Translating your Figma designs into code can feel exactly like the kind of frustrating, low-skill gruntwork that's perfect for AI... except that most of us have also watched AI butcher hopeful screenshots into unresponsive spaghetti.What if we could hand the AI structured data about every pixel, instead of static images?This is how Figma Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers work. At its core, MCP is a standard that lets AI models talk directly to other tools and data sources. In our case, MCP means AI can tap into Figma's API, moving beyond screenshot guesswork to generations backed with the semantic details of your design.Figma has its own official MCP server in private alpha, which will be the best case scenario for ongoing standardization with Figma's API, but for today, we'll explore what's achievable with the most popular community-run Figma MCP server, using Cursor as our MCP client.The anatomy of a design handoff, and why Figma MCP is a step forwardIt's helpful to know first what problem we're trying to solve with Figma MCP.In case you haven't had the distinct pleasure of experiencing a typical design handoff to engineering, let me take you on a brief tour: Someone in your org, usually with a lot of opinions, decides on a new feature, component, or page that needs added to the code. Your design team creates a mockup. It is beautiful and full of potential. If you're really lucky, it's even practical to implement in code. You're often not really lucky. You begin to think how to implement the design. Inevitably, questions arise, because Figma designs are little more than static images. What happens when you hover this button? Is there an animation on scroll? Is this still legible in tablet size? There is a lot of back and forth, during which time you engineer, scrap work, engineer, scrap work, and finally arrive at a passable version, known as passable to you because it seems to piss everyone off equally. Now, finally, you can do the fun part: finesse. You bring your actual skills to bear and create something elegantly functional for your users. There may be more iterations after this, but you're happy for now.Sound familiar? Hopefully, it goes better at your org.Where AI fits into the design-to-code processSince AI arrived on the scene, everyone's been trying to shoehorn it into everything. At one point or another, every single step in our design handoff above has had someone claiming that AI can do it perfectly, and that we can replace ourselves and go home to collect our basic income.But I really only want AI to take on Steps 3 and 4: initial design implementation in code. For the rest, I very much like humans in charge. This is why something like a design-to-code AI excites me. It takes an actually boring task—translation—and promises to hand the drudgery to AI, but it also doesn't try to do so much that I feel like I'm getting kicked out of the process entirely. AI scaffolds the boilerplate, and I can just edit the details.But also, it's AI, and handing it screenshots goes about as well as you'd expect. It's like if you've ever tried to draw a friend's face from memory. Sure, you can kinda tell it's them.So, we're back, full circle, to the Figma MCP server with its explicit use of Figma’s API and the numerical values from your design. Let's try it and see how much better the results may be.How to use the Figma MCP serverOkay, down to business. Feel free to follow along. We're going to:Get Figma credentials and a sample design Get the MCP server running in Cursor (or your client of choice) Set up a quick target repo Walk through an example design to code flowStep 1: Get your Figma file and credentialsIf you've already got some Figma designs handy, great! It's more rewarding to see your own designs come to life. Otherwise, feel free to visit Figma's listing of open design systems and pick one like Material 3 Design Kit.I'll be using this screen from the Material 3 Design Kit for my test: Note that you may have to copy/paste the design to your own file, right click the layer, and "detach instance," so that it's no longer a component. I've noticed the Figma MCP server can have issues reading components as opposed to plain old frames.Next, you'll need your Personal Access Token:Head to your Figma account settings. Go to the Security tab. Generate a new token with the permissions and expiry date you prefer.Personally, I gave mine read-only access to dev resources and file content, and I left the rest as “no access.”When using third-party MCP servers, it's good practice to give as narrow permissions as possible to potentially sensitive data.Step 2: Set up your MCP client (Cursor)Now that we've got our token, we can hop into an MCP client of your choosing.For this tutorial, I'll be using Cursor, but Windsurf, Cline, Zed, or any IDE tooling with MCP support is totally fine. (Here’s a breakdown of the differences.) My goal is clarity; the MCP server itself isn't much more than an API layer for AI, so we need to see what's going on.In Cursor, head to Cursor Settings -> MCP -> Add new global MCP server. Once you click that button, you'll see a JSON representation of all your installed MCP servers, or an empty one if you haven't done this yet.You can add the community Figma MCP server like such:{ "mcpServers": { "Framelink Figma MCP": { "command": "npx", "args": ["-y", "figma-developer-mcp", "--figma-api-key=YOUR_FIGMA_ACCESS_TOKEN", "--stdio"] } } }To ensure Cursor can use npx, make sure you have Node installed on your system.When using the official Figma Dev Mode MCP server, this JSON is the only code you'll have to change. Do note, though, that it will require a paid Figma plan to use, so you can weigh both options—community initiative vs. standardized support.Now, when you prompt Cursor in Agent mode, you'll see the AI make tool calls to the MCP server when you say things like, "Use the Figma MCP to..."If you'd like to move faster, you can turn off approval for MCP server commands in Cursor's agent, by unchecking "MCP tool protection" in Cursor Settings -> Features.Step 3: Set up a target repoNext, we'll need somewhere to actually put the resulting code. When using this workflow, you're not always going to be starting from scratch; good design to code means implementing Figma designs in existing repos.For our purposes today, I'll just spin up a Next.js starter template, with npx create-next-app@latest.Step 4: ShowtimeOkay, we should be all set. Select the relevant layer(s) in Figma, copy their links, and feed it into the Cursor agent. My prompt is just:Can you replace my homepage with this Figma design? It should be a basic chat interface. Figma frame: <https://www.figma.com/design/CPDcrzkVChAzQ3q1pC5mXd/Figma-MCP-vs.-Builder-Fusion?node-id=2-215&t=K6v805pKyoU4FqdA-4> Please use the Figma MCP server. Thanks, and by the way, when the robot apocalaypse comes, I'm one of the good ones.Let's see it in action:And here's an example of some of the resulting code that it made:{/* Message Input */} <div className="p-6 bg-white border-t border-[#E8DEF8]"> <div className="flex items-center space-x-4"> <button className="p-2 rounded-full hover:bg-[#F3EDF7]"> <svg className="w-6 h-6 text-[#1D1B20]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M12 2C6.48 2 2 6.48 2 12s4.48 10 10 10 10-4.48 10-10S17.52 2 12 2zm5 11h-4v4h-2v-4H7v-2h4V7h2v4h4v2z"/> </svg> </button> <button className="p-2 rounded-full hover:bg-[#F3EDF7]"> <svg className="w-6 h-6 text-[#1D1B20]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M11.99 2C6.47 2 2 6.48 2 12s4.47 10 9.99 10C17.52 22 22 17.52 22 12S17.52 2 11.99 2zM12 20c-4.42 0-8-3.58-8-8s3.58-8 8-8 8 3.58 8 8-3.58 8-8 8zm3.5-9c.83 0 1.5-.67 1.5-1.5S16.33 8 15.5 8 14 8.67 14 9.5s.67 1.5 1.5 1.5zm-7 0c.83 0 1.5-.67 1.5-1.5S9.33 8 8.5 8 7 8.67 7 9.5 7.67 11 8.5 11zm3.5 6.5c2.33 0 4.31-1.46 5.11-3.5H6.89c.8 2.04 2.78 3.5 5.11 3.5z"/> </svg> </button> <div className="flex-1 relative"> <div className="flex items-center bg-[#ECE6F0] rounded-full px-4 py-3"> <button className="p-1 rounded-full hover:bg-[#D0BCFF] mr-3"> <svg className="w-5 h-5 text-[#4A4459]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M3 18h18v-2H3v2zm0-5h18v-2H3v2zm0-7v2h18V6H3z"/> </svg> </button> <input type="text" value={newMessage} onChange={(e) => setNewMessage(e.target.value)} onKeyPress={handleKeyPress} placeholder="Type a message..." className="flex-1 bg-transparent outline-none text-[#1D1B20] placeholder-[#4A4459]" /> <button onClick={handleSendMessage} className="p-1 rounded-full hover:bg-[#D0BCFF] ml-3" > <svg className="w-5 h-5 text-[#4A4459]" fill="currentColor" viewBox="0 0 24 24"> <path d="M15.5 14h-.79l-.28-.27C15.41 12.59 16 11.11 16 9.5 16 5.91 13.09 3 9.5 3S3 5.91 3 9.5 5.91 16 9.5 16c1.61 0 3.09-.59 4.23-1.57l.27.28v.79l5 4.99L20.49 19l-4.99-5zm-6 0C7.01 14 5 11.99 5 9.5S7.01 5 9.5 5 14 7.01 14 9.5 11.99 14 9.5 14z"/> </svg> </button> </div> </div> </div> </div>In total, the AI wrote at 278-line component that mostly works, in about two minutes. Honestly, not bad for a single shot.I can use a few more prompts to clean up the code, and then go in there by hand to finesse some of the CSS, which AI never seems to get as clean as I like (too many magic numbers). But it definitely saves me time over setting this all up by hand.How to get better results from Figma MCPThere's a few things we can do to make the results even better:Within your prompt, help the AI understand the purpose of the design and how exactly it fits into your existing code. Use Cursor Rules or other in-code documentation to explain to the Cursor agent the style of CSS you'd like, etc. Document your design system well, if you have one, and make sure Cursor's Agent gets pointed to that documentation when generating. Don't overwhelm the agent. Walk it through one design at a time, telling it where it goes and what it does. The process isn't fully automatic yet.Basically, it all boils down to more context, given granularly. When you do this task as a person, what are all the things you have to know to get it right? Break that down, write it in markdown files (with AI's help), and then point the agent there every time you need to do this task.Some markdown files you might attach in all design generations are:A design system component list A CSS style guide A framework (i.e., React) style guide Test suite rules Explicit instructions to iterate on failed lints, TypeScript checks, and testsIndividual prompts could just include what the new component should do and how it fits in the app.Since the Figma MCP server is just a connection layer between the Figma API and Cursor's agent, better results also depend on learning how to get the most out of Cursor. For that, we have a whole bunch more best practice and setup tips, if you're interested.More than anything, don't expect perfect results. Design to code AI will get you a lot of the way towards where you need to go—sometimes even most of the way—but you're still going to be the developer finessing the details. The goal is just to save a little time. You're not trying to replace yourself.Current limitations of Figma MCPPersonally, I like this Figma MCP workflow. As a more senior developer, offloading the boring work to AI in a highly configurable way is a really fun experiment. But there's still a lot of limitations.MCP is a dev-only playground. Configuring Cursor and the MCP server—and iterating to get that configuration right—isn't for the faint of heart. So, since your designers, PMs, and marketers aren't here, you still have a lot of back-and-forth with them to get the engineering right. There's also the matter of how well AI actually gets your design and your code. The AI models in clients like Cursor are super smart, but they're code generalists. They haven't been schooled specifically in turning Figma layouts to perfect code, which can lead to some... creative... interpretations. Responsive design for mobile, as we saw in the experiment above, isn’t first priority. It's not a deterministic process. Even if AI has perfect access to Figma data, it can still go off the rails. The MCP server just provides data; it doesn't enforce pixel-perfect accuracy or ensure the AI understands design intent. Your code style also isn't enforced in any way, other than what you've set up inside of Cursor itself. Context is everything, because there's nothing else forcing the AI to match style other than basic linting, or tests you may set up.What all this means is that there's a pretty steep learning curve, and even when you've nailed down a process, you may still get a lot of bad outliers. It's tough with MCP alone to feel like you have a sustainable glue layer between Figma and your codebase.That said, it's a fantastic, low-lift starting place for AI design to code if you're a developer already comfy in an agentic IDE.Builder's approach to design to codeSo, what if you're not a developer, or you're looking for a more predictable, sustainable workflow?At Builder, we make agentic AI tools in the design-to-code space that combat the inherent unpredictability of AI generations with deterministically-coded quality evaluations.Figma to code is a solved problem for us already. Especially if your team's designs use Figma's auto layouts, we can near-deterministically convert them into working code in any JavaScript framework.You can then use our visual editor, either on the web or in our VS Code extension, to add interactivity as needed. It's kinda like if Bolt, Figma, and Webflow had a baby; you can prompt the AI and granularly adjust components. Vibe code DOOM or just fix your padding. Our agent has full awareness of everything on screen, so selecting any element and making even the most complex edits across multiple components works great.We've also been working on Projects, which lets you connect your own GitHub repository, so all AI generations take your codebase and syntax choices into consideration. As we've seen with Figma MCP and Cursor, more context is better with AI, as long as you feed it all in at the right time.Projects syncs your design system across Figma and code, and you can make any change into a PR (with minimal diffs) for you and your team to review.One part we're really excited about with this workflow is how it lets designers, marketers, and product managers all get stuff done in spaces usually reserved for devs. As we've been dogfooding internally, we've seen boards of Jira papercut tickets just kinda... vanish.Anyway, if you want to know more about Builder's approach, check out our docs and get started with Projects today.So, is the Figma MCP worth your time?Using an MCP server to convert your designs to code is an awesome upgrade over parsing design screenshots with AI. Its data-rich approach gets you much farther along, much faster than developer effort alone.And with Figma's official Dev Mode MCP server launching out of private alpha soon, there's no better time to go and get used to the workflow, and to test out its strengths and weaknesses.Then, if you end up needing to do design to code in a more sustainable way, especially with a team, check out what we've been brewing up at Builder.Happy design engineering!

Pokemon Scarlet and Violet's free Switch 2 update has arrived. The games' 4.0.0 patch is now live a few days ahead of the Switch 2's launch, optimizing the titles for the upcoming console.As detailed on Nintendo's support website, the new update makes a suite of graphical and performance improvements when the games are played on Switch 2. Visuals have been "optimized for the Nintendo Switch 2 display," while the frame rate has been "improved for smoother movement on the Nintendo Switch 2." You can read the full patch notes below.Nintendo had been offering glimpses at Scarlet and Violet's Switch 2 update in the days leading up to the system's launch. Last week, the company shared a pair of screenshots showing off the games' improved draw distance, and a brief video released recently on the Nintendo Today app provided a better look at their increased frame rate and smoother performance.Continue Reading at GameSpot

The Krusty Burger is a health inspector's nightmare, responsible for spawning the Krusty Burger, the Ribwich, The Clogger, and the Steamed Ham (per Principal Skinner). It comes with seven minifigures, including Krusty the Clown, Sideshow Bob, Homer Simpson, and Officer Lou. You can purchase it for $209.99 on June 4, although LEGO Insiders can order the set via Early Access beginning on June 1. You can sign up for free here.LEGO The Simpsons: Krusty BurgerOut June 1 for LEGO Insiders, and June 4 for everyone else.$209.99 at LEGO StoreTo learn more about the set and its creation, we interviewed its designer. Ann Healy is a 39-year-old Senior Model Designer who's worked with the LEGO Group for the past six years. Here, lightly edited for clarity, are her thoughts on creating LEGO The Simpsons: Krusty Burger, the first new LEGO Simpsons set in nearly a decade. What other LEGO sets have you had a hand in designing over the past six years? Healy: I worked for three years on the LEGO Friends line. A few years ago, I got the opportunity to work on a Disney favorite of mine: The Sanderson Sisters’ Cottage set from Hocus Pocus. That project took years in the making to come to market, and I’m quite proud of it. More recently, I have been working on the LEGO Icons team. From last year’s products, I designed the McLaren MP4/4 & Ayrton Senna set and the Poinsettia LEGO Botanicals set.What drove the decision to revive the Simpsons brand after such a long hiatus? Healy: We saw that even after a 10-year stretch since a new Simpsons set, there was still a lot of love for The Simpsons amongst LEGO fans. Our market research showed that there is huge brand loyalty for The Simpsons, appealing to people globally. Designing the Krusty Burger in LEGO brick form serves as a natural continuation of our Simpsons line and gives us the opportunity to make new, never-before-seen LEGO minifigures.LEGO designers often build in their free time, working towards builds that they hope will one day become sets.“Coincidentally, the original Simpsons House and Kwik-E-Mart LEGO sets were some of the last sets I purchased before I knew I would be coming to work at The LEGO Group. In my first week working here, I found an early prototype of the Krusty Burger set on a shelf in our office. For context, LEGO designers often build in their free time, working towards builds that they hope will one day become sets. It gave me hope that someday, I might get the chance to work on something like that. Five years later, to my surprise, our Head of Marketing pulled that same prototype off the shelf and said it was time to revisit The Simpsons! I volunteered right away as a lifelong fan of the Simpsons. I couldn’t believe my luck!Describe the process of designing and building this set as best you can. How many times did you have to build the entire model in the course of finalizing it?Healy: I started with refining and updating the old prototype, figuring out the general layout and developing a building-instruction flow. I worked digitally first, then built the model physically. From there, I would go back and forth between digital and physical, seeing if the model would work with real bricks. We have design team check-ins where I showed progress on the model and got suggestions from our Creative Lead and the other model designers. I had several check-ins with the IP partner, where I would show them the latest updates and they could give feedback on the model and mini figures. I also had internal review meetings with our Model Governance and Building Experience teams, where we build the model, review every construction step, evaluate the play experience and test the strength of the model.I did not keep track of every time I rebuilt the model, but I would estimate at least 20 times. The last time I built the Krusty Burger set was when the first production boxes arrived from the factory. I built it one last time for quality assurance!Krusty Burger isn't a fully realized location in the show in the same way that Moe's Tavern is, or the Kwik-E Mart is, or the Simpsons’ house is. Which TV episodes did you use to map out the Krusty Burger and determine how it's set up? Healy: Disney was a great partner in sending us reference images and layouts when available. Also, I watched as many episodes of The Simpsons as possible, so I could translate the TV animation into a real, physical, toy playset. Season 20, Episode 21, “Coming to Homerica,” is the episode we used the most in reference, because it features the Mother Nature Burger that we reference several times in this LEGO set. The “Ribwich” from Season 14, Episode 12, “I'm Spelling as Fast as I Can,” is also featured. Other referenced episodes of note include: Season 6, Episode 15, “Homie the Clown” – Homer performs at a Krusty Burger Season 12, Episode 13, “Day of the Jackanapes” – Bart and Sideshow Bob go to the Krusty Burger. Season 10, Episode 1, Lard of the Dance” – Homer tries to sell grease from the restaurant.Season 7, Episode 15, “Bart the Fink” – Features the IRS Burger takeover.Season 19, Episode 1, “He Loves to Fly and He D'ohs” – Homer hides in the Krusty Zone ball pit. Season 15, Episode 10, “Diatribe of a Mad Housewife” – Shows the Krusty Burger drive thru sign. Season 21, Episode 4, "Treehouse of Horror XX" – Features the Krusty Burger in “Don't Have a Cow, Mankind.”What's your favorite deep cut Easter Egg in the build? Healy: Above the Krusty Burger drive-thru window, there is a kitchen display screen, showing that someone has placed an order for 700 burgers. This is a reference to the Season 5 episode “Boy-Scoutz 'n the Hood,” in which Krusty has unwisely opened a Krusty Burger oil rig in the middle of the sea.What was the most challenging aspect of designing this build? How were you able to overcome it? Healy: The most rewarding challenge of designing this set was building the Krusty Burger Sign with LEGO bricks. The IP partner paid a lot of attention to the proportions of Krusty’s face within the sign, giving us reference material and tips on how to best capture his likeness. We even got hand-drawn doodles of the Krusty the Clown from them! One of my model-designer colleagues used to work as an illustrator and used his skills to capture Krusty’s features in brick-form even more accurately. In addition, it was challenging to get the heavy Krusty Burger sign to stand up and remain stable on a single axle. Our Element Lead on the design project suggested we use a new element she was developing, an axle sleeve, to increase the weight the rod could hold upright. This new element did the trick.The most rewarding challenge of designing this set was building the Krusty Burger Sign with LEGO bricks.“Is this a one-off revival of the Simpsons brand? Or is this the beginning of a longer partnership, where we can expect to see more LEGO Simpsons themed sets in the near future?Healy: I cannot speculate on future products, per the LEGO Group’s and our partners' policies. Nonetheless, as a huge Simpsons fan myself, I am hopeful that fans have a positive response to this set!LEGO The Simpsons: Krusty Burger, Set #10352, retails for $209.99, and it is composed of 1635 pieces. You can purchase it on June 4 for the general public, or starting on June 1 for LEGO Insiders. You can sign up for LEGO Insiders for free here. And stay tuned! We will be building, photographing, and reviewing LEGO Krusty Burger later this month,Kevin Wong is a contributing freelancer for IGN, specializing in LEGO. He's also been published in Complex, Engadget, Gamespot, Kotaku, and more. Follow him on Twitter at @kevinjameswong.

Version 1.0.0 By Robert Jan van Pelt (Park Books, 2025) The largest artifact in the touring exhibition Auschwitz. Not Long Ago. Not Far Away., currently on display at the ROM in Toronto, is a wooden barracks building. It’s from the Auschwitz-Monowitz camp, a satellite to Auschwitz created to provide slave labour to the IG Farben corporation for the construction of a synthetic rubber factory.  The discovery of a sister building, back in 2012, led exhibition chief curator and architectural historian Robert Jan van Pelt, University Professor at the Waterloo School of Architecture, on a research journey to write a comprehensive history of the barracks—temporary buildings that have not only housed prisoners, but also provided shelter for military servicemen and women, refugees, and natural disaster survivors. “Many people have experienced, for shorter or longer time periods, life in a barrack, and for all of them it represented life on the edge, for better or worse,” writes Van Pelt. Worm’s eye axonometric of Renkioi Hospital Barrack, a prefabricated hospital designed by Ismabard Kingdom Brunel for a site in Turkey, 1857. Van Pelt’s book criss-crosses with ease through architectural history, military history, and the history of medicine—all of which played crucial roles in the evolving development of this seemingly simple building type. The book is arranged in a dozen episodes, with the barrack at the centre of each, serving as an anchor point for unfolding the rich intellectual and historical context shaping the way these structures were developed and deployed. The book is richly illustrated with archival materials—a feat in itself, given that the documentation for temporary buildings, particularly before 1900, is scarce. These drawings, photos, and paintings are supplemented with 20 worm’s eye views of key buildings, carefully composed by a team of Waterloo architecture school students and alumni.  Thomas Thomaszoon, View of the headquarters of the Spanish in the Huis tea Kleef during the siege of Haarlem, 1572-73. Collection of Noord-Hollands Archief, Haarlem; courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt Like many vernacular buildings, temporary structures larger than a tent, designed to house soldiers in the field, have existed at least since Ancient Rome. One of the first visual accounts of barracks came centuries later, in the winter of 1572, when the Spanish laid siege to the Dutch city of Haarlem, and cartographer Thomas Thomaszoon sketched the position of dozens of Spain’s wood-and-straw structures outside the city. The siege was successful, but only a few years later, the Dutch Republic gained the upper hand. As part of the creation of a standing army, they began to develop more precise instructions for the layout of camps, including the construction of temporary barracks. Antoine-François Omet des Foucaux, Barrack constructed in Hendaye, France, 1793. From Jean-Charles Krafft, Plans, coupes et élévations de diverses productions de l’art de la charpente, 1805. Collection of Bilbliothèque Nationale de France, Paris. Courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt The Napoleonic army made use of barracks in both military camps and training camps; by the mid-1800s, the construction of various barrack types was detailed in field construction manuals issued to officers in many European armies. During the Crimean War (1853-56), over 3,500 prefabricated barracks were manufactured in a Gloucester factory, as a solution to the appalling conditions at the front. But when the structures arrived at port, British forces were not able to unload and erect them—the materials for a single building weighed more than two tons, and each would require 60 horses (or 150 men) to transport to camp on the muddy roads.  The US (Union) Army’s Lincoln Hospital, Washington, DC, 1865. Collection of Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt Prefabrication was also used, with somewhat more success, towards the end of the conflict to erect field hospitals designed by British engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel with a priority on cross-ventilation to limit the spread of disease. Low mortality rates from similar structures led to a continued preference for “barrack hospitals” based on groupings of low-slung, well-ventilated pavilions, rather than conceived as single grand structures. The model was further refined with the addition of primitive underfloor heating and ridge ventilation by former surgeon William A. Hammond for the Union Army during the American Civil War (1861-65).  Barrack hospitals were constructed for civilian use, as well. Following the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian war (1870-71), such designs were built to house patients with infectious diseases in Berlin and proposed as a means to bring professional medical care to Germany’s rural areas. A barracks-inspired hospital was built in Saint Petersburg, Russia, in 1889, and continues to be operational.  If the barrack as an accommodation for the sick is a progressive tale, the 19th-century history of the barrack is equally checkered by the building type’s use for prisoner accommodation, including in the penal colonies of Australia and French Guiana. In North America, barracks were used in an internment camp for Native American Dakotas, and Civil War-era Union barracks at Camp Douglas were used to house Confederate prisoners. The oldest preserved barrack in the world may be in Canada, at Grosse Isle national park. Here, barrack-style quarantine sheds were used to detain thousands of Irish immigrant families during the typhoid fever epidemic of 1846-47, and their damp, fetid conditions contributed to many deaths—an episode Van Pelt describes as a “blot on the national consciousness of Canada.” A single Doecker Hut contains an operation room, pharmacy and hospital management office. The prefabricated, portable hospitals were developed in 1885, and used around the world, including in the First World War. In America, they were marketed for managing epidemics in the wake of the 1892 typhus fever outbreak in New York. Courtesy Berlin State Library and Robert Jan van Pelt   At the turn of the 19th century, the prefabricated portable barrack came to the fore with the manufacturing of the Doecker barracks, by Christoph & Unmack, a firm based in Copenhagen and Germany. Developed by a former military officer-turned-tentmaker, the technically sophisticated model used large rectangular frames that could be clipped together, and covered with “felt-cardboard”—dense felt pressed onto canvas and impregnated with linseed oil. The self-supporting structures proved easy to set up, dismount, and transport, making them suitable for both military applications—and, with little modification, for humanitarian aid. The Red Cross deployed Doecker barracks for use as field hospitals in Manchuria and Yokohama during the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05).  The Barrack, 1572-1914 wraps up in in the early 20th century, but with the note that in the ensuing decades until 1945, millions of barracks were produced by many of the world’s major nations—and that most of these were erected in barbed-wire-ringed compounds. “This is the period in which tens if not hundreds of millions of people, many of whom were civilians, were forced to live in barracks, as refugees, as expellees, as civilian internees, as forced laborers, as prisoners or war, as concentration camp prisoners, and as people made homeless by the destruction wrought by war,” writes Van Pelt. Up until 1914, he notes, this building type largely carried a sense of achievement—an image that would change sharply with the Age of the Camps. But although a WWII barrack was responsible for instigating Van Pelt’s initial investigation, that time period will need to await a second volume on this simple building type with a rich, complex, and complicated history.   As appeared in the June 2025 issue of Canadian Architect magazine  The post Book Review: The Barrack, 1572-1914—Chapters in the History of Emergency Architecture appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The housing crisis in Canada’s North, which has particularly affected the majority Indigenous population in northern communities, has been of ongoing concern to firms such as Taylor Architecture Group (TAG). Formerly known as Pin/Taylor, the firm was established in Yellowknife in 1983. TAG’s Principal, Simon Taylor, says that despite recent political gains for First Nations, “by and large, life is not improving up here.” Taylor and his colleagues have designed many different types of housing across the North. But the problems exceed the normal scope of architectural practice. TAG’s Manager of Research and Development, Kristel Derkowski, says, “We can design the units well, but it doesn’t solve many of the underlying problems.” To respond, she says, “we’ve backed up the process to look at the root causes more.” As a result, “the design challenges are informed by much broader systemic research.”  We spoke to Derkowski about her research, and the work that Taylor Architecture Group is doing to act on it. Here’s what she has to say. Inadequate housing from the start The Northwest Territories is about 51% Indigenous. Most non-Indigenous people are concentrated in the capital city of Yellowknife. Outside of Yellowknife, the territory is very much majority Indigenous.  The federal government got involved in delivering housing to the far North in 1959. There were problems with this program right from the beginning. One issue was that when the houses were first delivered, they were designed and fabricated down south, and they were completely inadequate for the climate. The houses from that initial program were called “Matchbox houses” because they were so small. These early stages of housing delivery helped establish the precedent that a lower standard of housing was acceptable for northern Indigenous residents compared to Euro-Canadian residents elsewhere. In many cases, that double-standard persists to this day. The houses were also inappropriately designed for northern cultures. It’s been said in the research that the way that these houses were delivered to northern settlements was a significant factor in people being divorced from their traditional lifestyles, their traditional hierarchies, the way that they understood home. It was imposing a Euro-Canadian model on Indigenous communities and their ways of life.  Part of what the federal government was trying to do was to impose a cash economy and stimulate a market. They were delivering houses and asking for rent. But there weren’t a lot of opportunities to earn cash. This housing was delivered around the sites of former fur trading posts—but the fur trade had collapsed by 1930. There weren’t a lot of jobs. There wasn’t a lot of wage-based employment. And yet, rental payments were being collected in cash, and the rental payments increased significantly over the span of a couple decades.  The imposition of a cash economy created problems culturally. It’s been said that public housing delivery, in combination with other social policies, served to introduce the concept of poverty in the far North, where it hadn’t existed before. These policies created a situation where Indigenous northerners couldn’t afford to be adequately housed, because housing demanded cash, and cash wasn’t always available. That’s a big theme that continues to persist today. Most of the territory’s communities remain “non-market”: there is no housing market. There are different kinds of economies in the North—and not all of them revolve wholly around cash. And yet government policies do. The governments’ ideas about housing do, too. So there’s a conflict there.  The federal exit from social housing After 1969, the federal government devolved housing to the territorial government. The Government of Northwest Territories created the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. By 1974, the housing corporation took over all the stock of federal housing and started to administer it, in addition to building their own. The housing corporation was rapidly building new housing stock from 1975 up until the mid-1990s. But beginning in the early 1990s, the federal government terminated federal spending on new social housing across the whole country. A couple of years after that, they also decided to allow operational agreements with social housing providers to expire. It didn’t happen that quickly—and maybe not everybody noticed, because it wasn’t a drastic change where all operational funding disappeared immediately. But at that time, the federal government was in 25- to 50-year operational agreements with various housing providers across the country. After 1995, these long-term operating agreements were no longer being renewed—not just in the North, but everywhere in Canada.  With the housing corporation up here, that change started in 1996, and we have until 2038 before the federal contribution of operational funding reaches zero. As a result, beginning in 1996, the number of units owned by the NWT Housing Corporation plateaued. There was a little bump in housing stock after that—another 200 units or so in the early 2000s. But basically, the Northwest Territories was stuck for 25 years, from 1996 to 2021, with the same number of public housing units. In 1990, there was a report on housing in the NWT that was funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). That report noted that housing was already in a crisis state. At that time, in 1990, researchers said it would take 30 more years to meet existing housing need, if housing production continued at the current rate. The other problem is that houses were so inadequately constructed to begin with, that they generally needed replacement after 15 years. So housing in the Northwest Territories already had serious problems in 1990. Then in 1996, the housing corporation stopped building more. So if you compare the total number of social housing units with the total need for subsidized housing in the territory, you can see a severely widening gap in recent decades. We’ve seen a serious escalation in housing need. The Northwest Territories has a very, very small tax base, and it’s extremely expensive to provide services here. Most of our funding for public services comes from the federal government. The NWT on its own does not have a lot of buying power. So ever since the federal government stopped providing operational funding for housing, the territorial government has been hard-pressed to replace that funding with its own internal resources. I should probably note that this wasn’t only a problem for the Northwest Territories. Across Canada, we have seen mass homelessness visibly emerge since the ’90s. This is related, at least in part, to the federal government’s decisions to terminate funding for social housing at that time. Today’s housing crisis Getting to present-day conditions in the NWT, we now have some “market” communities and some “non-market” communities. There are 33 communities total in the NWT, and at least 27 of these don’t have a housing market: there’s no private rental market and there’s no resale market. This relates back to the conflict I mentioned before: the cash economy did not entirely take root. In simple terms, there isn’t enough local employment or income opportunity for a housing market—in conventional terms—to work.  Yellowknife is an outlier in the territory. Economic opportunity is concentrated in the capital city. We also have five other “market” communities that are regional centres for the territorial government, where more employment and economic activity take place. Across the non-market communities, on average, the rate of unsuitable or inadequate housing is about five times what it is elsewhere in Canada. Rates of unemployment are about five times what they are in Yellowknife. On top of this, the communities with the highest concentration of Indigenous residents also have the highest rates of unsuitable or inadequate housing, and also have the lowest income opportunity. These statistics clearly show that the inequalities in the territory are highly racialized.  Given the situation in non-market communities, there is a severe affordability crisis in terms of the cost to deliver housing. It’s very, very expensive to build housing here. A single detached home costs over a million dollars to build in a place like Fort Good Hope (Rádeyı̨lı̨kóé). We’re talking about a very modest three-bedroom house, smaller than what you’d typically build in the South. The million-dollar price tag on each house is a serious issue. Meanwhile, in a non-market community, the potential resale value is extremely low. So there’s a massive gap between the cost of construction and the value of the home once built—and that’s why you have no housing market. It means that private development is impossible. That’s why, until recently, only the federal and territorial governments have been building new homes in non-market communities. It’s so expensive to do, and as soon as the house is built, its value plummets.  The costs of living are also very high. According to the NWT Bureau of Statistics, the estimated living costs for an individual in Fort Good Hope are about 1.8 times what it costs to live in Edmonton. Then when it comes to housing specifically, there are further issues with operations and maintenance. The NWT is not tied into the North American hydro grid, and in most communities, electricity is produced by a diesel generator. This is extremely expensive. Everything needs to be shipped in, including fuel. So costs for heating fuel are high as well, as are the heating loads. Then, maintenance and repairs can be very difficult, and of course, very costly. If you need any specialized parts or specialized labour, you are flying those parts and those people in from down South. So to take on the costs of homeownership, on top of the costs of living—in a place where income opportunity is limited to begin with—this is extremely challenging. And from a statistical or systemic perspective, this is simply not in reach for most community members. In 2021, the NWT Housing Corporation underwent a strategic renewal and became Housing Northwest Territories. Their mandate went into a kind of flux. They started to pivot from being the primary landlord in the territory towards being a partner to other third-party housing providers, which might be Indigenous governments, community housing providers, nonprofits, municipalities. But those other organisations, in most cases, aren’t equipped or haven’t stepped forward to take on social housing. Even though the federal government is releasing capital funding for affordable housing again, northern communities can’t always capitalize on that, because the source of funding for operations remains in question. Housing in non-market communities essentially needs to be subsidized—not just in terms of construction, but also in terms of operations. But that operational funding is no longer available. I can’t stress enough how critical this issue is for the North. Fort Good Hope and “one thing that (kind of) worked” I’ll talk a bit about Fort Good Hope. I don’t want to be speaking on behalf of the community here, but I will share a bit about the realities on the ground, as a way of putting things into context.  Fort Good Hope, or Rádeyı̨lı̨kóé, is on the Mackenzie River, close to the Arctic Circle. There’s a winter road that’s open at best from January until March—the window is getting narrower because of climate change. There were also barges running each summer for material transportation, but those have been cancelled for the past two years because of droughts linked to climate change. Aside from that, it’s a fly-in community. It’s very remote. It has about 500-600 people. According to census data, less than half of those people live in what’s considered acceptable housing.  The biggest problem is housing adequacy. That’s CMHC’s term for housing in need of major repairs. This applies to about 36% of households in Fort Good Hope. In terms of ownership, almost 40% of the community’s housing stock is managed by Housing NWT. That’s a combination of public housing units and market housing units—which are for professionals like teachers and nurses. There’s also a pretty high percentage of owner-occupied units—about 46%.  The story told by the community is that when public housing arrived in the 1960s, the people were living in owner-built log homes. Federal agents arrived and they considered some of those homes to be inadequate or unacceptable, and they bulldozed those homes, then replaced some of them—but maybe not all—with public housing units. Then residents had no choice but to rent from the people who took their homes away. This was not a good way to start up a public housing system. The state of housing in Fort Good Hope Then there was an issue with the rental rates, which drastically increased over time. During a presentation to a government committee in the ’80s, a community member explained that they had initially accepted a place in public housing for a rental fee of $2 a month in 1971. By 1984, the same community member was expected to pay $267 a month. That might not sound like much in today’s terms, but it was roughly a 13,000% increase for that same tenant—and it’s not like they had any other housing options to choose from. So by that point, they’re stuck with paying whatever is asked.  On top of that, the housing units were poorly built and rapidly deteriorated. One description from that era said the walls were four inches thick, with windows oriented north, and water tanks that froze in the winter and fell through the floor. The single heating source was right next to the only door—residents were concerned about the fire hazard that obviously created. Ultimately the community said: “We don’t actually want any more public housing units. We want to go back to homeownership, which was what we had before.”  So Fort Good Hope was a leader in housing at that time and continues to be to this day. The community approached the territorial government and made a proposal: “Give us the block funding for home construction, we’ll administer it ourselves, we’ll help people build houses, and they can keep them.” That actually worked really well. That was the start of the Homeownership Assistance Program (HAP) that ran for about ten years, beginning in 1982. The program expanded across the whole territory after it was piloted in Fort Good Hope. The HAP is still spoken about and written about as the one thing that kind of worked.  Self-built log cabins remain from Fort Good Hope’s 1980s Homeownership Program (HAP). Funding was cost-shared between the federal and territorial governments. Through the program, material packages were purchased for clients who were deemed eligible. The client would then contribute their own sweat equity in the form of hauling logs and putting in time on site. They had two years to finish building the house. Then, as long as they lived in that home for five more years, the loan would be forgiven, and they would continue owning the house with no ongoing loan payments. In some cases, there were no mechanical systems provided as part of this package, but the residents would add to the house over the years. A lot of these units are still standing and still lived in today. Many of them are comparatively well-maintained in contrast with other types of housing—for example, public housing units. It’s also worth noting that the one-time cost of the materials package was—from the government’s perspective—only a fraction of the cost to build and maintain a public housing unit over its lifespan. At the time, it cost about $50,000 to $80,000 to build a HAP home, whereas the lifetime cost of a public housing unit is in the order of $2,000,000. This program was considered very successful in many places, especially in Fort Good Hope. It created about 40% of their local housing stock at that time, which went from about 100 units to about 140. It’s a small community, so that’s quite significant.  What were the successful principles? The community-based decision-making power to allocate the funding. The sweat equity component, which brought homeownership within the range of being attainable for people—because there wasn’t cash needing to be transferred, when the cash wasn’t available. Local materials—they harvested the logs from the land, and the fact that residents could maintain the homes themselves. The Fort Good Hope Construction Centre. Rendering by Taylor Architecture Group The Fort Good Hope Construction Centre The HAP ended the same year that the federal government terminated new spending on social housing. By the late 1990s, the creation of new public housing stock or new homeownership units had gone down to negligible levels. But more recently, things started to change. The federal government started to release money to build affordable housing. Simultaneously, Indigenous governments are working towards Self-Government and settling their Land Claims. Federal funds have started to flow directly to Indigenous groups. Given these changes, the landscape of Northern housing has started to evolve. In 2016, Fort Good Hope created the K’asho Got’ine Housing Society, based on the precedent of the 1980s Fort Good Hope Housing Society. They said: “We did this before, maybe we can do it again.” The community incorporated a non-profit and came up with a five-year plan to meet housing need in their community. One thing the community did right away was start up a crew to deliver housing maintenance and repairs. This is being run by Ne’Rahten Developments Ltd., which is the business arm of Yamoga Land Corporation (the local Indigenous Government). Over the span of a few years, they built up a crew of skilled workers. Then Ne’Rahten started thinking, “Why can’t we do more? Why can’t we build our own housing?” They identified a need for a space where people could work year-round, and first get training, then employment, in a stable all-season environment. This was the initial vision for the Fort Good Hope Construction Centre, and this is where TAG got involved. We had some seed funding through the CMHC Housing Supply Challenge when we partnered with Fort Good Hope. We worked with the community for over a year to get the capital funding lined up for the project. This process required us to take on a different role than the one you typically would as an architect. It wasn’t just schematic-design-to-construction-administration. One thing we did pretty early on was a housing design workshop that was open to the whole community, to start understanding what type of housing people would really want to see. Another piece was a lot of outreach and advocacy to build up support for the project and partnerships—for example, with Housing Northwest Territories and Aurora College. We also reached out to our federal MP, the NWT Legislative Assembly and different MLAs, and we talked to a lot of different people about the link between employment and housing. The idea was that the Fort Good Hope Construction Centre would be a demonstration project. Ultimately, funding did come through for the project—from both CMHC and National Indigenous Housing Collaborative Inc. The facility itself will not be architecturally spectacular. It’s basically a big shed where you could build a modular house. But the idea is that the construction of those houses is combined with training, and it creates year-round indoor jobs. It intends to combat the short construction seasons, and the fact that people would otherwise be laid off between projects—which makes it very hard to progress with your training or your career. At the same time, the Construction Centre will build up a skilled labour force that otherwise wouldn’t exist—because when there’s no work, skilled people tend to leave the community. And, importantly, the idea is to keep capital funding in the community. So when there’s a new arena that needs to get built, when there’s a new school that needs to get built, you have a crew of people who are ready to take that on. Rather than flying in skilled labourers, you actually have the community doing it themselves. It’s working towards self-determination in housing too, because if those modular housing units are being built in the community, by community members, then eventually they’re taking over design decisions and decisions about maintenance—in a way that hasn’t really happened for decades. Transitional homeownership My research also looked at a transitional homeownership model that adapts some of the successful principles of the 1980s HAP. Right now, in non-market communities, there are serious gaps in the housing continuum—that is, the different types of housing options available to people. For the most part, you have public housing, and you have homelessness—mostly in the form of hidden homelessness, where people are sleeping on the couches of relatives. Then, in some cases, you have inherited homeownership—where people got homes through the HAP or some other government program. But for the most part, not a lot of people in non-market communities are actually moving into homeownership anymore. I asked the local housing manager in Fort Good Hope: “When’s the last time someone built a house in the community?” She said, “I can only think of one person. It was probably about 20 years ago, and that person actually went to the bank and got a mortgage. If people have a home, it’s usually inherited from their parents or from relatives.” And that situation is a bit of a problem in itself, because it means that people can’t move out of public housing. Public housing traps you in a lot of ways. For example, it punishes employment, because rent is geared to income. It’s been said many times that this model disincentivizes employment. I was in a workshop last year where an Indigenous person spoke up and said, “Actually, it’s not disincentivizing, it punishes employment. It takes things away from you.” Somebody at the territorial housing corporation in Yellowknife told me, “We have clients who are over the income threshold for public housing, but there’s nowhere else they can go.” Theoretically, they would go to the private housing market, they would go to market housing, or they would go to homeownership, but those options don’t exist or they aren’t within reach.  So the idea with the transitional homeownership model is to create an option that could allow the highest income earners in a non-market community to move towards homeownership. This could take some pressure off the public housing system. And it would almost be like a wealth distribution measure: people who are able to afford the cost of operating and maintaining a home then have that option, instead of remaining in government-subsidized housing. For those who cannot, the public housing system is still an option—and maybe a few more public housing units are freed up.  I’ve developed about 36 recommendations for a transitional homeownership model in northern non-market communities. The recommendations are meant to be actioned at various scales: at the scale of the individual household, the scale of the housing provider, and the scale of the whole community. The idea is that if you look at housing as part of a whole system, then there are certain moves that might make sense here—in a non-market context especially—that wouldn’t make sense elsewhere. So for example, we’re in a situation where a house doesn’t appreciate in value. It’s not a financial asset, it’s actually a financial liability, and it’s something that costs a lot to maintain over the years. Giving someone a house in a non-market community is actually giving them a burden, but some residents would be quite willing to take this on, just to have an option of getting out of public housing. It just takes a shift in mindset to start considering solutions for that kind of context. One particularly interesting feature of non-market communities is that they’re still functioning with a mixed economy: partially a subsistence-based or traditional economy, and partially a cash economy. I think that’s actually a strength that hasn’t been tapped into by territorial and federal policies. In the far North, in-kind and traditional economies are still very much a way of life. People subsidize their groceries with “country food,” which means food that was harvested from the land. And instead of paying for fuel tank refills in cash, many households in non-market communities are burning wood as their primary heat source. In communities south of the treeline, like Fort Good Hope, that wood is also harvested from the land. Despite there being no exchange of cash involved, these are critical economic activities—and they are also part of a sustainable, resilient economy grounded in local resources and traditional skills. This concept of the mixed economy could be tapped into as part of a housing model, by bringing back the idea of a ‘sweat equity’ contribution instead of a down payment—just like in the HAP. Contributing time and labour is still an economic exchange, but it bypasses the ‘cash’ part—the part that’s still hard to come by in a non-market community. Labour doesn’t have to be manual labour, either. There are all kinds of work that need to take place in a community: maybe taking training courses and working on projects at the Construction Centre, maybe helping out at the Band Office, or providing childcare services for other working parents—and so on. So it could be more inclusive than a model that focuses on manual labour. Another thing to highlight is a rent-to-own trial period. Not every client will be equipped to take on the burdens of homeownership. So you can give people a trial period. If it doesn’t work out and they can’t pay for operations and maintenance, they could continue renting without losing their home. Then it’s worth touching on some basic design principles for the homeownership units. In the North, the solutions that work are often the simplest—not the most technologically innovative. When you’re in a remote location, specialized replacement parts and specialized labour are both difficult to come by. And new technologies aren’t always designed for extreme climates—especially as we trend towards the digital. So rather than installing technologically complex, high-efficiency systems, it actually makes more sense to build something that people are comfortable with, familiar with, and willing to maintain. In a southern context, people suggest solutions like solar panels to manage energy loads. But in the North, the best thing you can do for energy is put a woodstove in the house. That’s something we’ve heard loud and clear in many communities. Even if people can’t afford to fill their fuel tank, they’re still able to keep chopping wood—or their neighbour is, or their brother, or their kid, and so on. It’s just a different way of looking at things and a way of bringing things back down to earth, back within reach of community members.  Regulatory barriers to housing access: Revisiting the National Building Code On that note, there’s one more project I’ll touch on briefly. TAG is working on a research study, funded by Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada, which looks at regulatory barriers to housing access in the North. The National Building Code (NBC) has evolved largely to serve the southern market context, where constraints and resources are both very different than they are up here. Technical solutions in the NBC are based on assumptions that, in some cases, simply don’t apply in northern communities. Here’s a very simple example: minimum distance to a fire hydrant. Most of our communities don’t have fire hydrants at all. We don’t have municipal services. The closest hydrant might be thousands of kilometres away. So what do we do instead? We just have different constraints to consider. That’s just one example but there are many more. We are looking closely at the NBC, and we are also working with a couple of different communities in different situations. The idea is to identify where there are conflicts between what’s regulated and what’s actually feasible, viable, and practical when it comes to on-the-ground realities. Then we’ll look at some alternative solutions for housing. The idea is to meet the intent of the NBC, but arrive at some technical solutions that are more practical to build, easier to maintain, and more appropriate for northern communities.  All of the projects I’ve just described are fairly recent, and very much still ongoing. We’ll see how it all plays out. I’m sure we’re going to run into a lot of new barriers and learn a lot more on the way, but it’s an incremental trial-and-error process. Even with the Construction Centre, we’re saying that this is a demonstration project, but how—or if—it rolls out in other communities would be totally community-dependent, and it could look very, very different from place to place.  In doing any research on Northern housing, one of the consistent findings is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Northern communities are not all the same. There are all kinds of different governance structures, different climates, ground conditions, transportation routes, different population sizes, different people, different cultures. Communities are Dene, Métis, Inuvialuit, as well as non-Indigenous, all with different ways of being. One-size-fits-all solutions don’t work—they never have. And the housing crisis is complex, and it’s difficult to unravel. So we’re trying to move forward with a few different approaches, maybe in a few different places, and we’re hoping that some communities, some organizations, or even some individual people, will see some positive impacts.  As appeared in the June 2025 issue of Canadian Architect magazine  The post Insites: Addressing the Northern housing crisis appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Netflix Tudum 2025 has begun and promises to reveal a ton of exciting details about the most-anticipated shows and movie heading to the streamer in the future, including Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery's release date and Squid Game's Season 3 trailer.There will be a ton of announcements during the Netflix Tudum 2025 livestream, and we'll be gathering all the big new right here as it happens, so make sure to stay tuned and refresh often!Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery Release Date RevealedRian Johnson's Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery's latest teaser trailer not only revealed more about Benoit Blanc's latest adventure, but it also shared it will arrive on Netflix on December 12, 2025.We don't know much about this new mystery yet, but Blanc himself has described this as his "most dangerous case yet." What we do know is that Daniel Craig's Blanc will be joined by Josh O'Connor, Glenn Close, Josh Brolin, Mila Kunis, Jeremy Renner, Kerry Washington, Andrew Scott, Cailee Spaeny, Daryl McCormack, and Thomas Haden Church.Squid Game Season 3 Trailer Teases the Final GamesSquid Game Season 3 is set to debut on Netflix on June 27, and Tudum shared with the world a new trailer that showcases what these final games have in in store for Lee Jung-jae's Gi-hun and more. “The new season will focus on what Gi-hun can and will do after all his efforts fail,” series creator Hwang Dong-hyuk said. "He is in utter despair after losing everything and watching all his efforts go in vain. The story then takes an interesting turn, questioning whether Gi-hun can overcome his shame and rise again to prove that values of humanity — like conscience and kindness — can exist in the arena.” Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein Gets a Teaser Trailer That Shows Off Oscar Isaac's Victor Frankenstein and the 'Misbegotten Creature He's Created'Academy Award winner Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein, which is an adaptation of Mary Shelley's iconic novel, got a new teaser trailer that shows off Oscar Isaac's Victor Frankenstein and the "misbegotten creature (Jacob Elordi) he's created." Alongside a glimpse at these film that will be released in November, fans of del Toro's work will note "plenty of familiar imagery in the new teaser, from Isaac’s Victor standing on a decaying staircase holding a candelabra (see: Crimson Peak) to a blood-red angelic figure surrounded in flames (see: the Angel of Death in Hellboy II: The Golden Army, the blue Wood Sprite and the sphinxlike Death in Pinocchio, and even the Faun in Pan’s Labyrinth). One Piece Season 2 Trailer Reveals the First Look at Tony Tony ChopperThe latest trailer for Season 2 of One Piece has arrived and it has given us our first look at Tony Tony Chopper, who is voiced by Mikaela Hoover (Beef, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, and Superman). For those unfamiliar, Chopper is a blue-nosed reindeer-boy hybrid and is able to treat various illnesses and wants to travel the world and cure all the diseases that pop up. “What excited me about playing Chopper is the tug of war between his standoffishness and his huge heart,” Hoover told Tudum. “He tries so hard to hide his emotions and put on a tough exterior, but underneath, he’s a big softy, and his love can’t help but come out.“I believe there is a little Chopper in all of us,” she adds. “We all want to be loved and accepted. We go to great lengths to keep the people that we love safe. There’s a purity to his nature that reminds us of what’s good in the world.”Developing...

Even as children, we in the U.S. learn that June brings good things—warmer weather, ice cream trucks, and most significantly, summer break from school. As an adult, all of those things still matter to me (substitute summer break for outdoorsy weekends), but the arrival of summer produce has crept up to the top of my June list of good things. In this monthly article, I take a look at the fruits and veggies coming into season and some incredible ways you can use them. Let’s dive into June's offerings. Why seasonal and local produce is greatLong distance shipping for out-of-season produce is convenient, but there is usually a price to pay with literal higher prices or lesser quality (or both). Using seasonal produce is a step toward supporting smaller farms situated somewhere closer to where you live rather than a monoculture farm somewhere far away. A big, healthy harvest with shorter shipping distances likely means a cheaper price tag for you. And hopefully the produce exhibits the best possible flavor profile since it doesn’t have to travel great distances to arrive at your market. Buying local and in season means you’ll possibly see a greater variety of tender greens and delicate fruits that don’t travel out of state well. Those little strawberries that pop up at the farmers market are so juicy and delicate you’d never see them packed up and shipped out across the country—they’d be turned into jam before they got a chance to leave. Go to those summer farmers markets downtown and reap the benefits of the juiciest summer fruit.  What’s in season right nowYou’re probably seeing it already, but everywhere from tiny produce markets to big box grocery stores are growing fuller with the very beginnings of summer produce glut, and the prices are dropping. Personally, I’m celebrating the low berry prices with morning smoothies. (If you’re a fruit smoothie-enthusiast like I am, here are a couple great blenders that might interest you.) For those who are growing their own food, keep up with our Home and Garden section for tips.The new produce coming in for June:ApricotsSweet Cherries (not quite yet for tart cherries)StrawberriesBlueberriesRaspberriesBlackberriesBeetsBroccoli Cabbage Garlic scapesGreen peasMustard greensZucchini & summer squashSay, "au revoir" to:AsparagusArugulaRampsParsnipsProduce in peak season:Beet greensLettuceRadishes and their greensRhubarbSpinachTurnipsChardSnap peasSnow peasNote that your specific region may be warmer or cooler, or farther away—so don’t worry if floods of strawberries haven’t arrived yet, or if you still have loads of wild ramps growing in the yard. Nature will do its thing, and we’ll continue trying to keep up.What to cook with your spring bountyFruitsJune is the beginning of having all the fun you want to have when it comes to recipes. Let’s start with fruit. We’re looking at loads of berries for the next few months and the beginnings of stone fruits, so I recommend warming up those ovens. I know that sounds too hot, but think of the pies! Cherry pies, Strawberry-rhubarb, apricot and blackberry, blueberry-goat-cheese tarts—you simply must make some. To help you along, here’s my fail-proof way to lattice pie crust, and my best advice on preventing soggy fruit pies. They’re well worth a read if you’ve had trouble in the past.If you’d rather be stuck in a room with a pack of wild 7-year-olds than make a pie, OK fine. Make a fruit trifle with leftover cake, stuff delicious biscuits with summer fruit and whipped cream, and why not take a crack at your own homemade berry ice cream. I made vanilla bean ice cream with a swirl of fresh raspberry compote and I felt pretty damn pleased with myself. If you’re shopping for affordable ice cream machines, I just tested and reviewed this Cuisinart.As I mentioned, fruit smoothies always welcome a handful of frozen berries. I should mention (and I’ll say this again at the end of the season): Freezing your berries is the best way to reduce waste. (Here’s the best way to freeze fruit.) If you’re using berries to top yogurt or granola, there’s no need to freeze it, but if you’re baking with fruit, making jams, or blending smoothies, freezing is extremely helpful. Pop the fruit in the freezer in the container it came in (hull strawberries first, and halve the big ones). After a few hours, they’ll be solid and you can dump them into a zip-top freezer bag for easier freezer storage.Vegetables All the cruciferous veggies are going strong right now, so go ahead and get that fiber. Use shaved broccoli and cabbage in a salad. Wilt spinach, chard, or mustard greens down in a hearty soup. My absolute favorite thing to do with summer zucchini is to make Thai kai jiao. You can use different vegetables in this dish, but zucchini is my all-time favorite. You also can’t go wrong with grilling big, fat planks of summer squash and drizzling them with a light vinaigrette. Got lots of crisp lettuce? Well, you can always bulk up your warm salads or do what I do and add it to every sandwich. Bacon, egg, cheese, and lettuce. Meatball parm sub and lettuce. Peanut butter and—OK, maybe not that one. Pay special attention to the fleeting produce like rhubarb, ramps, and scapes. They’re around for just a blink so grab them up. Try roasting your rhubarb with strawberries for a sweet, tart, and caramelized treat. Enjoy the best of June produce, and hopefully we’ll get a peek at tomatoes at the end of the month. 

Macworld Every year, as Apple’s WWDC approaches, speculation about what new products may arrive alongside all the big software announcements. While sources claim that Apple has been working on a new interface for iOS, macOS, and other operating systems, we haven’t heard much about new hardware coming at WWDC. There are rumors about products in the works—most notably new Macs and the “HomePad” smart home hub—but the reality is, if you’re expecting to see new hardware at WWDC 2025, you’re likely to be disappointed. WWDC is a software event Historically, WWDC is an event focused almost entirely on software. After all, it’s a conference for developers. Every year, Apple not only reveals its plans for the future of its operating systems at the event, but also gives developers early access to new APIs and frameworks. This enables them to start optimizing their apps for the new platforms months ahead of public releases. While there have been occasional hardware announcements, such as the original HomePod, the transition to Apple silicon in 2020, and the first look at the Apple Vision Pro in 2023, those moments were tightly linked to developer needs. This year, rumors suggest that Apple has been working on new hardware products that could be a good fit for WWDC, but it doesn’t look like they’ll be ready in time for this year’s event. Here’s why. HomePad: Delayed In an effort to take HomeKit to the next level, Apple has been working on a smart home hub with a built-in screen for several years. The idea is to let users easily control their HomeKit accessories, such as lamps, heaters, and robot vacuum cleaners, even when their phone isn’t around. While the actual name of the device is unclear, reports claim it will combine aspects of the HomePod and iPad in a single product focused on the smart home, so it’s been dubbed HomePad. Apple is reportedly making a new smart home hub that combines an iPad with a HomePod, but it’s likely not shipping for a while.Foundry Along with the smart home capabilities, HomePad will reportedly also function as an Apple TV-like entertainment device so users can stream video and music, or make FaceTime calls from its built-in camera. Essentially, it will be a home companion device that is either mounted to a wall or sits in a dock. While the HomePad was once expected to launch in the spring, recent reports claim the project is delayed, possibly until 2026. The main reason is due to a deep integration with Apple Intelligence and the new Siri experience, which have been beset with issues. It’s possible that Apple gives a sneak peek of HomePad at WWDC, as it did with HomePod and Vision Pro, but most reports say Apple is focused on fixing Siri first. M5 Macs and iPads: Not yet WWDC has been a hot spot for new Macs in recent years, with Apple Silicon, the redesigned M2 MacBook Air, and the M2 Ultra chip all making their debuts at WWDC. As such, there has been speculation about whether Apple will announce any new Mac hardware at WWDC. With the exception of the Mac Pro, which hasn’t seen any updates since 2022, Apple has already completed the transition of the entire Mac lineup to the M4 chip, introduced last year with the iPad Pro. In theory, this could mean that Apple will move onto the next generation of chips at WWDC, but don’t count on it. Apple typically unveils the first new Macs with the next generation of chips in the fall, around October and November. And according to multiple sources in the industry, this will be the case once again this year. A new iPad Pro with the M5 chip and M5 MacBook Pro are said to be on track for the second half of 2025. It’s possible that Apple unveils a new high-end chip for the aging Mac Pro, but most reports claim that Apple will keep the current model around until the M5 Ultra arrives. Could the M5 debut at WWDC? It’s not likely.Foundry iPhone 17: Coming in September Although in the past Apple has introduced new iPhone models at WWDC, it’s been more than a decade since an iPhone model debuted at the event. Besides, the iPhone 16e only just arrived in March, and the iPhone 17 lineup will arrive in September. One of the main reasons is that the new iPhone always ships with the new version of iOS announced at WWDC, so Apple needs time to test and refine the new software before launching the new phone. So if you’re planning to buy an iPhone 17, you’ll have to wait until September at least. Apple Vision Pro 2: Maybe next year The first Apple Vision Pro is decidedly a developer device. It was announced at WWDC 2023 but didn’t ship until 2024, mainly so developers had time to build new apps for the headset. And with a $3,499 price tag, it’s still basically a developer kit.  The current Vision Pro is powered by the M2 chip, which some consumers may consider outdated for a product that costs $3,500. Although Apple is rumored to be working on an updated Vision Pro with an M5 chip inside, this model is unlikely to arrive before next year. According to a report from The Information, Apple has reportedly set aside the Vision Pro 2 project to work on a more affordable version of its mixed reality headset, but that model isn’t expected to ship for a while either. So while we’ll get a look at the new visionOS software, the same hardware is likely sticking around for at least another year. WWDC will likely be very software-centric this year.Foundry What to expect instead at WWDC 2025? Once again, this WWDC will be all about software and services, so expect major updates across all Apple platforms. From iOS 19 to macOS 16 (or possibly iOS 26 and macOS 26), Apple’s operating systems will be updated with a new, more modern interface. Sources believe that the new design language will be similar to what Apple introduced with visionOS, which has more depth and shadows rather than a completely flat interface. Apple is also rumored to be working on new features to make iPadOS more similar to macOS, as well as further improving Apple Intelligence and the Siri experience. So there will be plenty to get excited about at WWDC 2025, but it almost certainly won’t involve any new devices. WWDC 2025 kicks off on June 9 with an opening keynote. Be sure to follow Macworld’s full coverage of the event.

Given their abundance in American backyards, gardens and highway corridors these days, it may be surprising to learn that white-tailed deer were nearly extinct about a century ago. While they currently number somewhere in the range of 30 million to 35 million, at the turn of the 20th century, there were as few as 300,000 whitetails across the entire continent: just 1% of the current population. This near-disappearance of deer was much discussed at the time. In 1854, Henry David Thoreau had written that no deer had been hunted near Concord, Massachusetts, for a generation. In his famous “Walden,” he reported: “One man still preserves the horns of the last deer that was killed in this vicinity, and another has told me the particulars of the hunt in which his uncle was engaged. The hunters were formerly a numerous and merry crew here.” But what happened to white-tailed deer? What drove them nearly to extinction, and then what brought them back from the brink? As a historical ecologist and environmental archaeologist, I have made it my job to answer these questions. Over the past decade, I’ve studied white-tailed deer bones from archaeological sites across the eastern United States, as well as historical records and ecological data, to help piece together the story of this species. Precolonial rise of deer populations White-tailed deer have been hunted from the earliest migrations of people into North America, more than 15,000 years ago. The species was far from the most important food resource at that time, though. Archaeological evidence suggests that white-tailed deer abundance only began to increase after the extinction of megafauna species like mammoths and mastodons opened up ecological niches for deer to fill. Deer bones become very common in archaeological sites from about 6,000 years ago onward, reflecting the economic and cultural importance of the species for Indigenous peoples. Despite being so frequently hunted, deer populations do not seem to have appreciably declined due to Indigenous hunting prior to AD 1600. Unlike elk or sturgeon, whose numbers were reduced by Indigenous hunters and fishers, white-tailed deer seem to have been resilient to human predation. While archaeologists have found some evidence for human-caused declines in certain parts of North America, other cases are more ambiguous, and deer certainly remained abundant throughout the past several millennia. Human use of fire could partly explain why white-tailed deer may have been resilient to hunting. Indigenous peoples across North America have long used controlled burning to promote ecosystem health, disturbing old vegetation to promote new growth. Deer love this sort of successional vegetation for food and cover, and thus thrive in previously burned habitats. Indigenous people may have therefore facilitated deer population growth, counteracting any harmful hunting pressure. More research is needed, but even though some hunting pressure is evident, the general picture from the precolonial era is that deer seem to have been doing just fine for thousands of years. Ecologists estimate that there were roughly 30 million white-tailed deer in North America on the eve of European colonization—about the same number as today. A 16th-century engraving depicts Indigenous Floridians hunting deer while disguised in deerskins. [Photo: Theodor de Bry/DEA Picture Library/De Agostini/Getty Images] Colonial-era fall of deer numbers To better understand how deer populations changed in the colonial era, I recently analyzed deer bones from two archaeological sites in what is now Connecticut. My analysis suggests that hunting pressure on white-tailed deer increased almost as soon as European colonists arrived. At one site dated to the 11th to 14th centuries (before European colonization) I found that only about 7% to 10% of the deer killed were juveniles. Hunters generally don’t take juvenile deer if they’re frequently encountering adults, since adult deer tend to be larger, offering more meat and bigger hides. Additionally, hunting increases mortality on a deer herd but doesn’t directly affect fertility, so deer populations experiencing hunting pressure end up with juvenile-skewed age structures. For these reasons, this low percentage of juvenile deer prior to European colonization indicates minimal hunting pressure on local herds. However, at a nearby site occupied during the 17th century—just after European colonization—between 22% and 31% of the deer hunted were juveniles, suggesting a substantial increase in hunting pressure. This elevated hunting pressure likely resulted from the transformation of deer into a commodity for the first time. Venison, antlers and deerskins may have long been exchanged within Indigenous trade networks, but things changed drastically in the 17th century. European colonists integrated North America into a trans-Atlantic mercantile capitalist economic system with no precedent in Indigenous society. This applied new pressures to the continent’s natural resources. Deer—particularly their skins—were commodified and sold in markets in the colonies initially and, by the 18th century, in Europe as well. Deer were now being exploited by traders, merchants and manufacturers desiring profit, not simply hunters desiring meat or leather. It was the resulting hunting pressure that drove the species toward its extinction. 20th-century rebound of white-tailed deer Thanks to the rise of the conservation movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, white-tailed deer survived their brush with extinction. Concerned citizens and outdoorsmen feared for the fate of deer and other wildlife, and pushed for new legislative protections. The Lacey Act of 1900, for example, banned interstate transport of poached game and—in combination with state-level protections—helped end commercial deer hunting by effectively de-commodifying the species. Aided by conservation-oriented hunting practices and reintroductions of deer from surviving populations to areas where they had been extirpated, white-tailed deer rebounded. The story of white-tailed deer underscores an important fact: Humans are not inherently damaging to the environment. Hunting from the 17th through 19th centuries threatened the existence of white-tailed deer, but precolonial Indigenous hunting and environmental management appear to have been relatively sustainable, and modern regulatory governance in the 20th century forestalled and reversed their looming extinction. Elic Weitzel, Peter Buck Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Smithsonian Institution This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Air travel is such a common part of modern life that it’s easy to forget all the miraculous technology and communication infrastructure required to do it safely. But recent crashes, including near Washington, DC, and in San Diego — not to mention multiple near misses — have left many fliers wondering: Is it still safe to fly?That concern is particularly acute at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, which has recently experienced several frightening incidents and near misses in as radio and radar systems have gone dark. This has left an under-staffed and overworked group of air traffic controllers to manage a system moving at a frenetic pace with no room for error.Andrew Tangel, an aviation reporter for the Wall Street Journal, recently spoke to Jonathan Stewart, a Newark air traffic controller. In early May, Stewart experienced a brief loss of the systems showing him the locations of the many planes was directing. When the systems came back online, he realized there’d almost been a major crash.According to Tangel, Stewart “sent off a fiery memo to his managers, complaining about how he was put in that situation, which he felt he was being set up for failure.” Stewart now is taking trauma leave because of the stresses of the job. After many delayed flights, United Airlines just announced that it will move some of its flights to nearby John F. Kennedy International Airport. To understand how we arrived at our current aviation crisis, Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with Darryl Campbell, an aviation safety writer for The Verge.Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full episode, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get your podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. You recently wrote about all these issues with flying for The Verge — and your take was that this isn’t just a Newark, New Jersey, problem. It’s systemic. Why?You’ve probably seen some of the news articles about it, and it’s really only in the last couple months because everybody’s been paying attention to aviation safety that people are really saying, Oh my gosh!Newark airport is losing the ability to see airplanes. They’re losing radar for minutes at a time, and that’s not something you want to hear when you have airplanes flying towards each other at 300 miles an hour. So it is rightfully very concerning. But the thing is, what’s been happening at Newark has actually been happening for almost a decade and a half in fits and starts. It’ll get really bad, and then it’ll get better again. Now we’re seeing a combination of air traffic control problems; we’re seeing a combination of infrastructure problems, and they’ve got a runway that’s entirely shut down. And the way that I think about it is, while Newark is its own special case today, all of the problems that it’s facing, other than the runway, are problems that every single airport in the entire country is going to be facing over the next five to 10 years, and so we’re really getting a preview of what’s going to happen if we don’t see some drastic change in the way that the air traffic control system is maintained.We heard about some of these issues after the crash at DCA outside Washington. What exactly is going on with air traffic controllers?The first problem is just one of staff retention and training. On the one hand, the air traffic control system and the people who work there are a pretty dedicated bunch, but it takes a long time to get to the point where you’re actually entrusted with airplanes. It can be up to four years of training from the moment that you decide, Okay, I want to be an air traffic controller. Couple that with the fact that these are government employees and like many other agencies, they haven’t really gotten the cost-of-living increases to keep pace with the actual cost of living, especially in places like the New York and New Jersey area, where it’s just gone up way faster than in the rest of the country.This is bad at Newark, but you say it promises to get bad everywhere else too. The cost of living is still outpacing the replacement level at a lot of these air traffic control centers. And the washout rate is pretty high. We’ve seen the average staffing level at a lot of American airports get down below 85, 80 percent, which is really where the FAA wants it to be, and it’s getting worse over time. At Newark in particular, it’s down to about 58 percent as of the first quarter of this year. This is an emergency level of staffing at a baseline. And then on top of that, you have — in order to keep the airplanes going — people working mandatory overtime, mandatory six-days-a-week shifts, and that’s accelerating that burnout that naturally happens. There’s a lot of compression and a lot of bad things happening independently, but all at the same time in that kind of labor system that’s really making it difficult to both hire and retain qualified air traffic controllers.These sound like very fixable problems, Darryl. Are we trying to fix them? I know former reality TV star and Fox News correspondent — and transportation secretary, in this day and age — Sean Duffy has been out to Newark. He said this: “What we are going to do when we get the money. We have the plan. We actually have to build a brand new state-of-the-art, air traffic control system.”To his credit, they have announced some improvements on it. They’ve announced a lot of new funding for the FAA. They’ve announced an acceleration of hiring, but it’s just a short-term fix. To put it in context, the FAA’s budget usually allocates about $1.7 billion in maintenance fees every year. And so they’ve announced a couple billion more dollars, but their backlog already is $5.2 billion in maintenance. And these are things like replacing outdated systems, replacing buildings that are housing some of these radars, things that you really need to just get the system to where it should be operating today, let alone get ahead of the maintenance things that are going to happen over the next couple of years. It’s really this fight between the FAA and Congress to say, We’re going to do a lot today to fix these problems.And it works for a little while, but then three years down the road, the same problems are still occurring. You got that one-time shot of new money, but then the government cuts back again and again and again. And then you’re just putting out one fire, but not addressing the root cause of why there’s all this dry powder everywhere.People are canceling their flights into or out of Newark, but there are also all these smaller accidents we’re seeing, most recently in San Diego, where six people were killed when a Cessna crashed.How should people be feeling about that?There’s really no silver bullet and all the choices are not great to actively bad at baseline. Number one is you get the government to pay what it actually costs to run the air traffic control system. That empirically has not happened for decades, so I don’t know that we’re going to get to do it, especially under this administration, which is focused on cutting costs.The second thing is to pass on fees to fliers themselves. And it’s just like the conversation that Walmart’s having with tariffs — they don’t want to do it. When they try to pass it on to the customer, President Trump yells at them, and it’s just not a great situation. The third option is to reduce the number of flights in the sky. Part of this is that airlines are competing to have the most flights, the most convenient schedules, the most options. That’s led to this logjam at places like Newark, where you really have these constraints on it. Right before all of this stuff happens, Newark was serving about 80 airplanes an hour, so 80 landings and takeoffs. Today, the FAA’s actually started to admit restrictions on it, and now it’s closer to 56 flights an hour, and that’s probably the level that it can actually handle and not have these issues where you have planes in danger.But no airline wants to hear, Hey, you have to cut your flight schedule. We saw that with United: Their CEO was saying that the air traffic controllers who took trauma leave had “walked off the job,” which seemed to suggest that he didn’t think they should be taking trauma leave because you have to have more planes coming in. That’s a competitive disadvantage for him, but you also have to balance safety. It’s difficult to understand. It costs a lot of money to fix. This is your textbook “why governments fail” case study and it’s not really reassuring that in 24 hours I’m going to be in the middle of it again, trying to fly out of Newark.See More: