave in 19th-century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext. Now, it appears, its the US that wants to take the world back to the age of empires. 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:

Smartwatches have become so intricate and so expensive that we end up spending more money on armor-like cases and screen protectors than we used to spend on an entire watch. Even then you may be hesitant to take your pricey smartwatch with you if youre an outdoor adventurer.See at AmazonThe Garmin Instinct 2 presents no such problems. In fact, its designed and built specifically to be tough enough to accompany you on your rock-climbing, mountain-biking, triathlon-running adventures. And while its just $200 at Amazon during their 33% off sale, it definitely falls in that costs as much as the accessories that keep your Apple Watch looking pretty category.Know Where Youre GoingThe Garmin Instinct 2 has more eyes in the sky than most smartwatches in addition to GPS, it also has access to the Galileo and GLONASS multiple-satellite nav systems to keep you safe and connected even in remote challenging locations.ABC sensors Altimiter for elevation data, Barometer for watching the weather, and 3-axis electronic Compass can be literal lifesavers when youre out in the roughest conditions. And should you get out on a long trek and suddenly find youve lost your way, the Garmin Instinct 2 has Tracback Routing to guide you back the way you came. When you pair your Garmin Instinct 2 with your smartphone, your live location can be sent to your contacts for an added layer of safety.Training TitanJust like those fancier smartwatches, the Garmin Instinct 2 comes packed with 24/7 health and wellness monitoring features. The Instinct 2 keeps track of your heart rate, pulse, blood oxygen, respiration, sleep, and more. It also measures your VO2 max, a term endurance athletes are familiar with. VO2 max is the amount of oxygen your body consumes while exercising, and a higher VO2 max is an indicator of greater endurance. The Garmin Instinct 2 even takes changes in heat and altitude that can adversely affect your VO2 max score.The Garmin Instinct 2 is much more than just a smartwatch for hardcore adrenaline junkies. It receives texts, emails, and alerts when paired with your compatible smartphone, and you can zhuzh it up with downloadable custom watch faces from the Garmin IQ Store. The downloadable sports-specific apps also cover less-death-defying pastimes like golf, yoga, Pilates, and many more.Amazons $200 deal on the Garmin Instinct 2 is your chance to undercut the bigger price tags on the bougier smartwatches and strap on a device that is up to any challenge that youre wanting to take on, while still being a high-functioning fitness wearable even if your sporting tastes are a little more modest.See at Amazon