Barricades, as we know them today, are thought to date back to the European wars of religion. According to most historians, the first barricade went up in Paris in 1588; the word derives from the French barriques, or barrels, spontaneously put together. They have been assembled from the most diverse materials, from cobblestones, tyres, newspapers, dead horses and bags of ice (during Kyiv’s Euromaidan in 2013–14), to omnibuses and e‑scooters. Their tactical logic is close to that of guerrilla warfare: the authorities have to take the barricades in order to claim victory; all that those manning them have to do to prevail is to hold them.  The 19th century was the golden age for blocking narrow, labyrinthine streets. Paris had seen barricades go up nine times in the period before the Second Empire; during the July 1830 Revolution alone, 4,000 barricades had been erected (roughly one for every 200 Parisians). These barricades would not only stop, but also trap troops; people would then throw stones from windows or pour boiling water onto the streets. Georges‑Eugène Haussmann, Napoleon III’s prefect of Paris, famously created wide boulevards to make blocking by barricade more difficult and moving the military easier, and replaced cobblestones with macadam – a surface of crushed stone. As Flaubert observed in his Dictionary of Accepted Ideas: ‘Macadam: has cancelled revolutions. No more means to make barricades. Nevertheless rather inconvenient.’   Lead image: Barricades, as we know them today, are thought to have originated in early modern France. A colour engraving attributed to Achille‑Louis Martinet depicts the defence of a barricade during the 1830 July Revolution. Credit: Paris Musées / Musée Carnavalet – Histoire de Paris. Above: the socialist political thinker and activist Louis Auguste Blanqui – who was imprisoned by every regime that ruled France between 1815 and 1880 – drew instructions for how to build an effective barricade Under Napoleon III, Baron Haussmann widened Paris’s streets in his 1853–70 renovation of the city, making barricading more difficult Credit: Old Books Images / Alamy ‘On one hand, [the authorities] wanted to favour the circulation of ideas,’ reactionary intellectual Louis Veuillot observed apropos the ambiguous liberalism of the latter period of Napoleon III’s Second Empire. ‘On the other, to ensure the circulation of regiments.’ But ‘anti‑insurgency hardware’, as Justinien Tribillon has called it, also served to chase the working class out of the city centre: Haussmann’s projects amounted to a gigantic form of real-estate speculation, and the 1871 Paris Commune that followed constituted not just a short‑lived anarchist experiment featuring enormous barricades; it also signalled the return of the workers to the centre and, arguably, revenge for their dispossession.    By the mid‑19th century, observers questioned whether barricades still had practical meaning. Gottfried Semper’s barricade, constructed for the 1849 Dresden uprising, had proved unconquerable, but Friedrich Engels, one‑time ‘inspector of barricades’ in the Elberfeld insurrection of the same year, already suggested that the barricades’ primary meaning was now moral rather than military – a point to be echoed by Leon Trotsky in the subsequent century. Barricades symbolised bravery and the will to hold out among insurrectionists, and, not least, determination rather to destroy one’s possessions – and one’s neighbourhood – than put up with further oppression.   Not only self‑declared revolutionaries viewed things this way: the reformist Social Democrat leader Eduard Bernstein observed that ‘the barricade fight as a political weapon of the people has been completely eliminated due to changes in weapon technology and cities’ structures’. Bernstein was also picking up on the fact that, in the era of industrialisation, contention happened at least as much on the factory floor as on the streets. The strike, not the food riot or the defence of workers’ quartiers, became the paradigmatic form of conflict. Joshua Clover has pointed out in his 2016 book Riot. Strike. Riot: The New Era of Uprisings, that the price of labour, rather than the price of goods, caused people to confront the powerful. Blocking production grew more important than blocking the street. ‘The only weapons we have are our bodies, and we need to tuck them in places so wheels don’t turn’ Today, it is again blocking – not just people streaming along the streets in large marches – that is prominently associated with protests. Disrupting circulation is not only an important gesture in the face of climate emergency; blocking transport is a powerful form of protest in an economic system focused on logistics and just‑in‑time distribution. Members of Insulate Britain and Germany’s Last Generation super‑glue themselves to streets to stop car traffic to draw attention to the climate emergency; they have also attached themselves to airport runways. They form a human barricade of sorts, immobilising traffic by making themselves immovable.   Today’s protesters have made themselves consciously vulnerable. They in fact follow the advice of US civil rights’ Bayard Rustin who explained: ‘The only weapons we have are our bodies, and we need to tuck them in places so wheels don’t turn.’ Making oneself vulnerable might increase the chances of a majority of citizens seeing the importance of the cause which those engaged in civil disobedience are pursuing. Demonstrations – even large, unpredictable ones – are no longer sufficient. They draw too little attention and do not compel a reaction. Naomi Klein proposed the term ‘blockadia’ as ‘a roving transnational conflict zone’ in which people block extraction – be it open‑pit mines, fracking sites or tar sands pipelines – with their bodies. More often than not, these blockades are organised by local people opposing the fossil fuel industry, not environmental activists per se. Blockadia came to denote resistance to the Keystone XL pipeline as well as Canada’s First Nations‑led movement Idle No More. In cities, blocking can be accomplished with highly mobile structures. Like the barricade of the 19th century, they can be quickly assembled, yet are difficult to move; unlike old‑style barricades, they can also be quickly disassembled, removed and hidden (by those who have the engineering and architectural know‑how). Think of super tripods, intricate ‘protest beacons’ based on tensegrity principles, as well as inflatable cobblestones, pioneered by the artist‑activists of Tools for Action (and as analysed in Nick Newman’s recent volume Protest Architecture).   As recently as 1991, newly independent Latvia defended itself against Soviet tanks with the popular construction of barricades, in a series of confrontations that became known as the Barikādes Credit: Associated Press / Alamy Inversely, roadblocks can be used by police authorities to stop demonstrations and gatherings from taking place – protesters are seen removing such infrastructure in Dhaka during a general strike in 1999 Credit: REUTERS / Rafiqur Rahman / Bridgeman These inflatable objects are highly flexible, but can also be protective against police batons. They pose an awkward challenge to the authorities, who often end up looking ridiculous when dealing with them, and, as one of the inventors pointed out, they are guaranteed to create a media spectacle. This was also true of the 19th‑century barricade: people posed for pictures in front of them. As Wolfgang Scheppe, a curator of Architecture of the Barricade (currently on display at the Arsenale Institute for Politics of Representation in Venice), explains, these images helped the police to find Communards and mete out punishments after the end of the anarchist experiment. Much simpler structures can also be highly effective. In 2019, protesters in Hong Kong filled streets with little archways made from just three ordinary bricks: two standing upright, one resting on top. When touched, the falling top one would buttress the other two, and effectively block traffic. In line with their imperative of ‘be water’, protesters would retreat when the police appeared, but the ‘mini‑Stonehenges’ would remain and slow down the authorities. Today, elaborate architectures of protest, such as Extinction Rebellion’s ‘tensegrity towers’, are used to blockade roads and distribution networks – in this instance, Rupert Murdoch’s News UK printworks in Broxbourne, for the media group’s failure to report the climate emergency accurately Credit: Extinction Rebellion In June 2025, protests erupted in Los Angeles against the Trump administration’s deportation policies. Demonstrators barricaded downtown streets using various objects, including the pink public furniture designed by design firm Rios for Gloria Molina Grand Park. LAPD are seen advancing through tear gas Credit: Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Roads which radicals might want to target are not just ones in major metropoles and fancy post‑industrial downtowns. Rather, they might block the arteries leading to ‘fulfilment centres’ and harbours with container shipping. The model is not only Occupy Wall Street, which had initially called for the erection of ‘peaceful barricades’, but also the Occupy that led to the Oakland port shutdown in 2011. In short, such roadblocks disrupt what Phil Neel has called a ‘hinterland’ that is often invisible, yet crucial for contemporary capitalism. More recently, Extinction Rebellion targeted Amazon distribution centres in three European countries in November 2021; in the UK, they aimed to disrupt half of all deliveries on a Black Friday.   Will such blockades just anger consumers who, after all, are not present but are impatiently waiting for packages at home? One of the hopes associated with the traditional barricade was always that they might create spaces where protesters, police and previously indifferent citizens get talking; French theorists even expected them to become ‘a machine to produce the people’. That could be why military technology has evolved so that the authorities do not have to get close to the barricade: tear gas was first deployed against those on barricades before it was used in the First World War; so‑called riot control vehicles can ever more easily crush barricades. The challenge, then, for anyone who wishes to block is also how to get in other people’s faces – in order to have a chance to convince them of their cause.        2025-06-11 Kristina Rapacki Share

Last year, MACK Books published Architecture from Below, which anthologized writings by the French Brazilian architect, theorist, and painter Sérgio Ferro. (Douglas Spencer reviewed it for AN.) Now, MACK follows with Design and the Building Site and Complementary Essays, the second in the trilogy of books dedicated to Ferro’s scholarship. The following excerpt of the author’s 2023 preface to the English edition, which preserves its British phrasing, captures Ferro’s realization about the working conditions of construction sites in Brasília. The sentiment is likely relatable even today for young architects as they discover how drawings become buildings. Design and the Building Site and Complementary Essays will be released on May 22. If I remember correctly, it was in 1958 or 1959, when Rodrigo and I were second- or third year architecture students at FAUUSP, that my father, the real estate developer Armando Simone Pereira, commissioned us to design two large office buildings and eleven shops in Brasilia, which was then under construction. Of course, we were not adequately prepared for such an undertaking. Fortunately, Oscar Niemeyer and his team, who were responsible for overseeing the construction of the capital, had drawn up a detailed document determining the essential characteristics of all the private sector buildings. We followed these prescriptions to the letter, which saved us from disaster. Nowadays, it is hard to imagine the degree to which the construction of Brasilia inspired enthusiasm and professional pride in the country’s architects. And in the national imagination, the city’s establishment in the supposedly unpopulated hinterland evoked a re-founding of Brazil. Up until that point, the occupation of our immense territory had been reduced to a collection of arborescent communication routes, generally converging upon some river, following it up to the Atlantic Ocean. Through its ports, agricultural or extractive commodities produced by enslaved peoples or their substitutes passed towards the metropolises; goods were exchanged in the metropolises for more elaborate products, which took the opposite route. Our national identity was summed up in a few symbols, such as the anthem or the flag, and this scattering of paths pointing overseas. Brasilia would radically change this situation, or so we believed. It would create a central hub where the internal communication routes could converge, linking together hithertoseparate junctions, stimulating trade and economic progress in the country’s interior. It was as if, for the first time, we were taking care of ourselves. At the nucleus of this centripetal movement, architecture would embody the renaissance. And at the naval of the nucleus, the symbolic mandala of this utopia: the cathedral. Rodrigo and I got caught up in the euphoria. And perhaps more so than our colleagues, because we were taking part in the adventure with ‘our’ designs. The reality was very different — but we did not know that yet. At that time, architects in Brazil were responsible for verifying that the construction was in line with the design. We had already monitored some of our first building sites. But the construction company in charge of them, Osmar Souza e Silva’s CENPLA, specialized in the building sites of modernist architects from the so-called Escola Paulista led by Vilanova Artigas (which we aspired to be a part of, like the pretentious students we were). Osmar was very attentive to his clients and his workers, who formed a supportive and helpful team. He was even more careful with us, because he knew how inexperienced we were. I believe that the CENPLA was particularly important in São Paulo modernism: with its congeniality, it facilitated experimentation, but for the same reason, it deceived novices like us about the reality of other building sites. Consequently, Rodrigo and I travelled to Brasilia several times to check that the constructions followed ‘our’ designs and to resolve any issues. From the very first trip, our little bubble burst. Our building sites, like all the others in the future capital, bore no relation to Osmar’s. They were more like a branch of hell. A huge, muddy wasteland, in which a few cranes, pile drivers, tractors, and excavators dotted the mound of scaffolding occupied by thousands of skinny, seemingly exhausted wretches, who were nevertheless driven on by the shouts of master builders and foremen, in turn pressured by the imminence of the fateful inauguration date. Surrounding or huddled underneath the marquees of buildings under construction, entire families, equally skeletal and ragged, were waiting for some accident or death to open up a vacancy. In contact only with the master builders, and under close surveillance so we would not speak to the workers, we were not allowed to see what comrades who had worked on these sites later told us in prison: suicide abounded; escape was known to be futile in the unpopulated surroundings with no viable roads; fatal accidents were often caused by weakness due to chronic diarrhoea, brought on by rotten food that came from far away; outright theft took place in the calculation of wages and expenses in the contractor’s grocery store; camps were surrounded by law enforcement. I repeat this anecdote yet again not to invoke the benevolence of potential readers, but rather to point out the conditions that, in my opinion, allowed two students (Flávio Império joined us a little later) still in their professional infancy to quickly adopt positions that were contrary to the usual stance of architects. As the project was more Oscar Niemeyer’s than it was our own, we did not have the same emotional attachment that is understandably engendered between real authors and their designs. We had not yet been imbued with the charm and aura of the métier. And the only building sites we had visited thus far, Osmar’s, were incomparable to those we discovered in Brasilia. In short, our youthfulness and unpreparedness up against an unbearable situation made us react almost immediately to the profession’s satisfied doxa. Unprepared and young perhaps, but already with Marx by our side. Rodrigo and I joined the student cell of the Brazilian Communist Party during our first year at university. In itself, this did not help us much: the Party’s Marxism, revised in the interests of the USSR, was pitiful. Even high-level leaders rarely went beyond the first chapter of Capital. But at the end of the 1950s, the effervescence of the years to come was already nascent:  […] this extraordinary revival […] the rediscovery of Marxism and the great dialectical texts and traditions in the 1960s: an excitement that identifies a forgotten or repressed moment of the past as the new and subversive, and learns the dialectical grammar of a Hegel or an Adorno, a Marx or a Lukács, like a foreign language that has resources unavailable in our own. And what is more: the Chinese and Cuban revolutions, the war in Vietnam, guerrilla warfare of all kinds, national liberation movements, and a rare libertarian disposition in contemporary history, totally averse to fanaticism and respect for ideological apparatuses of (any) state or institution. Going against the grain was almost the norm. We were of course no more than contemporaries of our time. We were soon able to position ourselves from chapters 13, 14, and 15 of Capital, but only because we could constantly cross-reference Marx with our observations from well-contrasted building sites and do our own experimenting. As soon as we identified construction as manufacture, for example, thanks to the willingness and even encouragement of two friends and clients, Boris Fausto and Bernardo Issler, I was able to test both types of manufacture — organic and heterogeneous — on similar-sized projects taking place simultaneously, in order to find out which would be most convenient for the situation in Brazil, particularly in São Paulo. Despite the scientific shortcomings of these tests, they sufficed for us to select organic manufacture. Arquitetura Nova had defined its line of practice, studies, and research. There were other sources that were central to our theory and practice. Flávio Império was one of the founders of the Teatro de Arena, undoubtedly the vanguard of popular, militant theatre in Brazil. He won practically every set design award. He brought us his marvelous findings in spatial condensation and malleability, and in the creative diversion of techniques and material—appropriate devices for an underdeveloped country. This is what helped us pave the way to reformulating the reigning design paradigms.  We had to do what Flávio had done in the theatre: thoroughly rethink how to be an architect. Upend the perspective. The way we were taught was to start from a desired result; then others would take care of getting there, no matter how. We, on the other hand, set out to go down to the building site and accompany those carrying out the labor itself, those who actually build, the formally subsumed workers in manufacture who are increasingly deprived of the knowledge and know-how presupposed by this kind of subsumption. We should have been fostering the reconstitution of this knowledge and know-how—not so as to fulfil this assumption, but in order to reinvigorate the other side of this assumption according to Marx: the historical rebellion of the manufacture worker, especially the construction worker. We had to rekindle the demand that fueled this rebellion: total self-determination, and not just that of the manual operation as such. Our aim was above all political and ethical. Aesthetics only mattered by way of what it included—ethics. Instead of estética, we wrote est ética [this is ethics]. We wanted to make building sites into nests for the return of revolutionary syndicalism, which we ourselves had yet to discover. Sérgio Ferro, born in Brazil in 1938, studied architecture at FAUUSP, São Paulo. In the 1960s, he joined the Brazilian communist party and started, along with Rodrigo Lefevre and Flávio Império, the collective known as Arquitetura Nova. After being arrested by the military dictatorship that took power in Brazil in 1964, he moved to France as an exile. As a painter and a professor at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Grenoble, where he founded the Dessin/Chantier laboratory, he engaged in extensive research which resulted in several publications, exhibitions, and awards in Brazil and in France, including the title of Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres in 1992. Following his retirement from teaching, Ferro continues to research, write, and paint.

June 13, 20253 min readCould Iran Have Been Close to Making a Nuclear Weapon? Uranium Enrichment ExplainedWhen Israeli aircraft recently struck a uranium-enrichment complex in the nation, Iran could have been days away from achieving “breakout,” the ability to quickly turn “yellowcake” uranium into bomb-grade fuel, with its new high-speed centrifugesBy Deni Ellis Béchard edited by Dean VisserMen work inside of a uranium conversion facility just outside the city of Isfahan, Iran, on March 30, 2005. The facility in Isfahan made hexaflouride gas, which was then enriched by feeding it into centrifuges at a facility in Natanz, Iran. Getty ImagesIn the predawn darkness on Friday local time, Israeli military aircraft struck one of Iran’s uranium-enrichment complexes near the city of Natanz. The warheads aimed to do more than shatter concrete; they were meant to buy time, according to news reports. For months, Iran had seemed to be edging ever closer to “breakout,” the point at which its growing stockpile of partially enriched uranium could be converted into fuel for a nuclear bomb. (Iran has denied that it has been pursuing nuclear weapons development.)But why did the strike occur now? One consideration could involve the way enrichment complexes work. Natural uranium is composed almost entirely of uranium 238, or U-238, an isotope that is relatively “heavy” (meaning it has more neutrons in its nucleus). Only about 0.7 percent is uranium 235 (U-235), a lighter isotope that is capable of sustaining a nuclear chain reaction. That means that in natural uranium, only seven atoms in 1,000 are the lighter, fission-ready U-235; “enrichment” simply means raising the percentage of U-235.U-235 can be used in warheads because its nucleus can easily be split. The International Atomic Energy Agency uses 25 kilograms of contained U-235 as the benchmark amount deemed sufficient for a first-generation implosion bomb. In such a weapon, the U-235 is surrounded by conventional explosives that, when detonated, compress the isotope. A separate device releases a neutron stream. (Neutrons are the neutral subatomic particle in an atom’s nucleus that adds to their mass.) Each time a neutron strikes a U-235 atom, the atom fissions; it divides and spits out, on average, two or three fresh neutrons—plus a burst of energy in the form of heat and gamma radiation. And the emitted neutrons in turn strike other U-235 nuclei, creating a self-sustaining chain reaction among the U-235 atoms that have been packed together into a critical mass. The result is a nuclear explosion. By contrast, the more common isotope, U-238, usually absorbs slow neutrons without splitting and cannot drive such a devastating chain reaction.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.To enrich uranium so that it contains enough U-235, the “yellowcake” uranium powder that comes out of a mine must go through a lengthy process of conversions to transform it from a solid into the gas uranium hexafluoride. First, a series of chemical processes refine the uranium and then, at high temperatures, each uranium atom is bound to six fluorine atoms. The result, uranium hexafluoride, is unusual: below 56 degrees Celsius (132.8 degrees Fahrenheit) it is a white, waxy solid, but just above that temperature, it sublimates into a dense, invisible gas.During enrichment, this uranium hexafluoride is loaded into a centrifuge: a metal cylinder that spins at tens of thousands of revolutions per minute—faster than the blades of a jet engine. As the heavier U-238 molecules drift toward the cylinder wall, the lighter U-235 molecules remain closer to the center and are siphoned off. This new, slightly U-235-richer gas is then put into the next centrifuge. The process is repeated 10 to 20 times as ever more enriched gas is sent through a series of centrifuges.Enrichment is a slow process, but the Iranian government has been working on this for years and already holds roughly 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent U-235. This falls short of the 90 percent required for nuclear weapons. But whereas Iran’s first-generation IR-1 centrifuges whirl at about 63,000 revolutions per minute and do relatively modest work, its newer IR-6 models, built from high-strength carbon fiber, spin faster and produce enriched uranium far more quickly.Iran has been installing thousands of these units, especially at Fordow, an underground enrichment facility built beneath 80 to 90 meters of rock. According to a report released on Monday by the Institute for Science and International Security, the new centrifuges could produce enough 90 percent U-235 uranium for a warhead “in as little as two to three days” and enough for nine nuclear weapons in three weeks—or 19 by the end of the third month.

On November 4, 2003, a doctor gave Jon Gluck some of the worst news imaginable: He had cancer — one that later tests would reveal as multiple myeloma, a severe blood and bone marrow cancer. Jon was told he might have as little as 18 months to live. He was 38, a thriving magazine editor in New York with a 7-month-old daughter whose third birthday, he suddenly realized, he might never see.“The moment after I was told I had cancer, I just said ‘no, no, no,’” Jon told me in an interview just last week. “This cannot be true.”Living in remissionThe fact that Jon is still here, talking to me in 2025, tells you that things didn’t go the way the medical data would have predicted on that November morning. He has lived with his cancer, through waves of remission and recurrence, for more than 20 years, an experience he chronicles with grace and wit in his new book An Exercise in Uncertainty. That 7-month-old daughter is now in college.RelatedWhy do so many young people suddenly have cancer?You could say Jon has beaten the odds, and he’s well aware that chance played some role in his survival. (“Did you know that ‘Glück’ is German for ‘luck’?” he writes in the book, noting his good fortune that a random spill on the ice is what sent him to the doctor in the first place, enabling them to catch his cancer early.) Cancer is still a terrible health threat, one that is responsible for 1 in 6 deaths around the world, killing nearly 10 million people a year globally and over 600,000 people a year in the US. But Jon’s story and his survival demonstrate something that is too often missed: We’ve turned the tide in the war against cancer. The age-adjusted death rate in the US for cancer has declined by about a third since 1991, meaning people of a given age have about a third lower risk of dying from cancer than people of the same age more than three decades ago. That adds up to over 4 million fewer cancer deaths over that time period. Thanks to breakthroughs in treatments like autologous stem-cell harvesting and CAR-T therapy — breakthroughs Jon himself benefited from, often just in time — cancer isn’t the death sentence it once was.Our World in DataGetting better all the timeThere’s no doubt that just as the rise of smoking in the 20th century led to a major increase in cancer deaths, the equally sharp decline of tobacco use eventually led to a delayed decrease. Smoking is one of the most potent carcinogens in the world, and at the peak in the early 1960s, around 12 cigarettes were being sold per adult per day in the US. Take away the cigarettes and — after a delay of a couple of decades — lung cancer deaths drop in turn along with other non-cancer smoking-related deaths.But as Saloni Dattani wrote in a great piece earlier this year, even before the decline of smoking, death rates from non-lung cancers in the stomach and colon had begun to fall. Just as notably, death rates for childhood cancers — which for obvious reasons are not connected to smoking and tend to be caused by genetic mutations — have fallen significantly as well, declining sixfold since 1950. In the 1960s, for example, only around 10 percent of children diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia survived more than five years. Today it’s more than 90 percent. And the five-year survival rate for all cancers has risen from 49 percent in the mid-1970s to 69 percent in 2019. We’ve made strikes against the toughest of cancers, like Jon’s multiple myeloma. Around when Jon was diagnosed, the five-year survival rate was just 34 percent. Today it’s as high as 62 percent, and more and more people like Jon are living for decades. “There has been a revolution in cancer survival,” Jon told me. “Some illnesses now have far more successful therapies than others, but the gains are real.”Three cancer revolutions The dramatic bend in the curve of cancer deaths didn’t happen by accident — it’s the compound interest of three revolutions.While anti-smoking policy has been the single biggest lifesaver, other interventions have helped reduce people’s cancer risk. One of the biggest successes is the HPV vaccine. A study last year found that death rates of cervical cancer — which can be caused by HPV infections — in US women ages 20–39 had dropped 62 percent from 2012 to 2021, thanks largely to the spread of the vaccine. Other cancers have been linked to infections, and there is strong research indicating that vaccination can have positive effects on reducing cancer incidence. The next revolution is better and earlier screening. It’s generally true that the earlier cancer is caught, the better the chances of survival, as Jon’s own story shows. According to one study, incidences of late-stage colorectal cancer in Americans over 50 declined by a third between 2000 and 2010 in large part because rates of colonoscopies almost tripled in that same time period. And newer screening methods, often employing AI or using blood-based tests, could make preliminary screening simpler, less invasive and therefore more readily available. If 20th-century screening was about finding physical evidence of something wrong — the lump in the breast — 21st-century screening aims to find cancer before symptoms even arise.Most exciting of all are frontier developments in treating cancer, much of which can be tracked through Jon’s own experience. From drugs like lenalidomide and bortezomib in the 2000s, which helped double median myeloma survival, to the spread of monoclonal antibodies, real breakthroughs in treatments have meaningfully extended people’s lives — not just by months, but years.Perhaps the most promising development is CAR-T therapy, a form of immunotherapy. Rather than attempting to kill the cancer directly, immunotherapies turn a patient’s own T-cells into guided missiles. In a recent study of 97 patients with multiple myeloma, many of whom were facing hospice care, a third of those who received CAR-T therapy had no detectable cancer five years later. It was the kind of result that doctors rarely see. “CAR-T is mind-blowing — very science-fiction futuristic,” Jon told me. He underwent his own course of treatment with it in mid-2023 and writes that the experience, which put his cancer into a remission he’s still in, left him feeling “physically and metaphysically new.”A welcome uncertaintyWhile there are still more battles to be won in the war on cancer, and there are certain areas — like the rising rates of gastrointestinal cancers among younger people — where the story isn’t getting better, the future of cancer treatment is improving. For cancer patients like Jon, that can mean a new challenge — enduring the essential uncertainty that comes with living under a disease that’s controllable but which could always come back. But it sure beats the alternative.“I’ve come to trust so completely in my doctors and in these new developments,” he said. “I try to remain cautiously optimistic that my future will be much like the last 20 years.” And that’s more than he or anyone else could have hoped for nearly 22 years ago. A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!See More: Health

MSLAN corner / DevolutionSave this picture!© Xinxin GuoCoffee Shop•Chengdu, China Architects: Devolution Area Area of this architecture project Area:  80 m² Year Completion year of this architecture project Year:  2025 Photographs Photographs:Xinxin Guo Lead Architects: Jiansong Tang, Qi Wang More SpecsLess Specs Save this picture! Text description provided by the architects. We designed a teahouse with a courtyard along the sloping lakeside terrain at CPI Luhu. The platform in the courtyard draws inspiration from the small courtyards found in Minnan villages. In the design process, we aimed to keep both the building structure and the courtyard as open and transparent as possible.Save this picture!Save this picture!The building materials are mostly selected from old timber and old stone slabs in Fujian, retaining the natural texture and temperature in the hope of creating a simple and comfortable spatial atmosphere.Save this picture!Save this picture!To bring tea closer to everyday life, we also recycled tea stems and leaves to create tea residue boards, which are used in tabletops, seating, and other details. This allows the memory of tea aroma to become a tangible part of daily life.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!There is no complicated tea ceremony here, it is more like a place where you can rest your feet at any time and have a cup of tea at your own pace. Embracing the concept of "sharing tea and wandering", it offers a relaxing and easy-going resting experience.Save this picture!Save this picture!The spatial layout emphasizes openness and flow, with large floor-to-ceiling windows that naturally extend the tea garden and lake view into the interior.Save this picture!Save this picture!Every corner offers a unique perspective and atmosphere, allowing guests to experience a distinct 'tea time by the lake' every time they are seated.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture! Project gallerySee allShow less Project locationAddress:Chengdu, ChinaLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address.About this officeDevolutionOffice••• MaterialConcreteMaterials and TagsPublished on May 31, 2025Cite: "MSLAN corner / Devolution" 31 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030433/mslan-corner-devolution&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save想阅读文章的中文版本吗?崎寻·分茶寻游 / 退化建筑是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

Basic scientific research is a key contributor to economic productivity.getty Is science running out of steam? A growing body of research suggests that disruptive breakthroughs—the kind that fundamentally redefine entire fields—may be occurring less frequently. A 2023 article in Nature reported that scientific papers and patents are, on average, less “disruptive” than they were in the mid-20th century. The study sparked intense interest and considerable controversy, covered in a recent news feature provocatively titled “Are Groundbreaking Science Discoveries Becoming Harder To Find?” Before weighing in, however, it is worth interrogating a more fundamental question: What do we mean when we call science “disruptive”? And is that, in fact, the appropriate benchmark for progress? The study in question, led by entrepreneurship scholar Russell Funk, employs a citation-based metric known as the Consolidation–Disruption (CD) index. The tool attempts to quantify whether new research displaces prior work—a signal of disruption—or builds directly upon it, thereby reinforcing existing paradigms. It represents a noteworthy contribution to our understanding of scientific change. Their conclusion, that disruption has declined across disciplines even as the volume of scientific output has expanded, has ignited debate among scientists, scholars and policymakers. Innovation May Be Getting Harder—But Also Deeper At a structural level, science becomes more complex as it matures. In some sense it has to slow down. The simplest questions are often the first to be answered, and what remains are challenges that are more subtle, more interdependent, and more difficult to resolve. The law of diminishing marginal returns, long familiar in economics, finds a natural corollary in research: at some point the intellectual “low-hanging fruit” has largely been harvested. Yet this does not necessarily imply stagnation. In fact, science itself is evolving. I think that apparent declines in disruption reflect not an impoverishment of ideas, but a transformation in the conduct and culture of research itself. Citation practices have shifted. Publication incentives have changed. The sheer availability of data and digital resources has exploded. Comparing contemporary citation behavior to that of earlier decades is not simply apples to oranges; it’s more like comparing ecosystems separated by tectonic time. More profoundly, we might ask whether paradigm shifts—particularly those in the Kuhnian sense—are truly the milestones we should prize above all others. Much of the innovation that drives societal progress and economic productivity does not emerge from revolutions in thought, but from the subtle extension and application of existing knowledge. In fields as varied as biomedicine, agriculture, and climate science, incremental refinement has yielded results of transformative impact.Brighter green hybrid rice plants (left) help increase yields at this Filipino farm. (Photo by ... More Dick Swanson/Getty Images)Getty Images Science Today Is More Sophisticated—And More Efficient Scientists are publishing more today than ever. Critics of contemporary science attribute this to metric-driven culture of “salami slicing,” in which ideas are fragmented into the “minimum publishable unit” so that scientists can accrue an ever-growing publication count to secure career viability in a publish-or-perish environment. But such critiques overlook the extraordinary gains in research efficiency that have occurred in the past few decades, which I think are a far more compelling explanation for the massive output of scientific research today. Since the 1980s, personal computing has transformed nearly every dimension of the scientific process. Manuscript preparation, once the province of typewriters and retyped drafts, has become seamless. Data acquisition now involves automated sensors and real-time monitoring. Analytical tools like Python and R allow researchers to conduct sophisticated modeling and statistics with unprecedented speed. Communication is instantaneous. Knowledge-sharing platforms and open-access journals have dismantled many of the old barriers to entry.Advances in microcomputer technology in the 1980s and 1990s dramatically accelerated scientific ... More research.Denver Post via Getty Images Indeed, one wonders whether critics have recently read a research paper from the 1930s or 1970s. The methodological rigor, analytical depth, and interdisciplinary scope of modern research are, by nearly any standard, vastly more advanced. The Horizon Has Expanded In biology alone, high-throughput technologies—part of the broader “omics” revolution catalyzed by innovations like the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which enabled rapid DNA amplification and supported the eventual success of the Human Genome Project—continue to propel discovery at an astonishing pace.Nobel Prize laureate James D. Watson speaks at a press conference to announce that a six-country ... More consortium has successfully drawn up a complete map of the human genome, completing one of the most ambitious scientific projects ever and offering a major opportunity for medical advances, 14 April 2003 at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. The announcement coincides with the 50th anniversary of the publication of the landmark paper describing DNA's double helix by Watson and Francis Crick. AFP PHOTO / Robyn BECK (Photo credit should read ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images)AFP via Getty Images When critics lament the apparent decline of Nobel-caliber “blockbusters” they overlook that the frontier of science has expanded—not narrowed. If we consider scientific knowledge as a volume, then it is bounded by an outer edge where discovery occurs. In Euclidean geometry, as the radius of a sphere increases, the surface area (scaling with the square of the radius) grows more slowly than the volume (which scales with the cube). While the volume of knowledge grows more rapidly—encompassing established theories and tools that continue to yield applications—the surface area also expands, and it is along this widening frontier, where the known meets the unknown, that innovation arises. Rethinking Returns on Investment The modern belief that science must deliver measurable economic returns is, historically speaking, a relatively recent development. Before the Second World War, scientific research was not broadly viewed as a driver of productivity. Economist Daniel Susskind has argued that even the concept of economic growth as a central policy goal is a mid-20th century invention. After the war, that changed dramatically. Governments began to see research as critical to national development, security, and public health. Yet even as expectations have grown, relative public investment in science has, paradoxically, diminished, despite the fact that basic scientific research is a massive accelerant of economic productivity and effectively self-financing. While absolute funding has increased, government spending on science as a share of GDP has declined in the US and many other countries. Given the scale and complexity of the challenges we now face, we may be underinvesting in the very enterprise that could deliver solutions. Recent proposals to cut funding for NIH and NSF could, by some estimates, cost the U.S. tens of billions in lost productivity. There is compelling evidence to suggest that significantly increasing R&D expenditures—doubling or even tripling them—would yield strong and sustained returns. AI and the Next Wave of Scientific Efficiency Looking to the future, artificial intelligence offers the potential to not only streamline research but also to augment the process of innovation itself. AI tools—from large language models like ChatGPT to specialized engines for data mining and synthesis—enable researchers to traverse disciplines, identify patterns, and generate new hypotheses with remarkable speed. The ability to navigate vast bodies of scientific literature—once reserved for those with access to elite research libraries and ample time for reading—has been radically democratized. Scientists today can access digitized repositories, annotate papers with precision tools, manage bibliographies with software, and instantly trace the intellectual lineage of ideas. AI-powered tools support researchers in sifting through and synthesizing material across disciplines, helping to identify patterns, highlight connections, and bring under-explored ideas into view. For researchers like myself—an ecologist who often draws inspiration from nonlinear dynamics, statistical physics, and cognitive psychology—these technologies function as accelerators of thought rather than substitutes for it. They support the process of discovering latent analogies and assembling novel constellations of insight, the kind of cognitive recombination that underlies true creativity. While deep understanding still demands sustained intellectual engagement—reading, interpretation, and critical analysis—these tools lower the barrier to discovery and expand the range of intellectual possibilities. By enhancing cross-disciplinary thinking and reducing the latency between idea and investigation, AI may well reignite the kind of scientific innovation that some believe is slipping from reach. Science as a Cultural Endeavor Finally, it bears emphasizing that the value of science is not solely, or even primarily, economic. Like the arts, literature, or philosophy, science is a cultural and intellectual enterprise. It is an expression of curiosity, a vehicle for collective self-understanding, and a means of situating ourselves within the universe. From my vantage point, and that of many colleagues, the current landscape of discovery feels more fertile than ever. The questions we pose are more ambitious, the tools at our disposal more refined, and the connections we are able to make more multidimensional. If the signal of disruption appears to be dimming, perhaps it is only because the spectrum of science has grown too broad for any single wavelength to dominate. Rather than lament an apparent slowdown, we might ask a more constructive question: Are we measuring the right things? And are we creating the conditions that allow the most vital forms of science—creative, integrative, and with the potential to transform human society for the better—to flourish?

I wanted Journey Together to hit big. After Surging Sparks and Prismatic Evolutions delivered some real heat, it felt like we were on a roll. But instead of a clean three-hit combo, this set tripped over itself on the way out the gate. Prices were inflated from the start, and now that the market has had time to breathe, this correction is aggressive.N's Reshiram - 167/159 (Journey Together Stamped)Lillie's Clefairy ex 184/159Salamence ex 187/159N's Zoroark ex 185/159Articuno - 161/159Wailord 162/159N's Reshiram 167/159Iono's Bellibolt ex 172/159Lillie's Clefairy ex 173/159N's Zoroark ex 175/159Hop's Zacian ex 176/159Volcanion ex 182/159Iono's Bellibolt ex 183/159Hop's Zacian ex 186/159It’s still a solid set. Great art, fun pulls, some nostalgic hits. But a lot of the single prices were built on hype that couldn’t hold.Collectors thought we’d get another round of rapid value climbs. That didn’t happen. If you're buying now, you're catching cards on the way down instead of riding them on the way up. Just go in knowing what’s worth grabbing and what’s still floating on leftover launch-day fumes.Illustration RaresArticuno had a strong start. Prices hit $55 back in late March, which made sense at the time—it's a fan-favorite Legendary with great artwork. Since then, it’s taken a 36% dip and now floats around $35. Honestly, that’s still a bit high. I’ve seen near-mint listings at $18.69, and that feels more in line with where this card belongs. I think it’s a solid pickup if you just want a great-looking bird without the early adopter tax.Maractus - 160/159Articuno - 161/159Wailord 162/159Iono's Kilowattrel 163/159Lillie's Ribombee 164/159Swinub 165/159Lycanroc 166/159N's Reshiram 167/159N's Reshiram - 167/159 (Journey Together Stamped)Furret 168/159Noibat 169/159Hop's Wooloo 170/159Wailord was one of those early hype Illustration Rares that got pumped fast, mostly because it’s Wailord and people have a soft spot for absurdly large water types. It hit $60 at the end of March, which didn’t last long. It’s now dropped 63.66% to a market value of around $22.49, and I’ve seen copies listed for as low as $14.55. Personally, I think this one’s due for a soft bounce back to $30, but only once the panic listings clear out and the Wailord fans circle back.My favorite Illustration Rare is N’s Reshiram. The artwork is top-tier, and the character pairing actually adds something meaningful to the card. It started at $39.43, which honestly didn’t feel too far off given the demand at launch. Now it’s sitting around $17.44. Even the Journey Together stamped variant, which you'd think would carry some extra value, is undercutting the regular one at about $14. That’s a 79.51% drop, and in my opinion, a steal. If you want a chase card without paying chase prices, this is the one.Special Illustration Rare And Hyper RaresIGN Photo Composite / The Pokémon CompanyLillie’s Clefairy ex SIR was positioned as the face of the set, and for a moment it looked like it might stay there. Prices hit $400, which was wild, considering the only thing more expensive than that in Journey Together was probably regret. Now it’s sitting around $180 and in my opinion, it’s still too high. It’s a gorgeous card, no doubt about that, but I think we’ll see it hit $150 soon. Not a crash but a correction to something a little more in line with what most people are willing to pay.Volcanion ex 182/159Iono's Bellibolt ex 183/159Lillie's Clefairy ex 184/159N's Zoroark ex 185/159Hop's Zacian ex 186/159Salamence ex 187/159Iono's Bellibolt ex 188/159N's Zoroark ex 189/159Spiky Energy 190/159I thought Iono’s Bellibolt ex SIR was going to be the top card of the set. It had the rarity, it had the character, and it looked just chaotic enough to become a fan favorite. Instead, it’s hovering around $80, which is fine. Not great, not terrible. The price feels stable, and I don’t think it's going to tank like some of the other launch-day hype magnets. If you like it, grab it. If you're hoping it doubles in value, maybe take a walk.Salamence ex SIR is probably the best example of what went wrong with Journey Together’s early pricing. At launch, people were paying up to $250 for it like it was the last dragon card ever printed. Now it’s going for about $106, and I think it’ll settle closer to $100. Still expensive, sure, but at least now it’s priced like a high-tier chase card and not a collector’s retirement plan. The art’s strong, and Salamence has always had staying power, so I think this one holds up better than most.Full ArtsIono’s Bellibolt ex is my favorite full art, mostly because I pulled it and immediately convinced myself I was sitting on gold. At launch, it was going for around $80. It's now comfortably sitting in the $7–$8 range. Honestly, if you paid anything above $15, I don’t know what to tell you. It’s a great-looking card, though, and I think it’ll stick around this price for a while now that the dust has settled. Just maybe don’t buy it thinking it's the next Supporter-tier Iono. It’s a Bellibolt. Let’s be reasonable.Volcanion ex 171/159Iono's Bellibolt ex 172/159Lillie's Clefairy ex 173/159Mamoswine ex 174/159N's Zoroark ex 175/159Hop's Zacian ex 176/159Salamence ex 177/159Dudunsparce ex 178/159Brock's Scouting 179/159Iris's Fighting Spirit 180/159Ruffian 181/159Lillie’s Clefairy ex had a bizarre start. Prices climbed past $110 before launch, which had me wondering if people thought it was a Special Illustration Rare by mistake. It’s now found its lane at around $17–$19, which is where it probably should’ve been all along. I think it’s a great pickup at that price if you're into Lillie, or Clefairy, or just want something that won’t lose half its value before it hits your mailbox.N’s Zoroark ex started out a little more grounded at around $30, but even that wasn’t safe from the drop. It's landed around $12 now, which honestly feels like a fair deal. The card still looks fantastic, and it’s got some collector appeal thanks to N.But when I say Journey Together prices are crashing, this is exactly what I mean. Remember all those “can’t-miss deals” I was posting at launch? It wasn’t because the cards were underpriced — it’s because they were about to fall off a cliff.Find out more top tips on where to find Pokémon cards with my extensive guide, and check out this weeks latest crashers and climbers article for more Pokémon cards market watch updates.Here's the Pokémon TCG full Release Schedule so far for this year, too, so you don't miss anything. Buying singles is the cheapest way to collect right now, but don't feel like you have to "Catch Em' All!".Christian Wait is a contributing freelancer for IGN covering everything collectable and deals. Christian has over 7 years of experience in the Gaming and Tech industry with bylines at Mashable and Pocket-Tactics. Christian also makes hand-painted collectibles for Saber Miniatures. Christian is also the author of "Pokemon Ultimate Unofficial Gaming Guide by GamesWarrior". Find Christian on X @ChrisReggieWait.

Hey there! Welcome to our weekly indie games roundup. We've got lots to get through this time, including some news before we highlight some brand-new games you can play right now. Indie journal publisher Lost in Cult is moving into physical game releases with a label called Editions. The focus here is on preservation — all of the games that it releases will be available to play offline, with no updates required. Physical game preservation team Does it Play? is playtesting each release. There are premium, limited-edition versions of each game with a slipcase cover, essay booklet, poster and more, as well as retail copies. There will be new releases every month, and the first batch includes a couple of humdingers: Immortality and Thank Goodness You're Here. The Excavation of Hob's Barrow, a point-and-click folk horror game rounds out the trio of debut titles. Really looking forward to seeing where Editions goes from here. The latest Six One Indie showcase took place this week. I've mentioned a game or two that was featured in it below (Game Informer has a list of all the announcements), but I just want to call out a couple of things here.  The score for 1000xResist, one of the best-received games of 2024, is getting a vinyl release in October. Pre-orders are open now. Also, the game that closed out the show has somehow flown under my radar. Dinoblade is an upcoming hack-and-slash action RPG that puts big blades in the jaws of big dinosaurs. Hell yeah. Meanwhile, the folks behind the showcase have set up their own publishing label, Six One Indie Publishing. We've got a ton of other gaming showcases coming up over the next few weeks as Summer Game Fest bobbles on the horizon. Fans of brainteasers may want to catch the Thinky Direct showcase from the Thinky Games community. The hour-long stream starts on May 29 at 1PM ET (just as the Cerebral Puzzle Showcase begins on Steam) It will focus on, you guessed it, puzzle games and other titles that should give your brain a workout. You'll be able to watch the stream on YouTube. Meanwhile, a fun showcase of spy games just premiered. The 25-minute video highlights games across several genres that are largely about snoopin' and sneakin'. All of them, including a bundle of the I Expect You To Die VR trilogy, are featured in the Spy Video Game Rendezvous festival on Steam. New releases Deliver At All Costs was among this week's newcomers. It's an action game in which you play a courier in the '50s. As the name suggests, your primary goal is to deliver your cargo, no matter what. Reviews are mixed for this one but, hey, it's free on the Epic Games Store until 11AM ET on May 29. You can also get it on Steam for 10 percent off the regular price of $30 for the time being. The game is also available on PS5 and Xbox Series X/S. Speaking of vehicle-oriented destruction, it can be a chore to get the first few Grand Theft Auto games running on modern hardware. I live for chaos and Maniac, from Transhuman Design and publisher Skystone Games, reminds me a bit of those early, top-down GTA entries (which were made in my hometown, fact fans). It's out now on Nintendo Switch, PS5 and Xbox Series X/S, a little over a year after debuting on Steam. I can't promise it'll tide you over for a year until GTA 6 drops, but Maniac will run you just five bucks. Lynked: Banner of the Spark is a co-op action RPG that just came out of early access on Steam and landed on PS5 and Xbox Series X|S. With its colorful visuals, it reminds me a bit of Hi-Fi Rush, aesthetically. There's a town-building aspect to this as well. I didn't get around to digging into the game during early access. Reviews have been pretty solid so far, though, so I'm hoping to try out Lynked (from FuzzyBot and publisher Dreamhaven) soon. A few seconds into the latest trailer for Tales of Seikyu, I spotted a centaur, which was enough to catch my attention. This yokai fantasy life sim from ACE Entertainment and Fireshine Games is out now in early access on Steam. You can morph into other forms (including a slime!) to help with navigation and combat in this one. Centaurs and slimes, what's not to love? Here's one for the turn-based strategy/history enthusiasts out there. Bonaparte - A Mechanized Revolution (the debut game from Studio Imugi) sees you take control of units like a giant commandant mech in a battle for the future of France. Expect some political intrigue from this one, which is out now on Steam early access. Upcoming Chrono Odyssey has picked up plenty of momentum, as more than 400,000 people have already signed up to try it out. The horror-tinged, open-world MMORPG from Kakao Games and Chrono Studio will have a closed beta on Steam next month. It's also set to be featured at the Summer Game Fest Live showcase on June 6. The latest trailer looks deliciously creepy. Any game from Katamari Damacy creator Keita Takahashi is worth paying attention to. Even more so when publisher Annapurna Interactive is on board. And when it's a game that has a "call unicycle" button, I'm triple sold. Life-sim To a T tells the story of a teenager whose body gets stuck in a T-pose, with their arms stuck out to the sides. Thankfully, they have a cute pup who helps them actually do things. A delightful demo is out now on Steam, and the game will hit PC, PS5 and Xbox Series X/S on May 28. This one will be available day one on Game Pass. We've mentioned The Wandering Village a few times over the years and the game is finally coming out of early access on Steam on July 17. It'll also hit PS4, PS5, Xbox One, Xbox Series X/S and Nintendo Switch on the same day. This is a city-building sim that takes place on the back of a giant creature. I do enjoy the voxel destruction of sandbox heist game Teardown. So I was happy to hear that Tuxedo Labs and Coffee Stain are set to release another expansion next month. This time, we're going to space, as all great franchises (i.e the Leprechaun movies) eventually do. The Greenwash Gambit DLC will arrive on PS5, Xbox Series X/S and PC on June 24. It'll cost $8, but owners of the season pass and ultimate edition will get access at no extra cost. Artis Impact's pretty pixel art made an immediate impression on me during the Six One Indie showcase. It took Malaysian solo developer Mas four years to make this cozy RPG, which is "set in a decaying world ruled by rogue AI." Although the game has a main, linear main path, there are side quests, hidden interactions and random events to experience. A demo for Artis Impact is out now, and the full game is coming to Steam on August 7.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/chaotic-deliveries-colorful-co-op-action-rpgs-and-other-new-indie-games-worth-checking-out-140023626.html?src=rss