A new study reveals the key lies not in the production of a regrowth molecule, but in that molecule's controlled destruction. The discovery could inspire future regenerative medicine.

By TREVOR HOGG Images courtesy of Chocolate Tribe. Nosipho Maketo-van den Bragt, Owner and CEO, Chocolate Tribe After initially pursuing a career as an attorney, Nosipho Maketo-van den Bragt discovered her true calling was to apply her legal knowledge in a more artistic endeavor with her husband, Rob Van den Bragt, who had forged a career as a visual effects supervisor. The couple co-founded Chocolate Tribe, the Johannesburg and Cape Town-based visual effects and animation studio that has done work for Netflix, BBC, Disney and Voltage Pictures. “It was following my passion and my passion finding me,” observes Maketo-van den Bragt, Owner and CEO of Chocolate Tribe and Founder of AVIJOZI. “I grew up in Soweto, South Africa, and we had this old-fashioned television. I was always fascinated by how those people got in there to perform and entertain us. Living in the townships, you become the funnel for your parents’ aspirations and dreams. My dad was a judge’s registrar, so he was writing all of the court cases coming up for a judge. My dad would come home and tell us stories of what happened in court. I found this enthralling, funny and sometimes painful because it was about people’s lives. I did law and to some extent still practice it. My legal career and entertainment media careers merged because I fell in love with the storytelling aspect of it all. There are those who say that lawyers are failed actors!” Chocolate Tribe hosts what has become the annual AVIJOZI festival with Netflix. AVIJOZI is a two-day, free-access event in Johannesburg focused on Animation/Film, Visual Effects and Interactive Technology. This year’s AVIJOZI is scheduled for September 13-14 in Johannesburg. Photo: Casting Director and Actor Spaces Founder Ayanda Sithebe (center in black T-shirt) and friends at AVIJOZI 2024. A personal ambition was to find a way to merge married life into a professional partnership. “I never thought that a lawyer and a creative would work together,” admits Maketo-van den Bragt. “However, Rob and I had this great love for watching films together and music; entertainment was the core fabric of our relationship. That was my first gentle schooling into the visual effects and animation content development space. Starting the company was due to both of us being out of work. I had quit my job without any sort of plan B. I actually incorporated Chocolate Tribe as a company without knowing what we would do with it. As time went on, there was a project that we were asked to come to do. The relationship didn’t work out, so Rob and I decided, ‘Okay, it seems like we can do this on our own.’ I’ve read many books about visual effects and animation, and I still do. I attend a lot of festivals. I am connected with a lot of the guys who work in different visual effects spaces because it is all about understanding how it works and, from a business side, how can we leverage all of that information?” Chocolate Tribe provided VFX and post-production for Checkers supermarket’s “Planet” ad promoting environmental sustainability. The Chocolate Tribe team pushed photorealism for the ad, creating three fully CG creatures: a polar bear, orangutan and sea turtle. With a population of 1.5 billion, there is no shortage of consumers and content creators in Africa. “Nollywood is great because it shows us that even with minimal resources, you can create a whole movement and ecosystem,” Maketo-van den Bragt remarks. “Maybe the question around Nollywood is making sure that the caliber and quality of work is high end and speaks to a global audience. South Africa has the same dynamics. It’s a vibrant traditional film and animation industry that grows in leaps and bounds every year. More and more animation houses are being incorporated or started with CEOs or managing directors in their 20s. There’s also an eagerness to look for different stories which haven’t been told. Africa gives that opportunity to tell stories that ordinary people, for example, in America, have not heard or don’t know about. There’s a huge rise in animation, visual effects and content in general.” Rob van den Bragt served as Creative Supervisor and Nosipho Maketo-van den Bragt as Studio Executive for the “Surf Sangoma” episode of the Disney+ series Kizazi Moto: Generation Fire. Rob van den Bragt, CCO, and Nosipho Maketo-van den Bragt, CEO, Co-Founders of Chocolate Tribe, in an AVIJOZI planning meeting. Stella Gono, Software Developer, working on the Chocolate Tribe website. Family photo of the Maketos. Maketo-van de Bragt has two siblings. Film tax credits have contributed to The Woman King, Dredd, Safe House, Black Sails and Mission: Impossible – Final Reckoning shooting in South Africa. “People understand principal photography, but there is confusion about animation and visual effects,” Maketo-van den Bragt states. “Rebates pose a challenge because now you have to go above and beyond to explain what you are selling. It’s taken time for the government to realize this is a viable career.” The streamers have had a positive impact. “For the most part, Netflix localizes, and that’s been quite a big hit because it speaks to the demographics and local representation and uplifts talent within those geographical spaces. We did one of the shorts for Disney’s Kizazi Moto: Generation Fire, and there was huge global excitement to that kind of anthology coming from Africa. We’ve worked on a number of collaborations with the U.K., and often that melding of different partners creates a fusion of universality. We need to tell authentic stories, and that authenticity will be dictated by the voices in the writing room.” AVIJOZI was established to support the development of local talent in animation, visual effects, film production and gaming. “AVIJOZI stands for Animation Visual Effects Interactive in JOZI [nickname for Johannesburg],” Maketo-van den Bragt explains. “It is a conference as well as a festival. The conference part is where we have networking sessions, panel discussions and behind-the-scenes presentations to draw the curtain back and show what happens when people create avatars. We want to show the next generation that there is a way to do this magical craft. The festival part is people have film screenings and music as well. We’ve brought in gaming as an integral aspect, which attracts many young people because that’s something they do at an early age. Gaming has become the common sport. AVIJOVI is in its fourth year now. It started when I got irritated by people constantly complaining, ‘Nothing ever happens in Johannesburg in terms of animation and visual effects.’ Nobody wanted to do it. So, I said, ‘I’ll do it.’ I didn’t know what I was getting myself into, and four years later I have lots of gray hair!” Rob van den Bragt served as Animation Supervisor/Visual Effects Supervisor and Nosipho Maketo-van den Bragt as an Executive Producer on iNumber Number: Jozi Gold (2023) for Netflix. (Image courtesy of Chocolate Tribe and Netflix) Mentorship and internship programs have been established with various academic institutions, and while there are times when specific skills are being sought, like rigging, the field of view tends to be much wider. “What we are finding is that the people who have done other disciplines are much more vibrant,” Maketo-van den Bragt states. “Artists don’t always know how to communicate because it’s all in their heads. Sometimes, somebody with a different background can articulate that vision a bit better because they have those other skills. We also find with those who have gone to art school that the range within their artistry and craftsmanship has become a ‘thing.’ When you have mentally traveled where you have done other things, it allows you to be a more well-rounded artist because you can pull references from different walks of life and engage with different topics without being constrained to one thing. We look for people with a plethora of skills and diverse backgrounds. It’s a lot richer as a Chocolate Tribe. There are multiple flavors.” South African director/producer/cinematographer and drone cinemtography specialist FC Hamman, Founder of FC Hamman Films, at AVIJOZI 2024. There is a particular driving force when it comes to mentoring. “I want to be the mentor I hoped for,” Maketo-van den Bragt remarks. “I have silent mentors in that we didn’t formalize the relationship, but I knew they were my mentors because every time I would encounter an issue, I would be able to call them. One of the people who not only mentored but pushed me into different spaces is Jinko Gotoh, who is part of Women in Animation. She brought me into Women in Animation, and I had never mentored anybody. Here I was, sitting with six women who wanted to know how I was able to build up Chocolate Tribe. I didn’t know how to structure a presentation to tell them about the journey because I had been so focused on the journey. It’s a sense of grit and feeling that I cannot fail because I have a whole community that believes in me. Even when I felt my shoulders sagging, they would be there to say, ‘We need this. Keep it moving.’ This isn’t just about me. I have a whole stream of people who want this to work.” Netflix VFX Manager Ben Perry, who oversees Netflix’s VFX strategy across Africa, the Middle East and Europe, at AVIJOZI 2024. Netflix was a partner in AVIJOZI with Chocolate Tribe for three years. Zama Mfusi, Founder of IndiLang, and Isabelle Rorke, CEO of Dreamforge Creative and Deputy Chair of Animation SA, at AVIJOZI 2024. Numerous unknown factors had to be accounted for, which made predicting how the journey would unfold extremely difficult. “What it looks like and what I expected it to be, you don’t have the full sense of what it would lead to in this situation,” Maketo-van den Bragt states. “I can tell you that there have been moments of absolute joy where I was so excited we got this project or won that award. There are other moments where you feel completely lost and ask yourself, ‘Am I doing the right thing?’ The journey is to have the highs, lows and moments of confusion. I go through it and accept that not every day will be an award-winning day. For the most part, I love this journey. I wanted to be somewhere where there was a purpose. What has been a big highlight is when I’m signing a contract for new employees who are excited about being part of Chocolate Tribe. Also, when you get a new project and it’s exciting, especially from a service or visual effects perspective, we’re constantly looking for that dragon or big creature. It’s about being mesmerizing, epic and awesome.” Maketo-van den Bragt has two major career-defining ambitions. “Fostering the next generation of talent and making sure that they are ready to create these amazing stories properly – that is my life work, and relating the African narrative to let the world see the human aspect of who we are because for the longest time we’ve been written out of the stories and narratives.”

Key Takeaways The European Commission will introduce the new International Digital Strategy that will focus on tech collaboration with the US and other countries. This is in contradiction to the growing pressure in Europe that calls for tech sovereignty and reducing tech dependence on the US. Low venture capital funding and a diverse regulatory landscape have been major challenges for tech innovation in Europe. Europe is seeing an increasing push to establish technological sovereignty and reduce the region’s reliance on US technology. However, there’s always been an undertone of acceptance that the EU is years behind the US when it comes to technological innovation and advancements. Now, the European Commission is planning to acknowledge this publicly. The EC will introduce a new International Digital Strategy, which will focus on collaboration with the United States and other tech-forward countries, such as Japan, South Korea, and India. The lawmakers believe that “decoupling” from the West is unrealistic and will instead push Europe further back in the technological race. Europe’s Call for Tech Sovereignty Several prominent political leaders and lawmakers have advocated for European sovereignty over technology and artificial intelligence.  For instance, Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, said in a speech in 2024 that Europe’s strategic autonomy is a conscious choice to end the region’s dependence on others. In an earlier speech, he also said that if Europe fails to build champions in areas such as digital and artificial intelligence, its choices will be dictated by others.  Similarly, Thierry Breton, the former EU Commissioner for Internal Markets, said that digital spending in the EU will breach the 20% target, underlining the importance of investing in European tech sovereignty. He focused on Europe’s declining market share in the semiconductor industry and called for the development of groundbreaking European tech. The Eurostack movement in the EU has also been gaining a lot of traction and support from various think tanks, academic researchers, and industry voices. Eurostack staff calls for the development of an indigenous infrastructure stack in the European region, including cloud, AI, semiconductors, digital services, and data centers. The main aim is to reduce Europe’s dependence on Chinese and US technology. This growing concern among EU well-wishers is quite understandable. Excessive reliance on the United States puts the US (meaning Donald Trump) in a controlling position, where he can arm-twist the European Union in matters of trade and even politics.  We have already seen an example of this during the tariff war, where Trump imposed a 25% tariff on automobiles (and their parts) and steel and aluminum products imported from the EU. Also, the fact that Google, Microsoft, and Amazon account for around 69% of the cloud market in the EU is quite concerning, too. Europe Wakes Up to Reality Despite positive speeches and statements by people in power in the EU, the fact remains that Europe is still lagging behind the United States. Bulgarian lawmaker Eva Maydell said that Europe should “sober up” and accept that the train has left the station. Dan Nechita, the current EU director for the Transatlantic Policy Network, said that it’s not the right time to be politically absolute and say that “we are going to do everything in Europe.” EU tech chief Virkkunen has been working hard to bring home the support of influential tech lobbies and emphasized the need to continue working with the United States. To put it in a nutshell, the European Commission is ready to accept the fact that the damage is done, and now Europe needs to play second fiddle and forge strategic partnerships with key technological leaders (primarily in the US) to stay alive in the race. Lack of Investments and the EU’s Regulation-First Approach One of the major reasons behind the European Union’s sluggish tech development is the lack of venture capital investments in the region. As per an IMF post, EU VC funds raised around $130B between 2013 and 2022. During the same time, the US raised $924B.  Similarly, annual VC investments in the EU are only 0.2% of the GDP when compared to 0.7% in the US. Currently, the United States accounts for a massive 52% of the global VC funds, whereas the EU holds just 5%.  Lack of investments has forced European startups to look elsewhere, especially the United States, for funding and support. One of the major reasons for such low venture capital interest in Europe is its diversity. Each of the 27 countries in the EU has its own regulatory and legal challenges, which make it difficult for multinational corporations to operate in the region.  Plus, the EU has adopted a regulation-first approach, which is very different from the United States. Of course, this approach has its own merits, but it has surely slowed down the speed of technological investments in the region.  For instance, the GDPR puts a truckload of regulatory and moral responsibility on companies to protect user data. Similarly, the AI Act focuses on the more ethical development of artificial intelligence that’s aligned with human values and refrains companies from exploiting public data. Sure, all of these are positive tech regulations important to protect the long-term sovereignty of the public at large. Even global tech advocates have praised the EU’s efforts for the development of safe and ethical technologies. However, we cannot ignore the fact that this has come at the cost of sluggish tech investments and overall growth. With its back against the wall, Europe needs to reassess its strengths and focus on areas such as open-source technologies, such as France’s La Suite numérique, and government-backed technological initiatives to have a say in the upcoming artificial intelligence and semiconductor race. Krishi is a seasoned tech journalist with over four years of experience writing about PC hardware, consumer technology, and artificial intelligence.  Clarity and accessibility are at the core of Krishi’s writing style. He believes technology writing should empower readers—not confuse them—and he’s committed to ensuring his content is always easy to understand without sacrificing accuracy or depth. Over the years, Krishi has contributed to some of the most reputable names in the industry, including Techopedia, TechRadar, and Tom’s Guide. A man of many talents, Krishi has also proven his mettle as a crypto writer, tackling complex topics with both ease and zeal. His work spans various formats—from in-depth explainers and news coverage to feature pieces and buying guides.  Behind the scenes, Krishi operates from a dual-monitor setup (including a 29-inch LG UltraWide) that’s always buzzing with news feeds, technical documentation, and research notes, as well as the occasional gaming sessions that keep him fresh.  Krishi thrives on staying current, always ready to dive into the latest announcements, industry shifts, and their far-reaching impacts.  When he's not deep into research on the latest PC hardware news, Krishi would love to chat with you about day trading and the financial markets—oh! And cricket, as well. View all articles by Krishi Chowdhary Our editorial process The Tech Report editorial policy is centered on providing helpful, accurate content that offers real value to our readers. We only work with experienced writers who have specific knowledge in the topics they cover, including latest developments in technology, online privacy, cryptocurrencies, software, and more. Our editorial policy ensures that each topic is researched and curated by our in-house editors. We maintain rigorous journalistic standards, and every article is 100% written by real authors.

iOS 19—or is it iOS 26, as rumors suggest?—is nearly here. Apple will almost assuredly announce the latest version of the iPhone's OS next week at WWDC 2025. As such, rumors about iOS 26's features have been coming in fast, and only more so as we approach the big event. Although none of these rumors can be confirmed at the moment, they still give us a good idea about what Apple might be considering behind the scenes.Is Apple changing iOS' name?Seems that way. While we (logically) thought the next version of iOS would be called iOS 19, Apple reportedly has other plans in place. According to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, iOS 19 will be iOS 26, taking the name of the following year. Apple is reportedly doing this with all of its OS titles, including iPadOS 26, macOS 26, watchOS 26, and visionOS 26. A fresh look for iOS 26While iOS has changed considerably in recent years, the overall design language still follows the last big UI overhaul: 2013's iOS 7. It's been nearly 12 years since Apple has mixed things up, leaving users to design their own Lock Screens and app icons. According to Gurman, however, that might change with iOS 26, as well as iPadOS 26 and macOS 26. The details are scarce, but Gurman reports sources within Apple say the company wants to better align the design languages across its various products, without merging those OSes entirely, while also simplifying the way you interact with these devices. That means iOS 26 could adopt the design of visionOS, which uses circles instead of squares for app icons, translucent window elements, and the adoption of 3D—though that latter element may be difficult to translate on a 2D display.You can see those elements on display in this concept video from Jon Prosser. If the rumors are correct, we could be looking at "one of the most dramatic software overhauls in the company’s history." In addition to a new look, iOS may be getting a little less buggy. Gurman says that stability is a big priority for Apple this year, which is music to my ears.Live translation for AirPodsGurman also says that Apple is working on a live translation feature for certain AirPods models. If you're having a conversation with someone who is speaking a language you don't know, your AirPods will translate and dictate those words in your target language automatically. When you speak, your words will be translated and dictated by your iPhone, via the Translate app. This feature isn't groundbreaking—Google's Pixel Buds have offered it for years. But it'd be a great addition to iOS 26, and to AirPods users. Accessibility featuresApple doesn't reveal much about its upcoming updates before officially announcing them, but accessibility features are an exception. Last month, the company unveiled a list of accessibility features coming to devices "later this year." While they don't name iOS 26 and other "26" updates, it's pretty obvious those are the updates we'll see them in. There's a new Accessibility Reader feature that makes text easier to read across iOS; Magnifier is coming to Mac; you'll see "Accessibility nutrition" labels on the App Store, to denote how accessible an app is; Apple Watch is getting Live Captions, and Vehicle Motion Cues are coming to the Mac. 'Desktop' modeRumor has it that Apple is working on a "Stage Manager-like" desktop mode for USB-C iPhones with iOS 26. The feature would let you plug your iPhone into an external monitor, so you can extend your iPhone's screen to the larger display.This might not be a true "desktop mode" experience, like Samsung DeX, in that you might not be able to use your iPhone as a portable computer this way. But it could make it easier to share your iPhone's display when you want to connect to a larger screen. You only need to sign into public wifi networks onceIf you use multiple devices on public wifi networks, it's a pain to connect each one manually. That might be changing with Apple's upcoming updates: Gurman says that once updated, you'll only need to log into the wifi with one Apple device (your iPhone, iPad, or Mac) and the rest will automatically connect.Battery upgradesHere's a great use for AI: optimizing battery life. Rumor has it iOS 26 will analyze your usage habits and determine the right times to lower performance in the name of preserving battery life. Extending the amount of time between charges is something we can all get behind. In addition, the company may add a charging indicator to the lock screen, so you know how long your battery has left to charge. This small feature has been sorely missing on iPhones for years. Apple offers it on MacBooks, but only in Activity Monitor. I hope its brings it back to the menu bar in a future update. Your iPhone will (probably) run iOS 26With any luck, your current iPhone should be compatible with iOS 26, assuming you're currently running the latest software. Citing a source within Apple, French website iPhoneSoft.fr reports that any phone that runs iOS 18 should be compatible with iOS 26 as well. However, the iPad 7 will supposedly not be so lucky, as the website says it will not be included in the iPadOS 26 update.However, a MacRumors source says that Apple plans to drop the iPhone XR, XS, and XS Max this year. We'll have to wait and see what Apple announces on Monday to find out which phones will still be supported.A new gaming appAccording to Gurman, Apple is working on a dedicated gaming app for iOS, iPadOS, macOS, and tvOS, meant to replace the existing Game Center. The app will both let you launch titles, as well as check leader boards, chat with friends, and see your achievements. If true, it'll be interesting timing, considering the announcement will come four days after the launch of the Nintendo Switch 2. I have my doubts that such an app could compete with a gaming titan like Nintendo, or that this will really expand beyond the traditional short and sweet mobile game experience, but who knows. Maybe Apple is about to become a serious gaming company. (I doubt it.)Shortcuts get Apple Intelligence integrationThe Shortcuts app lets you set up "shortcuts," which you can use to automate tasks across your Apple devices. Gurman says with iOS 26, Apple is integrating Apple Intelligence into the Shortcuts app, which might let you create shortcuts with natural language—or, in other words, describe the shortcuts you want and have the AI build them for you. Small updatesAccording to 9to5Mac, Apple has plans to add a new feature or two to a handful of apps. That includes:Messages: Automatic translation for incoming and outgoing messages, as well as polls.Music: Full-screen animated artwork on the lock screenNotes: Markdown support, a huge plus for pro-notes usersCarPlay: A redesigned UI to compliment iOS 26The merging of Siri and Apple IntelligenceAccording to Gurman, Apple plans to merge Siri with Apple Intelligence sometime during the iOS 26 patch cycle. Yes, the assistant is currently listed as being part of Apple Intelligence, but behind the scenes, it supposedly has a new LLM in the works that would unify its currently split architecture and allow it to more frequently handle complex requests. As of now, its AI features are much more limited, and most of Siri doesn't use this type of AI at all.Gurman says he expects the merger to be completed by spring of 2026 with the launch of iOS 26.4. His report states that, originally, Apple's plan was to launch a more conversational Siri in the same update, but that's been delayed and is not expected to be unveiled at WWDC 2025.Gurman also indicates that because Apple has not yet completed last year's Apple Intelligence feature rollout, any unannounced features shouldn't be expected for a while.

It’s easy to look at President Donald Trump’s second term and conclude that the less power and reach the federal government has, the better. After all, a smaller government might provide Trump or someone like him with fewer opportunities to disrupt people’s lives, leaving America less vulnerable to the whims of an aspiring autocrat. Weaker law-enforcement agencies could lack the capacity to enforce draconian policies. The president would have less say in how universities like Columbia conduct their business if they weren’t so dependent on federal funding. And he would have fewer resources to fundamentally change the American way of life.Trump’s presidency has the potential to reshape an age-old debate between the left and the right: Is it better to have a big government or a small one? The left, which has long advocated for bigger government as a solution to society’s problems, might be inclined to think that in the age of Trump, a strong government may be too risky. Say the United States had a single-payer universal health care system, for example. As my colleague Kelsey Piper pointed out, the government would have a lot of power to decide what sorts of medical treatments should and shouldn’t be covered, and certain forms of care that the right doesn’t support — like abortion or transgender health — would likely get cut when they’re in power. That’s certainly a valid concern. But the dangers Trump poses do not ultimately make the case for a small or weak government because the principal problem with the Trump presidency is not that he or the federal government has too much power. It’s that there’s not enough oversight.Reducing the power of the government wouldn’t necessarily protect us. In fact, “making government smaller” is one of the ways that Trump might be consolidating power.First things first: What is “big government”?When Americans are polled about how they feel about “big government” programs — policies like universal health care, Social Security, welfare for the poor — the majority of people tend to support them. Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the government should be responsible for ensuring everyone has health coverage. But when you ask Americans whether they support “big government” in the abstract, a solid majority say they view it as a threat.That might sound like a story of contradictions. But it also makes sense because “big government” can have many different meanings. It can be a police state that surveils its citizens, an expansive regulatory state that establishes and enforces rules for the private sector, a social welfare state that directly provides a decent standard of living for everyone, or some combination of the three. In the United States, the debate over “big government” can also include arguments about federalism, or how much power the federal government should have over states. All these distinctions complicate the debate over the size of government: Because while someone might support a robust welfare system, they might simultaneously be opposed to being governed by a surveillance state or having the federal government involved in state and local affairs.As much as Americans like to fantasize about small government, the reality is that the wealthiest economies in the world have all been a product of big government, and the United States is no exception. That form of government includes providing a baseline social safety net, funding basic services, and regulating commerce. It also includes a government that has the capacity to enforce its rules and regulations.A robust state that caters to the needs of its people, that is able to respond quickly in times of crisis, is essential. Take the Covid-19 pandemic. The US government, under both the Trump and Biden administrations, was able to inject trillions of dollars into the economy to avert a sustained economic downturn. As a result, people were able to withstand the economic shocks, and poverty actually declined. Stripping the state of the basic powers it needs to improve the lives of its citizens will only make it less effective and erode people’s faith in it as a central institution, making people less likely to participate in the democratic process, comply with government policies, or even accept election outcomes.A constrained government does not mean a small governmentBut what happens when the people in power have no respect for democracy? The argument for a weaker and smaller government often suggests that a smaller government would be more constrained in the harm it can cause, while big government is more unrestrained. In this case, the argument is that if the US had a smaller government, then Trump could not effectively use the power of the state — by, say, deploying federal law enforcement agencies or withholding federal funds — to deport thousands of immigrants, bully universities, and assault fundamental rights like the freedom of speech. But advocating for bigger government does not mean you believe in handing the state unlimited power to do as it pleases. Ultimately, the most important way to constrain government has less to do with its size and scope and more to do with its checks and balances. In fact, one of the biggest checks on Trump’s power so far has been the structure of the US government, not its size. Trump’s most dangerous examples of overreach — his attempts to conduct mass deportations, eliminate birthright citizenship, and revoke student visas and green cards based on political views — have been an example of how proper oversight has the potential to limit government overreach. To be sure, Trump’s policies have already upended people’s lives, chilled speech, and undermined the principle of due process. But while Trump has pushed through some of his agenda, he hasn’t been able to deliver at the scale he promised. But that’s not because the federal government lacks the capacity to do those things. It’s because we have three equal branches of government, and the judicial branch, for all of its shortcomings in the Trump era, is still doing its most basic job to keep the executive branch in check. Reforms should include more oversight, not shrinking governmentThe biggest lesson from Trump’s first term was that America’s system of checks and balances — rules and regulations, norms, and the separate branches of government — wasn’t strong enough. As it turned out, a lot of potential oversight mechanisms did not have enough teeth to meaningfully restrain the president from abusing his power. Trump incited an assault on the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, and Congress ultimately failed in its duty to convict him for his actions. Twice, impeachment was shown to be a useless tool to keep a president in check.But again that’s a problem of oversight, not of the size and power of government. Still, oversight mechanisms need to be baked into big government programs to insulate them from petty politics or volatile changes from one administration to the next. Take the example of the hypothetical single-payer universal health care system. Laws dictating which treatments should be covered should be designed to ensure that changes to them aren’t dictated by the president alone, but through some degree of consensus that involves regulatory boards, Congress, and the courts. Ultimately, social programs should have mechanisms that allow for change so that laws don’t become outdated, as they do now. And while it’s impossible to guarantee that those changes will always be good, the current system of employer-sponsored health insurance is hardly a stable alternative.By contrast, shrinking government in the way that Republicans often talk about only makes people more vulnerable. Bigger governments — and more bureaucracy — can also insulate public institutions from the whims of an erratic president. For instance, Trump has tried to shutter the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a regulatory agency that gets in the way of his and his allies’ business. This assault allows Trump to serve his own interests by pleasing his donors.In other words, Trump is currently trying to make government smaller — by shrinking or eliminating agencies that get in his way — to consolidate power. “Despite Donald Trump’s rhetoric about the size or inefficiency of government, what he has done is eradicate agencies that directly served people,” said Julie Margetta Morgan, president of the Century Foundation who served as an associate director at the CFPB. “He may use the language of ‘government inefficiency’ to accomplish his goals, but I think what we’re seeing is that the goals are in fact to open up more lanes for big businesses to run roughshod over the American people.” The problem for small-government advocates is that the alternative to big government is not just small government. It’s also big business because fewer services, rules, and regulations open up the door to privatization and monopolization. And while the government, however big, has to answer to the public, businesses are far less accountable. One example of how business can replace government programs is the Republicans’ effort to overhaul student loan programs in the latest reconciliation bill the House passed, which includes eliminating subsidized loans and limiting the amount of aid students receive. The idea is that if students can’t get enough federal loans to cover the cost of school, they’ll turn to private lenders instead. “It’s not only cutting Pell Grants and the affordability of student loan programs in order to fund tax cuts to the wealthy, but it’s also creating a gap where [private lenders] are all too happy to come in,” Margetta Morgan said. “This is the small government alternative: It’s cutting back on programs that provided direct services for people — that made their lives better and more affordable — and replacing it with companies that will use that gap as an opportunity for extraction and, in some cases, for predatory services.”Even with flawed oversight, a bigger and more powerful government is still preferable because it can address people’s most basic needs, whereas small government and the privatization of public services often lead to worse outcomes.So while small government might sound like a nice alternative when would-be tyrants rise to power, the alternative to big government would only be more corrosive to democracy, consolidating power in the hands of even fewer people (and businesses). And ultimately, there’s one big way for Trump to succeed at destroying democracy, and that’s not by expanding government but by eliminating the parts of government that get in his way.See More:

Few companies in the history of capitalism have amassed as much wealth and influence as Meta.A global superpower in the information space, Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Threads — has a market cap of $1.68 trillion at the time of writing, which for a rough sense of scale is more than the gross domestic product of Spain.In spite of its immense influence, none of its internal algorithms can be scrutinized by public watchdogs. Its host country, the United States, has largely turned a blind eye to its dealings in exchange for free use of Meta's vast surveillance capabilities.That lack of oversight coupled with Meta's near-omnipresence as a social utility has had devastating consequences throughout the world, manifesting in crises like the genocide of Muslims in Myanmar, or the systemic suppression of Palestinian rights organizations.How do you uncover the harms caused by one of the most powerful companies on earth? In the case of public violence, the evidence isn't hard to trace. However, Meta's unprecedented corporate dynasty also creates less obvious harms, which scores of scholars, researchers, and journalists are devoting entire careers to uncovering.One prominent group of said investigators is GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which recently released its annual report on social media safety, privacy, and expression for LGBTQ people.The report notes that Meta has undergone a "particularly extreme" ideological shift over the past year, adding harmful exceptions to its content moderation policies while disproportionately suppressing LGBTQ users and their content. The tech giant has also failed to give LGBTQ users sovereignty over their own personal data, which it collects, analyzes, and wields to generate huge profits.While Meta collects all of our data — from which it draws over 95 percent of its revenue — the practice is particularly harmful to LGBTQ users, who then have to contend with algorithmic biases, non-consensual outing, harassment, and in some countries state oppression."It's a dangerous time, certainly for trans people, who as a minority have been so ridiculously maligned, but also a dangerous time for gay people, openly bi[sexual] people, people who are different in any way," says Sarah Roberts, a UCLA professor and Director of the Center for Critical Internet Inquiry.To address these shortcomings and the dangers they introduce, GLAAD made a number of recommendations. One key suggestion was to improve moderation "by providing training for all content moderators focused on LGBTQ safety, privacy and expression." The media advocacy group doesn't mince words, adding that "AI systems should be used to flag for human review, not for automated removals."However, it doesn't look like Meta got the message.Weeks after GLAAD issued its findings, internal Meta documents leaked to NPR revealed the company's plan to hand 90 percent of its privacy and integrity reviews over to "artificial intelligence."This will impact nearly every new feature introduced to its platforms, where human moderators would typically evaluate new features for risks to privacy and safety, and the wellbeing of user groups like minors, immigrants, and LGBTQ people.Meta's internal risk assessment is an already opaque process, and Roberts notes that government attempts at risk oversight, like the EU's Digital Services Act, are likewise a labyrinth of filings which are largely dictated by the social media companies themselves. AI, chock full of biases and prone to errors — as admitted by Meta's own AI chief — is certain to make the situation even worse.Earlier this week, meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal revealed Meta's plans to fully automate advertising via the company's generative AI software, which will allow advertisers to "fully create and target ads" directly, with no human in the loop.This includes hyper-personalized ads, writes the WSJ, "so that users see different versions of the same ad in real time, based on factors such as geolocation."Data hoarders like Meta — which track you even when you're not using its platforms — have long been able to profile LGBTQ users based on gender identify and sexual orientation, including those who aren't publicly out.Removing any human from these already sinister practices serves to streamline operations and distance Meta from its own actions — "we didn't out gay users living under an oppressive government," the company can say, "even if our AI did." It's no coincidence that Meta had already disbanded its "Responsible AI" team as early as 2023.At the root of these decisions — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's right wing turn notwithstanding — is the calculated drive to maximize revenue."If there's no reason to rigorously moderate harmful content, then why pay so many content moderators? Why engage researchers to look into the circulation of this kind of content?" observes Roberts. "There ends up being a real cost savings there.""One of the things I've always said is that content moderation of social media is not primarily about protecting people, it's about brand management," she told Futurism. "It's about the platform managing its brand in order to make the most hospitable environment for advertisers."Sometimes these corporate priorities line up with progressive causes, like LGBTQ user safety or voter registration. But when they don't, Roberts notes, "dollars are dollars.""We are looking at multibillion-dollar companies, the most capitalized companies in the world, who have operated with impunity for many, many years," she said. "How do you convince them that they should care, when other powerful sectors are telling them the opposite?"Share This Article

the fastest one 2025 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 first drive: Engineered for insane speed Now that Chevrolet can fit turbos to the Corvette, it's gone and done just that. Michael Teo Van Runkle – May 30, 2025 10:00 am | 0 Chevrolet has given its latest Corvette variant a four-figure power output to go with a six-figure price tag. Credit: Michael Teo Van Runkle Chevrolet has given its latest Corvette variant a four-figure power output to go with a six-figure price tag. Credit: Michael Teo Van Runkle Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Chevrolet provided flights from Los Angeles to Austin and accommodation so Ars could drive the ZR1. Ars does not accept paid editorial content. AUSTIN, Texas—By just my third lap in the top-spec 2025 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, I glanced down at the speedometer toward the end of the Circuit of the Americas' long back straight and spied 181 mph (291 km/h) displayed for a split second. Not bad for Chevy’s newest flagship sports car, especially given that the $174,995 ZR1’s twin-turbocharged V8 pumps all 1,064 horsepower to the rear wheels only. The US’s only purpose-built F1 track made for an excellent setting to taste Corvette’s latest; the ZR1 also commanded your attention while conquering the steep uphill toward the first corner, then winding through a series of challenging corners with plenty of elevation change. Luckily, the car itself is an engineering marvel, and Chevy brought along a team of engineers to explain exactly how the total package comes together to enable such a breathtaking pace, as well as how Chevy can responsibly sell such a powerful car to the general public at all. The entire point of switching the Corvette’s eighth generation to a mid-engine layout was to improve weight distribution and allow the Corvette to compete against much more exotic competition from European OEMs like Ferrari. The front-engined car's engine bay also lacked the width to add a pair of turbos, due to the suspension and tire orientation, which dictated the use of a supercharger that kept peak power to “just” 755 hp (563 kW) in the last Corvette to wear the ZR1 badge. It's a tight fit in there. Credit: Michael Teo Van Runkle COTA reveals the ZR1's excellent balance, especially when specced with the optional aero package, carbon fiber wheels, and Michelin’s Cup 2 R tires. The tires—in effect, grooved slicks—allow for improved lateral acceleration but also the ability to consistently put the four-figure horsepower down to the asphalt. Yet Chevy’s engineers readily admitted the original target for ZR1 was just 850 hp (634 kW), until 1,000 came into sight and required some serious creativity to reach reliably. Biggest turbos ever The ZR1’s engine, dubbed LT7, shares much with the 5.5 L naturally aspirated LT6 engine in the less-powerful, cheaper Z06. It’s still a flat-plane crank with dry-sump oiling, even if clever eyes inspecting an LT6 might have noticed that the dry-sump oil tank allowed for the placement of turbos all along. The dual 74-millimeter turbos, the largest ever fitted to a production car, required new intake routing, and computer control of the wastegate actuation maintains an anti-lag boost of 6 to 7 psi even under a closed throttle. Turbo speed sensors allow the turbines to spin closer to maximum speed before the vanes physically break apart—a mechanical system typically needs to maintain a 7 percent margin of error, but the ZR1’s is more like 2–3 percent. That's a massive turbocharger, and there are two of them. Credit: Michael Teo Van Runkle The eventual power output actually wound up breaking two of Chevrolet’s dynos during early testing, we're told. So the C8’s eight-speed dual-clutch transmission also needed beefing up with physically wider gears that were shot-peened for additional strength, plus a revised lubrication system. The engine, meanwhile, creates enormous cooling demands when running at full throttle, which plays hand in hand with the downforce requirements of hitting such high speeds. Consequently, the ZR1 sacrifices its usable frunk in favor of a massive radiator, while the hood’s heat extractor also releases trapped air and feeds it over the roofline. This freed up more space for additional cooling via the front fascia, which further benefits from canard spat dive planes. On the sides, an additional inlet on the side strakes complements the enormously wide scoops that debuted on the Z06. Coupes then get a split rear window—which harks back to Corvettes of old, while releasing hot air from the engine bay—plus new shoulder NACA intakes that directly feed the air box with cooler oxygen that even creates a ram air effect akin to mild supercharging. Cooling for the ZR1 became an even higher priority, because the LT6 and LT7 employ extremely tight tolerances between the crankshaft and connecting rods, which mandates keeping the 5W-50 oil below 120° C (248° F) at all times. And the system simply works, as even on a hot and humid Texas day, I only noticed oil temperatures cresting above 104° C (220° F) occasionally. The interior is better than any prior generation of Corvette, but it feels prosaic compared to the cockpits of its more exotic mid-engined rivals. Michael Teo Van Runkle The interior is better than any prior generation of Corvette, but it feels prosaic compared to the cockpits of its more exotic mid-engined rivals. Michael Teo Van Runkle Lightweight carbon-fiber wheels are mounted with the stickiest road-legal tires Chevy could fit. Michael Teo Van Runkle Lightweight carbon-fiber wheels are mounted with the stickiest road-legal tires Chevy could fit. Michael Teo Van Runkle The ZR1 gets added cooling and more wings. Michael Teo Van Runkle The ZR1 gets added cooling and more wings. Michael Teo Van Runkle Lightweight carbon-fiber wheels are mounted with the stickiest road-legal tires Chevy could fit. Michael Teo Van Runkle The ZR1 gets added cooling and more wings. Michael Teo Van Runkle The hardtop convertible ZR1 lacks the split-engine venting and shoulder intakes, while cutting into headroom so much that I skipped out while wearing a helmet. Other journalists noticed a drop-off in performance for the convertibles, and probably more so than the mild weight gains of just about 100 lbs (45 kg) might suggest. Instead, temperatures probably came into play, as the ECU drew back timing and instead allowed mild overboost of 24–25 psi to compensate for the Texas day. Even so, an engineer admitted he thought the engine was probably down 5–10 percent on power. The fact that I hit my highest-ever top speed despite the ZR1 potentially giving up somewhere between 53 to 106 hp (40–80 kW) only makes this Corvettes sound even more insane. But I essentially wound up driving the turbos, since the DCT’s gear ratios carry over from the Stingray and therefore drop out of peak power when shifting from second to third and third to fourth. I suspect nothing short of an F1 racecar feels this fast on a circuit of this size. A track designed for corner exit speeds double my pace in the ZR1 helps explain why Chevrolet declined to set us loose on public roads behind the wheel. We drove it on track—will owners cope with this much power on the street? Credit: Michael Teo Van Runkle That’s a concern for potential buyers, though, and why the ZR1’s electronics undoubtedly ratchet back the insanity. Chevy still uses Bosch’s ninth-generation traction control, which debuted on C7 and operates on a 10-millisecond loop, even if the ABS runs at 5 milliseconds—while the ESC is at 20 milliseconds. I suspect this computerized nannying slowed me down a fair amount, in addition to the torque-by-gear restrictions in first and second that purposefully protect driveline components. We’ve probably reached peak internal-combustion Corvette, which is something of a hint about the all-too-real question of where Chevy can go from here. If so, this car reaches a new level of unfathomable American ingenuity, combined with a newfound level of refinement and traction management that attempts to belie the undeniable absurdity to a minimal, arguably necessary, extent. 0 Comments

Former PlayStation executive Shuhei Yoshida, in an interview with Game Developer at Gamescom LATAM, has warned developers against relying too heavily on subscription services. According to Yoshida, game subscription services, like Xbox Game Pass, can be “really dangerous”, since these services could start dictating what kinds of games developers would be able to make. Yoshida expanded on this idea by mentioning that big companies – who typically tend to be averse to funding games that are based on big, risky ideas – would try to steer developers under them to safer genres or gameplay styles to appease a player base that might end up existing primarily on subscription services. “If the only way for people to play games is through subscriptions that’s really dangerous, because what [type] of games can be created will be dictated by the owner of the subscription services,” said Yoshida. “That’s really, really risky because there always must always be fresh new ideas tried by small developers that create the next wave of development. But if the big companies dictate what games can be created, I don’t think that will advance the industry.” Yoshida also believes that Sony’s approach to a subscription service, through some of the higher tiers available for PlayStation Plus, might be “healthier” for developers and the overall industry. While he does acknowledge that his time working for Sony might have biased him a bit in the company’s favour, Yoshida also says that, through PlayStation Plus, Sony avoids over-promising, while also encouraging players to buy games rather than to wait for the games to come to the service. “I believe the way Sony approached [subscriptions] is healthier. You know, not to overpromise and to allow people to spend money to buy the new games,” Yoshida said. “After a couple of years there won’t be many people willing to buy those games at that initial price, so they’ll be added to the subscription service and there’ll be more people to try [those products] in time for the next game in the franchise to come out.” When it comes to Sony’s competitors in the console market, Yoshida praises Microsoft for its efforts in bringing backwards compatibility on Xbox Series X/S. “They must have put a lot of engineering effort in to achieve what they have done,” he said. As for Nintendo, Yoshida praises the company’s strategy, as well as the technology behind the Switch and its Joy-Con controllers. “[That’s] so smart,” he said. “It’s in their DNA to cater to the needs of family and friends.” While Yoshida might have a point about Game Pass, Microsoft has considered it to be quite successful. During an earnings call back in January, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella spoke about the subscription service’s growth, revealing that its subscriber base had grown by more than 30 percent. “All-up, Game Pass set a new quarterly record for revenue and grew its PC subscriber base by over 30%, as we focus on driving fully paid subscribers across endpoints,” said Nadella in the earnings call, who went on to praise the critical response for Indiana Jones and the Great Circle.