When people talk about UX, it’s usually about the things they can see and interact with, like wireframes and prototypes, smart interactions, and design tools like Figma, Miro, or Maze. Some of the outputs are even glamorized, like design systems, research reports, and pixel-perfect UI designs. But here’s the truth I’ve seen again and again in over two decades of working in UX: none of that moves the needle if there is no collaboration. Great UX doesn’t happen in isolation. It happens through conversations with engineers, product managers, customer-facing teams, and the customer support teams who manage support tickets. Amazing UX ideas come alive in messy Miro sessions, cross-functional workshops, and those online chats (e.g., Slack or Teams) where people align, adapt, and co-create. Some of the most impactful moments in my career weren’t when I was “designing” in the traditional sense. They have been gaining incredible insights when discussing problems with teammates who have varied experiences, brainstorming, and coming up with ideas that I never could have come up with on my own. As I always say, ten minds in a room will come up with ten times as many ideas as one mind. Often, many ideas are the most useful outcome. There have been times when a team has helped to reframe a problem in a workshop, taken vague and conflicting feedback, and clarified a path forward, or I’ve sat with a sales rep and heard the same user complaint show up in multiple conversations. This is when design becomes a team sport, and when your ability to capture the outcomes multiplies the UX impact. Why This Article Matters Now The reason collaboration feels so urgent now is that the way we work since COVID has changed, according to a study published by the US Department of Labor. Teams are more cross-functional, often remote, and increasingly complex. Silos are easier to fall into, due to distance or lack of face-to-face contact, and yet alignment has never been more important. We can’t afford to see collaboration as a “nice to have” anymore. It’s a core skill, especially in UX, where our work touches so many parts of an organisation. Let’s break down what collaboration in UX really means, and why it deserves way more attention than it gets. What Is Collaboration In UX, Really? Let’s start by clearing up a misconception. Collaboration is not the same as cooperation. Cooperation: “You do your thing, I’ll do mine, and we’ll check in later.” Collaboration: “Let’s figure this out together and co-own the outcome.” Collaboration, as defined in the book Communication Concepts, published by Deakin University, involves working with others to produce outputs and/or achieve shared goals. The outcome of collaboration is typically a tangible product or a measurable achievement, such as solving a problem or making a decision. Here’s an example from a recent project: Recently, I worked on a fraud alert platform for a fintech business. It was a six-month project, and we had zero access to users, as the product had not yet hit the market. Also, the users were highly specialised in the B2B finance space and were difficult to find. Additionally, the team members I needed to collaborate with were based in Malaysia and Melbourne, while I am located in Sydney. Instead of treating that as a dead end, we turned inward: collaborating with subject matter experts, professional services consultants, compliance specialists, and customer support team members who had deep knowledge of fraud patterns and customer pain points. Through bi-weekly workshops using a Miro board, iterative feedback loops, and sketching sessions, we worked on design solution options. I even asked them to present their own design version as part of the process. After months of iterating on the fraud investigation platform through these collaboration sessions, I ended up with two different design frameworks for the investigator’s dashboard. Instead of just presenting the “best one” and hoping for buy-in, I ran a voting exercise with PMs, engineers, SMEs, and customer support. Everyone had a voice. The winning design was created and validated with the input of the team, resulting in an outcome that solved many problems for the end user and was owned by the entire team. That’s collaboration! It is definitely one of the most satisfying projects of my career. On the other hand, I recently caught up with an old colleague who now serves as a product owner. Her story was a cautionary tale: the design team had gone ahead with a major redesign of an app without looping her in until late in the game. Not surprisingly, the new design missed several key product constraints and business goals. It had to be scrapped and redone, with her now at the table. That experience reinforced what we all know deep down: your best work rarely happens in isolation. As illustrated in my experience, true collaboration can span many roles. It’s not just between designers and PMs. It can also include QA testers who identify real-world issues, content strategists who ensure our language is clear and inclusive, sales representatives who interact with customers on a daily basis, marketers who understand the brand’s voice, and, of course, customer support agents who are often the first to hear when something goes wrong. The best outcomes arrive when we’re open to different perspectives and inputs. Why Collaboration Is So Overlooked? If collaboration is so powerful, why don’t we talk about it more? In my experience, one reason is the myth of the “lone UX hero”. Many of us entered the field inspired by stories of design geniuses revolutionising products on their own. Our portfolios often reflect that as well. We showcase our solo work, our processes, and our wins. Job descriptions often reinforce the idea of the solo UX designer, listing tool proficiency and deliverables more than soft skills and team dynamics. And then there’s the team culture within many organisations of “just get the work done”, which often leads to fewer meetings and tighter deadlines. As a result, a sense of collaboration is inefficient and wasted. I have also experienced working with some designers where perfectionism and territoriality creep in — “This is my design” — which kills the open, communal spirit that collaboration needs. When Collaboration Is The User Research In an ideal world, we’d always have direct access to users. But let’s be real. Sometimes that just doesn’t happen. Whether it’s due to budget constraints, time limitations, or layers of bureaucracy, talking to end users isn’t always possible. That’s where collaboration with team members becomes even more crucial. The next best thing to talking to users? Talking to the people who talk to users. Sales teams, customer success reps, tech support, and field engineers. They’re all user researchers in disguise! On another B2C project, the end users were having trouble completing the key task. My role was to redesign the onboarding experience for an online identity capture tool for end users. I was unable to schedule interviews with end users due to budget and time constraints, so I turned to the sales and tech support teams. I conducted multiple mini-workshops to identify the most common onboarding issues they had heard directly from our customers. This led to a huge “aha” moment: most users dropped off before the document capture process. They may have been struggling with a lack of instruction, not knowing the required time, or not understanding the steps involved in completing the onboarding process. That insight reframed my approach, and we ultimately redesigned the flow to prioritize orientation and clear instructions before proceeding to the setup steps. Below is an example of one of the screen designs, including some of the instructions we added. This kind of collaboration is user research. It’s not a substitute for talking to users directly, but it’s a powerful proxy when you have limited options. But What About Using AI? Glad you asked! Even AI tools, which are increasingly being used for idea generation, pattern recognition, or rapid prototyping, don’t replace collaboration; they just change the shape of it. AI can help you explore design patterns, draft user flows, or generate multiple variations of a layout in seconds. It’s fantastic for getting past creative blocks or pressure-testing your assumptions. But let’s be clear: these tools are accelerators, not oracles. As an innovation and strategy consultant Nathan Waterhouse points out, AI can point you in a direction, but it can’t tell you which direction is the right one in your specific context. That still requires human judgment, empathy, and an understanding of the messy realities of users and business goals. You still need people, especially those closest to your users, to validate, challenge, and evolve any AI-generated idea. For instance, you might use ChatGPT to brainstorm onboarding flows for a SaaS tool, but if you’re not involving customer support reps who regularly hear “I didn’t know where to start” or “I couldn’t even log in,” you’re just working with assumptions. The same applies to engineers who know what is technically feasible or PMs who understand where the business is headed. AI can generate ideas, but only collaboration turns those ideas into something usable, valuable, and real. Think of it as a powerful ingredient, but not the whole recipe. How To Strengthen Your UX Collaboration Skills? If collaboration doesn’t come naturally or hasn’t been a focus, that’s okay. Like any skill, it can be practiced and improved. Here are a few ways to level up: Cultivate curiosity about your teammates.Ask engineers what keeps them up at night. Learn what metrics your PMs care about. Understand the types of tickets the support team handles most frequently. The more you care about their challenges, the more they'll care about yours. Get comfortable facilitating.You don’t need to be a certified Design Sprint master, but learning how to run a structured conversation, align stakeholders, or synthesize different points of view is hugely valuable. Even a simple “What’s working? What’s not?” retro can be an amazing starting point in identifying where you need to focus next. Share early, share often.Don’t wait until your designs are polished to get input. Messy sketches and rough prototypes invite collaboration. When others feel like they’ve helped shape the work, they’re more invested in its success. Practice active listening.When someone critiques your work, don’t immediately defend. Pause. Ask follow-up questions. Reframe the feedback. Collaboration isn’t about consensus; it’s about finding a shared direction that can honour multiple truths. Co-own the outcome.Let go of your ego. The best UX work isn’t “your” work. It’s the result of many voices, skill sets, and conversations converging toward a solution that helps users. It’s not “I”, it’s “we” that will solve this problem together. Conclusion: UX Is A Team Sport Great design doesn’t emerge from a vacuum. It comes from open dialogue, cross-functional understanding, and a shared commitment to solving real problems for real people. If there’s one thing I wish every early-career designer knew, it’s this: Collaboration is not a side skill. It’s the engine behind every meaningful design outcome. And for seasoned professionals, it’s the superpower that turns good teams into great ones. So next time you’re tempted to go heads-down and just “crank out a design,” pause to reflect. Ask who else should be in the room. And invite them in, not just to review your work, but to help create it. Because in the end, the best UX isn’t just what you make. It’s what you make together. Further Reading On SmashingMag “Presenting UX Research And Design To Stakeholders: The Power Of Persuasion,” Victor Yocco “Transforming The Relationship Between Designers And Developers,” Chris Day “Effective Communication For Everyday Meetings,” Andrii Zhdan “Preventing Bad UX Through Integrated Design Workflows,” Ceara Crawshaw

Crowdfunding a game you like is a common practice, but be careful with where you send your money. Zarya is an upcoming cozy narrative simulator telling the story of a rural driver in a post-Soviet setting, clearly inspired by Disco Elysium. Developed by SBSR, it needs support like any other game, but the creators don't ask for money online, so if you've seen their game on Indiegogo, be aware that this is a scam.One of the game's developers, Anton Surkov, went to Reddit to warn potential players about this fake page, saying that SBSR didn't create it and never planned to run a crowdfunding campaign. "Someone just stole our game name, visuals, and text, and started collecting money under our name. It’s not just upsetting – it’s terrifying."The worst part is that they might have never learned about it if not for emails offering “advice” and “coaching” to improve crowdfunding results that they started receiving after the page's launch.SBSR has already contacted Indiegogo but hasn't received a reply yet. "We’re just three people working late nights on something we care about. Watching someone try to exploit that… it sucks. But we’re not giving up."If you're interested in Zarya, wishlist it on Steam and find all the relevant information there, not on some crowdfunding site. Here is some information about the game so you can decide if this is something you'd like to play when it gets released.SBSR"Immerse yourself in the life of Vasily, a local driver striving to breathe new life into his village. Assist the villagers, transport packages, tow cars. Do everything within your power! Deliver cargo across endless fields, country roads, and overgrown paths. Upgrade your vehicle, turning it into an indefatigable iron steed."SBSRYou'll get to talk to people living far from civilization and see their views on the world. "Grill kebabs with the guys in the garages, go fishing with Petrovich, take the harvest to the market, tow cars, and try not to end up in a pit, as the last time a tractor was seen in the village was 30 years ago."There are plenty of "authentic post-Soviet clichés" and the warm atmosphere of the good old days.SBSRSign in for a playtest and join our 80 Level Talent platform and our new Discord server, follow us on Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Telegram, TikTok, and Threads, where we share breakdowns, the latest news, awesome artworks, and more.

Great star corals in the grip of disease have been saved with probiotics — beneficial bacteria that attack or displace invading pathogens or possibly trigger immune responses to them. What’s causing this deadly disease remains unidentified. But researchers at the Smithsonian Marine Station in Fort Pierce, Fla., were able to successfully halt progression of the disease’s symptoms, the team reports June 5 in Frontiers in Marine Science. The condition is called stony coral tissue loss disease and is characterized by white lesions that lead to the loss of polyps — tiny soft-bodied organisms similar to sea anemones — blanketing coral. Eventually, nothing but the white coral skeleton is left behind. The disease emerged in Florida in 2014 and has spread rampantly throughout the Florida Keys and the Caribbean. A great star coral (M. cavernosa) colony is infected with stony coral tissue loss disease on the coral reef in Fort Lauderdale. The lesion, where the white band of tissue occurs, typically moves across the coral, killing coral tissue along the way. Kelly Pitts/Smithsonian Researchers suspect that the disease is bacterial in nature. Antibiotic treatments can offer a quick fix, but these drugs do not prevent reinfection and carry the risk of the mysterious pathogen building resistance against them. So, in late 2020, the Smithsonian group tried for a more sustainable solution, giving probiotics to 30 infected great star coral colonies. The helpful microbes came from corals tested in the lab that showed resistance to the disease. “We noticed that one of the coral fragments would not get infected … so one of the first things we did was try to culture the microbes that are on this coral,” says microbiologist Blake Ushijima, who developed the probiotic used in the team’s experiment. “These microbes produce antibacterial compounds … and one had a high level of activity against bacteria from diseased corals,” acting as a “pro” biotic, by somehow neutralizing pathogens. The identified microbe, a bacterium called McH1-7, became the active ingredient in a paste delivered by divers to several infected colonies. They covered these colonies with plastic bags to immerse them in the probiotic solution, injecting the paste into the bags using a syringe. They also applied the paste directly to other colonies, slathering lesions caused by the disease. A probiotic paste of McH1-7 is applied to the disease lesion of a great star coral (M. cavernosa) colony infected with stony coral tissue loss disease. The paste was then smoothed flat with a gloved hand so that all apparently infected tissue was covered by the lesion-specific treatment.Kelly Pitts/Smithsonian For two and a half years, the team monitored the corals’ health. The probiotics slowed or stopped the disease from spreading in all eight colonies treated inside bags. On average, the disease’s ugly advance was held to only 7 percent of tissue, compared with an aggressive 30 percent on untreated colonies. The paste put directly on the coral had no beneficial effect. The results are encouraging, but coauthor Valerie Paul cautions against declaring the probiotic a cure. She doubts the practicality of swimming around with heavily weighted plastic bags and putting them on corals. And, she points out, the study was limited to one species of coral, when the disease plagues over 30. Sponsor Message Still, Ushijima considers the study a proof of concept. “The idea of coral probiotics has been thrown around for decades, but no one has directly shown their effects on disease in the wild,” he says. “I think it’s very exciting because it’s actually opening the door to a new field.”

TL;DR: Canberra authorities are embracing a tough approach to ransomware threats. A new law will require certain organizations to disclose when and how much they have paid to cybercriminals following a data breach. However, experts remain unconvinced that this is the most effective way to tackle the problem. Companies operating in Australia must now report any payments made to cybercriminals after experiencing a ransomware incident. Government officials hope the new mandate will help them gain a deeper understanding of the issue, as many enterprises continue to pay ransoms whenever they fall victim to file-encrypting malware. Originally proposed last year, the law applies only to companies with an annual turnover exceeding $1.93 million. This threshold targets the top 6.5 percent of Australia's registered businesses – representing roughly half of the country's total economic output. Under the new law, affected companies must report ransomware incidents to the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD). Failure to properly disclose an attack will result in fines under the country's civil penalty system. Authorities are allegedly planning to follow a two-stage approach, initially prioritizing major violations while fostering a "constructive" dialogue with victims. Starting next year, regulators will adopt a much stricter stance toward noncompliant organizations. The Australian government has implemented this mandatory reporting requirement after concluding that voluntary disclosures were insufficient. In 2024, officials noted that ransomware and cyber extortion incidents were vastly underreported, with only one in five victims coming forward. Ransomware remains a highly complex and growing phenomenon, with attacks reaching record levels despite increased law enforcement actions against notorious cyber gangs. Although several governments have proposed similar regulations, Australia is the first country to formally enact such a law. // Related Stories Jeff Wichman, director of incident response at cybersecurity firm Semperis, cautions that mandatory reporting is a double-edged sword. While the government may gain valuable data and insights into attacker profiles, the law may not reduce the frequency of attacks. Instead, it could serve mainly to publicly shame breached organizations – while cybercriminals continue to profit. A recent Semperis study found that over 70 percent of 1,000 ransomware-hit companies opted to pay the ransom and hope for the best. "Some companies, they just want to pay it and get things done, to get their data off the dark web. Others, it's a delayed response perspective, they want negotiations to happen with the attacker while they figure out what happened," Wichman explained. According to the study, 60 percent of victims who paid received functional decryption keys and successfully recovered their data. However, in 40 percent of cases, the provided keys were corrupted or ineffective.

If you’re in the homebuying market, you’ve probably come to realize that the grass is always greener in the listing description—both literally and figuratively. Real estate agents sometimes get creative with Photoshop edits on listing photos, often brightening up the grass and editing out unsightly objects, like a neighbor’s clunker car or wires cluttering a bedroom. They also use some descriptive language that can be, well, deceptive. Adjectives like cozy and charming may evoke good feelings in potential buyers, but they’re high on the list of frequently used adjectives that probably don’t mean what you think they do. Photos and descriptions give you a teaser, but nothing beats an in-person tour for catching any potential sneaky details. Still, there are certain phrases to keep an eye out for as you're browsing for your next dream home online. Below, we're rounding up 10 common words or phrases often found in real estate listings should raise red flags, according to real estate pros. Related Stories“Charming”DreamPictures//Getty ImagesOr, similarly, unique. “Often, this means the property has some quirks that might not appeal to everyone,” real estate expert Yawar Charlie, director of the luxury estates division at Aaron Kirman Group, says. “It could be anything from a funky floor plan to unconventional finishes.” Think about resale value and whether any of these quirks might be a dealbreaker for future buyers, should you choose to sell“Cozy”Cozy is most likely a code word for lacking square footage, Charlie says. “When they call it cozy, they’re hinting that it might be a bit cramped,” he says. “Check for square footage and layout specifics.”“Home Being Sold As Is”"As is" is perhaps one of the biggest red flags in real estate. “It often signals that the property may have significant issues the seller is trying to offload,” says Nikki Bernstein, a global real estate advisor with Engel & Völkers Scottsdale.According to Bernstein, an "as is" condition indicates that the seller is likely emotionally detached and unwilling to negotiate on price or concessions. It also suggests they may be withholding information, indicating there could be hidden problems waiting to be uncovered during inspection, she says. “As is might as well be a warning: ‘Buyer beware,’” Bernstein says. “Fixer Upper”Mableen//Getty ImagesIf you’ve got a design-build background or are looking for homes that are worth renovating, a property advertised as a fixer-upper might make for a fun challenge. But this phrase usually means the property has seen better days and needs some TLC, which is not what most buyers are looking for. Charlie's advice? Bring a contractor or a handyman to the home inspection with you. “You’re not just checking for cosmetic issues; you want to get the lowdown on structural problems, electrical updates, and plumbing repairs,” Charlie says. “A fixer-upper can quickly turn into a money pit.”If you choose to pursue a home that needs a fair amount of love, make sure you’ve got the right loan, Virginia Realtor and real estate broker Michelle Brown cautions. For example, a FHA 203K loan lets buyers roll home improvement costs into their mortgage.“Investors’ Dream”This phrase typically signals the property is in poor condition but priced low for potential profit through renovations or redevelopment, Brown says. This is another instance where you’ll want to have a contractor with you to get a full picture of all the repairs that may be needed.“Make This Home Your Own”This phrase signals the home is likely outdated and in need of cosmetic updates at the very least, New Jersey Realtor Larry Devardo says. Listings that advertise “potential” or say “home has endless possibilities” are also indicators that repairs and updates are needed, he says. “Great Bones”DreamPictures//Getty ImagesOn the upside, “great bones” means the home is structurally sound with strong infrastructure, Maryland Realtor Ellie Hitt says. On the downside, it likely needs a lot of cosmetic updates to bring it up to date with modern conveniences and aesthetics.“Needs TLC”Often, when a home requires cosmetic work, “TLC” is noted, indicating the property needs someone who is willing to put in a little bit of elbow grease, agent Karen Kostiw of Coldwell Banker Warburg says. You may be thinking of new carpet, updated cabinets, and a few other touch-ups, but in some cases, TLC could actually mean the property requires a gut renovation.“Motivated Seller”Translation: The seller is eager to sell, possibly due to financial issues, a pending foreclosure, or a property that has been on the market for a while, says Jeffrey Borham, owner of Tampa Bay, Florida Team Borham. “This could be an opportunity for negotiation,” he adds. “However, investigate why the seller is motivated; there could be hidden issues that have deterred other buyers.”Similarly, “priced to sell” could mean a whole host of things, ranging from the property needs some work or the seller wants to start a bidding war, New York City Broker Sean Adu-Gyamfi of Coldwell Banker Warburg says.“Hot Listing”Some agents advertise “hot listings” on the MLS to create urgency, even if there are no other offers, Misty Spittler, a licensed public insurance adjuster and certified roof inspector, says. Don’t feel pressured, though. She recently had a client bid $20,000 over asking on a listing advertised as hot. Spittler’s inspection found $30,000 of necessary repairs, so the client was able to renegotiate.Follow House Beautiful on Instagram and TikTok.

June 3, 20258 min readWhite House Budget Plan Would Devastate U.S. Space ScienceScientists are rallying to reverse ruinous proposed cuts to both NASA and the National Science FoundationBy Nadia Drake edited by Lee BillingsFog shrouds the iconic Vehicle Assembly Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida in this photograph from February 25, 2025. Gregg Newton/AFP via GettyLate last week the Trump Administration released its detailed budget request for fiscal year 2026 —a request that, if enacted, would be the equivalent of carpet-bombing the national scientific enterprise.“This is a profound, generational threat to scientific leadership in the United States,” says Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society, a science advocacy group. “If implemented, it would fundamentally undermine and potentially devastate the most unique capabilities that the U.S. has built up over a half-century.”The Trump administration’s proposal, which still needs to be approved by Congress, is sure to ignite fierce resistance from scientists and senators alike. Among other agencies, the budget deals staggering blows to NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF), which together fund the majority of U.S. research in astronomy, astrophysics, planetary science, heliophysics and Earth science —all space-related sciences that have typically mustered hearty bipartisan support.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.The NSF supports ground-based astronomy, including such facilities as the Nobel Prize–winning gravitational-wave detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), globe-spanning arrays of radio telescopes, and cutting-edge observatories that stretch from Hawaii to the South Pole. The agency faces a lethal 57 percent reduction to its $9-billion budget, with deep cuts to every program except those in President Trump’s priority areas, which include artificial intelligence and quantum information science. NASA, which funds space-based observatories, faces a 25 percent reduction, dropping the agency’s $24.9-billion budget to $18.8 billion. The proposal beefs up efforts to send humans to the moon and to Mars, but the agency’s Science Mission Directorate —home to Mars rovers, the Voyager interstellar probes, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Hubble Space Telescope, and much more —is looking at a nearly 50 percent reduction, with dozens of missions canceled, turned off or operating on a starvation diet.“It’s an end-game scenario for science at NASA,” says Joel Parriott, director of external affairs and public policy at the American Astronomical Society. “It’s not just the facilities. You’re punching a generation-size hole, maybe a multigenerational hole, in the scientific and technical workforce. You don’t just Cryovac these people and pull them out when the money comes back. People are going to move on.”Adding to the chaos, on Saturday President Trump announced that billionaire entrepreneur and private astronaut Jared Isaacman was no longer his pick for NASA administrator—just days before the Senate was set to confirm Isaacman’s nomination. Initial reports—which have now been disputed—explained the president’s decision as stemming from his discovery that Isaacman recently donated money to Democratic candidates. Regardless of the true reason, the decision leaves both NASA and the NSF, whose director abruptly resigned in April, with respective placeholder “acting” leaders at the top. That leadership vacuum significantly weakens the agencies’ ability to fight the proposed budget cuts and advocate for themselves. “What’s more inefficient than a rudderless agency without an empowered leadership?” Dreier asks.Actions versus WordsDuring his second administration, President Trump has repeatedly celebrated U.S. leadership in space. When he nominated Isaacman last December, Trump noted “NASA’s mission of discovery and inspiration” and looked to a future of “groundbreaking achievements in space science, technology and exploration.” More recently, while celebrating Hubble’s 35th anniversary in April, Trump called the telescope “a symbol of America’s unmatched exploratory might” and declared that NASA would “continue to lead the way in fueling the pursuit of space discovery and exploration.” The administration’s budgetary actions speak louder than Trump’s words, however. Instead of ushering in a new golden age of space exploration—or even setting up the U.S. to stay atop the podium—the president’s budget “narrows down what the cosmos is to moon and Mars and pretty much nothing else,” Dreier says. “And the cosmos is a lot bigger, and there’s a lot more to learn out there.”Dreier notes that when corrected for inflation, the overall NASA budget would be the lowest it’s been since 1961. But in April of that year, the Soviet Union launched the first human into orbit, igniting a space race that swelled NASA’s budget and led to the Apollo program putting American astronauts on the moon. Today China’s rapidprogress and enormous ambitions in space would make the moment ripe for a 21st-century version of this competition, with the U.S. generously funding its own efforts to maintain pole position. Instead the White House’s budget would do the exact opposite.“The seesaw is sort of unbalanced,” says Tony Beasley, director of the NSF-funded National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO). “On the one side, we’re saying, ‘Well, China’s kicking our ass, and we need to do something about that.’ But then we’re not going to give any money to anything that might actually do that.”How NASA will achieve a crewed return to the moon and send astronauts to Mars—goals that the agency now considers part of “winning the second space race”—while also maintaining its leadership in science is unclear.“This is Russ Vought’s budget,” Dreier says, referring to the director of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an unelected bureaucrat who has been notorious for his efforts to reshape the U.S. government by weaponizing federal funding. “This isn’t even Trump’s budget. Trump’s budget would be good for space. This one undermines the president’s own claims and ambitions when it comes to space.”“Low Expectations” at the High FrontierRumors began swirling about the demise of NASA science in April, when a leaked OMB document described some of the proposed cuts and cancellations. Those included both the beleaguered, bloated Mars Sample Return (MSR) program and the on-time, on-budget Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, the next astrophysics flagship mission.The top-line numbers in the more fleshed-out proposal are consistent with that document, and MSR would still be canceled. But Roman would be granted a stay of execution: rather than being zeroed out, it would be put on life support.“It’s a reprieve from outright termination, but it’s still a cut for functionally no reason,” Dreier says. “In some ways, [the budget] is slightly better than I was expecting. But I had very low expectations.”In the proposal, many of the deepest cuts would be made to NASA science, which would sink from $7.3 billion to $3.9 billion. Earth science missions focused on carbon monitoring and climate change, as well as programs aimed at education and workforce diversity, would be effectively erased by the cuts. But a slew of high-profile planetary science projects would suffer, too, with cancellations proposed for two future Venus missions, the Juno mission that is currently surveilling Jupiter, the New Horizons mission that flew by Pluto and two Mars orbiters. (The Dragonfly mission to Saturn’s moon Titan would survive, as would the flagship Europa Clipper spacecraft, which launched last October.) NASA’s international partnerships in planetary science fare poorly, too, as the budget rescinds the agency’s involvement with multiple European-led projects, including a Venus mission and Mars rover.The proposal is even worse for NASA astrophysics—the study of our cosmic home—which “really takes it to the chin,” Dreier says, with a roughly $1-billion drop to just $523 million. In the president’s proposal, only three big astrophysics missions would survive: the soon-to-launch Roman and the already-operational Hubble and JWST. The rest of NASA’s active astrophysics missions, which include the Chandra X-ray Observatory, the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope and the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), would be severely pared back or zeroed out. Additionally, the budget would nix NASA’s contributions to large European missions, such as a future space-based gravitational-wave observatory.“This is the most powerful fleet of missions in the history of the study of astrophysics from space,” says John O’Meara, chief scientist at the W. M. Keck Observatory in Hawaii and co-chair of a recent senior review panel that evaluated NASA’s astrophysics missions. The report found that each reviewed mission “continues to be capable of producing important, impactful science.” This fleet, O’Meara adds, is more than the sum of its parts, with much of its power emerging from synergies among multiple telescopes that study the cosmos in many different types, or wavelengths, of light.By hollowing out NASA’s science to ruthlessly focus on crewed missions, the White House budget might be charitably viewed as seeking to rekindle a heroic age of spaceflight—with China’s burgeoning space program as the new archrival. But even for these supposedly high-priority initiatives, the proposed funding levels appear too anemic and meager to give the U.S. any competitive edge. For example, the budget directs about $1 billion to new technology investments to support crewed Mars missions while conservative estimates have projected that such voyages would cost hundreds of billions of dollars more.“It cedes U.S. leadership in space science at a time when other nations, particularly China, are increasing their ambitions,” Dreier says. “It completely flies in the face of the president’s own stated goals for American leadership in space.”Undermining the FoundationThe NSF’s situation, which one senior space scientist predicted would be “diabolical” when the NASA numbers leaked back in April, is also unsurprisingly dire. Unlike NASA, which is focused on space science and exploration, the NSF’s programs span the sweep of scientific disciplines, meaning that even small, isolated cuts—let alone the enormous ones that the budget has proposed—can have shockingly large effects on certain research domains.“Across the different parts of the NSF, the programs that are upvoted are the president’s strategic initiatives, but then everything else gets hit,” Beasley says.Several large-scale NSF-funded projects would escape more or less intact. Among these are the panoramic Vera C. Rubin Observatory, scheduled to unveil its first science images later this month, and the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) radio telescope. The budget also moves the Giant Magellan Telescope, which would boast starlight-gathering mirrors totaling more than 25 meters across, into a final design phase. All three of those facilities take advantage of Chile’s pristine dark skies. Other large NSF-funded projects that would survive include the proposed Next Generation Very Large Array of radio telescopes in New Mexico and several facilities at the South Pole, such as the IceCube Neutrino Observatory.If this budget is enacted, however, NSF officials anticipate only funding a measly 7 percent of research proposals overall rather than 25 percent; the number of graduate research fellowships awarded would be cleaved in half, and postdoctoral fellowships in the physical sciences would drop to zero. NRAO’s Green Bank Observatory — home to the largest steerable single-dish radio telescope on the planet — would likely shut down. So would other, smaller observatories in Arizona and Chile. The Thirty Meter Telescope, a humongous, perennially embattled project with no clear site selection, would be canceled. And the budget proposes closing one of the two gravitational-wave detectors used by the LIGO collaboration—whose observations of colliding black holes earned the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics—even though both detectors need to be online for LIGO’s experiment to work. Even factoring in other operational detectors, such as Virgo in Europe and the Kamioka Gravitational Wave Detector (KAGRA) in Japan, shutting down half of LIGO would leave a gaping blind spot in humanity’s gravitational-wave view of the heavens.“The consequences of this budget are that key scientific priorities, on the ground and in space, will take at least a decade longer—or not be realized at all,” O’Meara says. “The universe is telling its story at all wavelengths. It doesn’t care what you build, but if you want to hear that story, you must build many things.”Dreier, Parriott and others are anticipating fierce battles on Capitol Hill. And already both Democratic and Republican legislators have issued statement signaling that they won’t support the budget request as is. “This sick joke of a budget is a nonstarter,” said Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, ranking member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, in a recent statement. And in an earlier statement, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, chair of the powerful Senate Committee on Appropriations, cautioned that “the President’s Budget Request is simply one step in the annual budget process.”The Trump administration has “thrown a huge punch here, and there will be a certain back-reaction, and we’ll end up in the middle somewhere,” Beasley says. “The mistake you can make right now is to assume that this represents finalized decisions and the future—because it doesn’t.”

Un pionnier de l’IA veut construire des systèmes non nuisibles à l’humanité L’informaticien Yoshua Bengio annonce la création de LoiZéro, un laboratoire destiné à mettre au point des intelligences artificielles « sûres ». Elles devraient notamment être capables de prévenir les risques liés aux chatbots. Article réservé aux abonnés Yoshua Bengio, professeur titulaire à l’Université de Montréal au Paris Saclay Summit - Choose Science, Saclay, le 12 février 2025. JEAN NICHOLAS GUILLO/REA Yoshua Bengio a de la suite dans les idées. Prix Turing en 2018, directeur scientifique du MILA, l’Institut en intelligence artificielle (IA) de Montréal, cet informaticien canadien est réputé pour être l’un des pionniers de l’apprentissage profond, à l’origine du réveil de l’IA depuis une quinzaine d’années. Il est aussi connu pour alerter, depuis plus récemment, sur les risques inhérents à ces technologies, y compris sur des scénarios catastrophe pouvant conduire à l’anéantissement de l’humanité. En janvier, il publiait un vaste travail qu’il avait coordonné pour évaluer les risques. Si le rapport était équilibré, lui-même a une opinion plus tranchée, s’inquiétant d’une possible extinction de masse et appelant au principe de précaution pour freiner le développement actuel. Le 3 juin, il a franchi une nouvelle étape, ne se contentant plus d’alerter. Il lance, en effet, un nouveau laboratoire de recherche privé pour développer des « solutions techniques de systèmes d’IA sûrs par conception ». C’est-à-dire, comme il le détaille au Monde en visio, pour fabriquer des IA « qui ne se retourneront pas contre nous et qui ne pourront pas être utilisées pour nuire ». Il vous reste 73.38% de cet article à lire. La suite est réservée aux abonnés.

Workers at Reaction Engines felt they were close to completing a revolutionary jet engine.

The leisurely pace of Apple’s AI efforts has come under increasing fire, with the company accused of being behind the curve. But a new study on the dangers of AI chatbots suggests that other companies are not being cautious enough. OpenAI had to r

Love or hate them, leaf blowers are undeniably effective: They have have transformed the chore of clearing leaves off your property from a back-straining misery into a (very noisy) stroll across it. And while it’s true that old-school gas-powered leaf blowers have been maligned as loud, polluting scourges, these days you can get a clean, battery-powered model that won’t ruin your relationship with your neighbors while actively destroying the climate.And you might have good reason to. While leaf blowers are seemingly simple, single-use tools (you know, blowing leaves into piles), they’re a lot more versatile than that. By my count, my leaf blower is actually at least six tools in one.Gutter cleanerYour home's gutters protect your property by directing rainwater away from your foundation and walls. But to keep doing that, gutters need maintenance and regular cleaning to ensure they’re not filled with leaves, birds’ nests, and other debris.Cleaning gutters can be a dangerous and dirty chore—or you can buy yourself a gutter cleaning kit that attaches to your leaf blower. Using your leaf blower in this way allows you to stay firmly on the ground, keeps you far away from the mulch-y, damp stuff collecting in your gutters, and makes the job much faster, because you don’t have to keep resetting a ladder every five minutes.Snow shovelClearing snow from your sidewalk, driveway, and other areas of your property can cause back strain, heart attacks, and a generally grim view of the world in general. But if you have a leaf blower, you don’t need a shovel. Leaf blowers are surprisingly effective at clearing away snow as long that's relatively dry and powdery—admittedly, if the snow is dense and wet you’re probably still going to need a shovel to clear it. But if you’re looking at a lot of fresh, light snow, that leaf blower will make short work of it.A portable air dryerLeaf blowers aren’t complex—they blow air out one end, and that’s it. This means yours can act as a portable air dryer. Just washed your car and don’t want to spend the next half hour drying it off by hand? A leaf blower will gently dry it for you. Having guests over and your patio furniture is damp? Leaf blower to the rescue. In fact, just about anything and anyplace where water beads up can be quickly dried with a leaf blower.Filter cleanerHave a vacuum, furnace, or other filter that's dirt-clogged to the point of unsuitability? Cleaning it will make the machine it fits into run better, but it's a chore: Shaking it out isn’t very thorough, and rinsing it with water means you have to build in time for it to dry before you put it back in place. So use a leaf blower to blow out that filter in seconds and put it right back to work.Caution: Some suggest using your leaf blower to clear out your dryer vent. While this may appear to work, it’s also a bad idea: The leaf blower can compact lint inside the vent, making its performance worse and increasing the chance of a fire greater. Stick with cleaning out those filters via another method.Seed spreaderGot a lawn to seed but short on time? Pick up a seed spreader attachment for your leaf blower (this is a real thing I am not making up). It works really well at spraying seeds (or herbicides, or muck pellets, or anything else you want to spread over a large area) quickly and efficiently. (You can even make your own with a drill, saw, a plastic bottle or funnel, and some tape.)Wire threaderIf you’ve ever tried to thread a wire through a conduit, you know there’s a certain amount of black magic involved—even the most straightforward conduit can have you feeling like it leads through an alternate dimension where the laws of physics don’t apply. But with your trusty leaf blower and a plastic bag, you can run that wire through the conduit in seconds: Attach the wire to a standard lightweight plastic bag, drop it in one end of the conduit, and let your leaf blower blow that bag straight through to the other end.