The anime summer season is close — and there will be lots of big names for us to look forward to. In such a packed season, Gachiakuta is one of the most anticipated and Crunchyroll just dropped a new trailer for the show which is airing next month July 6, 2025, alongside some details on the voice actors we are going to see giving life to important characters. The show is an adaptation of the manga written by Kei Urana and it has been published by Kodansha in their Weekly Shonen Magazine since 2022. Gachiakuta is Urana’s first series after her two one-shots – Nokase (2018) and Shikido (2019) – and this year the show is receiving the anime treatment by the hands of studio Bones Films, the one responsible for Vigilante: Boku no Hero Academia ILLEGALS. In this new trailer, we learn more about the world of Gachiakuta, which we have only seen some flashes of in the announcement trailer. This second trailer gives us an idea of why Rudo, the show’s protagonist, ends up in the Pit. Other key concepts of the manga are introduced as well, such as Gachiakuta’s power system that works around people called Givers who draw out power from objects they give life. While the trailer brings the energy you expect to see in a show like Gachiakuta – a few intense action scenes with the show’s opening song “HUGs” by Japanese band Paledusk –, it doesn’t fail to make it clear that Gachiakuta has a central social commentary on how society segregates people, throwing them away like garbage. Alongside the trailer, Crunchyroll also shared with us the names of two voice actors that will be in the Gachiakuta. Regot, the man who raises Rudo in the show, is voiced by Toshiyuki Morikawa, present in other important recent shows such as Ranma ½. Morikawa was also the Japanese voice of Sephiroth in Final Fantasy VII Remake and Rebirth. Yuki Shin is the other name and he is coming to Gachiakuta to voice Jabber. The artist has voiced secondary characters in shows like Attack on Titan, Given, and My Hero Academia.

Many don’t like it, but (almost) everybody agrees it’s the future.“Vibe Coding” is everywhere. Tools and game engines are implementing AI-assisted coding, vibe coding interest skyrocketed on Google search, on social media, everybody claims to build apps and games in minutes, while the comment section gets flooded with angry developers calling out the pile of garbage code that will never be shipped.A screenshot from Andrej Karpathy with the original “definition” of Vibe CodingBUT, how do professionals feel about it?This is what I will cover in this article. We will look at:How people react to the term vibe coding,How their attitude differs based on who they are and their professional experienceThe reason for their stance towards “vibe coding” (with direct quotes)How they feel about the impact “vibe coding” will have in the next 5 yearsIt all started with this survey on LinkedIn. I have always been curious about how technology can support creatives and I believe that the only way to get a deeper understanding is to go beyond buzzwords and ask the hard questions. That’s why for over a year, I’ve been conducting weekly interviews with both the founders developing these tools and the creatives utilising them. If you want to learn their journeys, I’ve gathered their insights and experiences on my blog called XR AI Spotlight.Driven by the same motives and curious about people’s feelings about “vibe coding”, I asked a simple question: How does the term “Vibe Coding” make you feel?Original LinkedIn poll by Gabriele RomagnoliIn just three days, the poll collected 139 votes and it was clear that most responders didn’t have a good “vibe” about it. The remaining half was equally split between excitement and no specific feeling.But who are these people? What is their professional background? Why did they respond the way they did?Curious, I created a more comprehensive survey and sent it to everyone who voted on the LinkedIn poll.The survey had four questions:Select what describes you best: developers, creative, non-creative professionalHow many years of experience do you have? 1–5, 6–10, 11–15 or 16+Explain why the term “vibe coding” makes you feel excited/neutral/dismissive?Do you think “vibe coding” will become more relevant in the next 5 years?: It’s the future, only in niche use cases, unlikely, no idea)In a few days, I collected 62 replies and started digging into the findings, and that’s when I finally started understanding who took part in the initial poll.The audienceWhen characterising the audience, I refrained from adding too many options because I just wanted to understand:If the people responding were the ones making stuffWhat percentage of makers were creatives and what developersI was happy to see that only 8% of respondents were non-creative professionals and the remaining 92% were actual makers who have more “skin in the game“ with almost a 50/50 split between creatives and developers. There was also a good spread in the degree of professional experience of the respondents, but that’s where things started to get surprising.Respondents are mostly “makers” and show a good variety in professional experienceWhen creating 2 groups with people who have more or less than 10 years of experience, it is clear that less experienced professionals skew more towards a neutral or negative stance than the more experienced group.Experienced professionals are more positive and open to vibe codingThis might be because senior professionals see AI as a tool to accelerate their workflows, while more juniors perceive it as a competitor or threat.I then took out the non-professional creatives and looked at the attitude of these 2 groups. Not surprisingly, fewer creatives than developers have a negative attitude towards “vibe coding” (47% for developers Vs 37% for creatives), but the percentage of creatives and developers who have a positive attitude stays almost constant. This means that creatives have a more indecisive or neutral stance than developers.Creatives have a more positive attitude to vibe coding than developersWhat are people saying about “vibe coding”?As part of the survey, everybody had the chance to add a few sentences explaining their stance. This was not a compulsory field, but to my surprise, only 3 of the 62 left it empty (thanks everybody). Before getting into the sentiment analysis, I noticed something quite interesting while filtering the data. People with a negative attitude had much more to say, and their responses were significantly longer than the other group. They wrote an average of 59 words while the others barely 37 and I think is a good indication of the emotional investment of people who want to articulate and explain their point. Let’s now look at what the different groups of people replied.😍 Patterns in Positive Responses to “Vibe Coding”Positive responders often embraced vibe coding as a way to break free from rigid programming structures and instead explore, improvise, and experiment creatively.“It puts no pressure on it being perfect or thorough.”“Pursuing the vibe, trying what works and then adapt.”“Coding can be geeky and laborious… ‘vibing’ is quite nice.”This perspective repositions code not as rigid infrastructure, but something that favors creativity and playfulness over precision.Several answers point to vibe coding as a democratizing force opening up coding to a broader audience, who want to build without going through the traditional gatekeeping of engineering culture.“For every person complaining… there are ten who are dabbling in code and programming, building stuff without permission.”“Bridges creative with technical perfectly, thus creating potential for independence.”This group often used words like “freedom,” “reframing,” and “revolution.”.😑 Patterns in Neutral Responses to “Vibe Coding”As shown in the initial LinkedIn poll, 27% of respondents expressed mixed feelings. When going through their responses, they recognised potential and were open to experimentation but they also had lingering doubts about the name, seriousness, and future usefulness.“It’s still a hype or buzzword.”“I have mixed feelings of fascination and scepticism.”“Unsure about further developments.”They were on the fence and were often enthusiastic about the capability, but wary of the framing.Neutral responders also acknowledged that complex, polished, or production-level work still requires traditional approaches and framed vibe coding as an early-stage assistant, not a full solution.“Nice tool, but not more than autocomplete on steroids.”“Helps get setup quickly… but critical thinking is still a human job.”“Great for prototyping, not enough to finalize product.”Some respondents were indifferent to the term itself, viewing it more as a label or meme than a paradigm shift. For them, it doesn’t change the substance of what’s happening.“At the end of the day they are just words. Are you able to accomplish what’s needed?”“I think it’s been around forever, just now with a new name.”These voices grounded the discussion in the terminology and I think they bring up a very important point that leads to the polarisation of a lot of the conversations around “vibe coding”.🤮 Patterns in Negative Responses to “Vibe Coding”Many respondents expressed concern that vibe coding implies a casual, unstructured approach to coding. This was often linked to fears about poor code quality, bugs, and security issues.“Feels like building a house without knowing how electricity and water systems work.”“Without fundamental knowledge… you quickly lose control over the output.”The term was also seen as dismissive or diminishing the value of skilled developers. It really rubbed people the wrong way, especially those with professional experience.“It downplays the skill and intention behind writing a functional, efficient program.”“Vibe coding implies not understanding what the AI does but still micromanaging it.”Like for “neutral” respondents, there’s a strong mistrust around how the term is used (especially on social media) where it’s seen as fueling unrealistic expectations or being pushed by non-experts.“Used to promote coding without knowledge.”“Just another overhyped term like NFTs or memecoins.”“It feels like a joke that went too far.”Ultimately, I decided to compare attitudes that are excited (positive) and accepting (neutral) of vibe coding vs. those that reject or criticise it. After all, even among people who were neutral, there was a general acceptance that vibe coding has its place. Many saw it as a useful tool for things like prototyping, creative exploration, or simply making it easier to get started. What really stood out, though, was the absence of fear that was very prominent in the “negative” group and saw vibe coding as a threat to software quality or professional identity.People in the neutral and positive groups generally see potential. They view it as useful for prototyping, creative exploration, or making coding more accessible, but they still recognise the need for structure in complex systems. In contrast, the negative group rejects the concept outright, and not just the name, but what it stands for: a more casual, less rigorous approach to coding. Their opinion is often rooted in defending software engineering as a disciplined craft… and probably their job.😍 “As long as you understand the result and the process, AI can write and fix scripts much faster than humans can.”🤮 “It’s a joke. It started as a joke… but to me doesn’t encapsulate actual AI co-engineering.”On the topic of skill and control, the neutral and positive group sees AI as a helpful assistant, assuming that a human is still guiding the process. They mention refining and reviewing as normal parts of the workflow. The negative group sees more danger, fearing that vibe coding gives a false sense of competence. They describe it as producing buggy or shallow results, often in the hands of inexperienced users.😑 “Critical thinking is still a human job… but vibe coding helps with fast results.”🤮“Vibe-Coding takes away the very features of a good developer… logical thinking and orchestration are crucial.”Culturally, the divide is clear. The positive and neutral voices often embrace vibe coding as part of a broader shift, welcoming new types of creators and perspectives. They tend to come from design or interdisciplinary backgrounds and are more comfortable with playful language. On the other hand, the negative group associates the term with hype and cringe, criticising it as disrespectful to those who’ve spent years honing their technical skills.😍“It’s about playful, relaxed creation — for the love of making something.”🤮Creating a lot of unsafe bloatware with no proper planning.”What’s the future of “Vibe Coding”?The responses to the last question were probably the most surprising to me. I was expecting that the big scepticism towards vibe coding would align with the scepticism on its future, but that was not the case. 90% of people still see “vibe coding” becoming more relevant overall or in niche use cases.Vibe coding is here to stayOut of curiosity, I also went back to see if there was any difference based on professional experience, and that’s where we see the more experienced audience being more conservative. Only 30% of more senior Vs 50% of less experienced professionals see vibe coding playing a role in niche use cases and 13 % Vs only 3% of more experienced users don’t see vibe coding becoming more relevant at all.More experienced professionals are less likely to think Vibe Coding is the futureThere are still many open questions. What is “vibe coding” really? For whom is it? What can you do with it?To answer these questions, I decided to start a new survey you can find here. If you would like to further contribute to this research, I encourage you to participate and in case you are interested, I will share the results with you as well.The more I read or learn about this, I feel “Vibe Coding” is like the “Metaverse”:Some people hate it, some people love it.Everybody means something differentIn one form or another, it is here to stay.What professionals really think about “Vibe Coding” was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Nvidia's RTX Remix is a remarkable tool that allows game modders to bring state-of-the-art path traced visuals to classic PC games. We've seen Portal RTX from Nvidia already, along with the development of a full-on remaster of Half-Life 2 - but I was excited to see a community of modders take on 2004's Painkiller, enhanced now to become Painkiller RTX. It's still a work-in-progress project as of version 0.1.6, but what I've seen so far is still highly impressive - and if you have the means, I recommend checking it out. The whole reason RTX Remix works with the original Painkiller is due to its custom rendering technology, known as the PainEngine. This 2004 release from People Can Fly Studios was built around Direct X 8.1, which gave it stellar visuals at the time, including bloom effects – specular lighting with limited bump mapping and full framebuffer distortion effects. Those visuals dazzled top-end GPU owners of the time, but like a great number of PC releases from that era, it had a DX7 fallback which culled the fancier shading effects and could even run on GPUs like the original GeForce. RTX Remix uses the fixed function DX7 path and replaces the core rendering with the path tracer - and that is how I have been playing the game these last few days, taking in the sights and sounds of Painkiller with a new lick of paint. It's an upgrade that has made me appreciate it all the more now in 2025 as it is quite a special game that history has mostly forgotten. To fully enjoy the modders' work on the path-traced upgrade to Painkiller, we highly recommend this video.Watch on YouTube Painkiller is primarily a singleplayer first-person shooter that bucked the trends of the time period. After Half-Life and Halo: Combat Evolved, many first person shooters trended towards a more grounded and storytelling-based design. The classic FPS franchises like Quake or Unreal had gone on to become wholly focused on multiplayer, or else transitioned to the storytelling route - like Doom 3, for example. Painkiller took all of those 'modern' trappings and threw them in the garbage. A narrative only exists in a loose sense with pre-rendered video that bookends the game’s chapters, acting only as a flimsy excuse to send the player to visually distinct levels that have no thematic linking beyond pointing you towards enemies that you should dispatch with a variety of weapons. The basic gameplay sounds familiar if you ever played Doom Eternal or Doom 2016. It is simple on paper, but thanks to the enemy and level variety and the brilliant weaponry, it does not get tiring. The game enhanced its traditional FPS gameplay with an extensive use of Havok physics – where a great deal of the game’s environmental objects could be broken up into tiny pieces with rigid body movement on all the little fragments, or environmental objects could be manipulated with ragdoll or rope physics. Sometimes it is there for purely visual entertainment but other times it has a gameplay purpose with destructible objects often containing valuable resources or being useful as a physics weapon against the game's enemies. So, what's the score with Painkiller RTX? Well, the original's baked lighting featured hardly any moving lights and no real-time perspective-correct shadows - so all of that is added as part and parcel of the path-traced visuals. The RTX renderer also takes advantage of ray-traced fog volumes, showing shadows in the fog in the areas where light is obscured. Another aspect you might notice is that the game’s various pickups have been now made to be light-emissive. In the original game, emissives textures are used to keep things full bright even in darkness, but they themselves emit no light. Since the path tracer fully supports emissive lighting from any arbitrary surface, they all now cast light, making them stand out even more in the environment. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. The original game extensively used physics objects, which tended to lead to a clash in lighting and shading for any moving objects, which were incongruous then with the static baked lighting. Turn on the path tracer and these moving objects are grounded into the environment with shadows of their own, while receiving and casting light themselves. Boss battles are transformed as those enemies are also fully grounded in the surrounding environments, perfectly integrated into the path-traced visuals - and even if the titanic enemies are off-screen, their shadows are not. The main difference in many scenes is just down to the new lighting - it's more physicalised now as dynamic objects are properly integrated, no longer floating or glowing strangely. One reason for this is due to lighting resolution. The original lighting was limited by trying to fit in 256MB of VRAM, competing for space with the game’s high resolution textures. Painkiller RTX's lighting and shadowing is achieved at a per-pixel level in the path tracer, which by necessity means that you tend to see more nuance, along with more bounce lighting as it is no longer erased away by bilinear filtering on chunky light map textures. Alongside more dynamism and detail, there are a few new effects too. Lit fog is heavily used now in many levels - perhaps at its best in the asylum level where the moonlight and rain are now illuminated, giving the level more ambience than it had before. There is also some occasional usage of glass lighting effects like the stain glass windows in the game now filtering light through them properly, colouring the light on the ground in the pattern of the individual mosaic patterns found on their surface. Half-Life 2 RTX - built on RTX Remix - recently received a demo release. It's the flagship project for the technology, but modders have delivered path traced versions of many modern games.Watch on YouTube New textures and materials interact with the path tracer in ways that transform the game. For some objects, I believe the modders used Quixel megascan assets to give the materials parallax along with a high resolution that is artistically similar to the original game. A stoney ground in the graveyard now actually looks stoney, thanks to a different texture: a rocky material with craggy bits and crevices that obscure light and cast micro shadows, for example. Ceramic tiles on the floor now show varying levels of depth and cracks that pick up a very dull level of reflectivity from the moon-lit sky. Some textures are also updated by running them through generative tools which interpret dark areas of the baked textures as recesses and lighter areas as raised edges and assigns them a heightmap. This automated process works quite well for textures whose baked features are easily interpreted, but for textures that had a lot of noise added into them to simulate detail, the automated process can be less successful. That is the main issue I would say with the RTX version so far: some of these automated textures have a few too many bumps in them, making them appear unnatural. But that is just the heightmap data as the added in material values to give the textures sheen tend to look universally impressive. The original game barely has any reflectivity, and now a number of select surfaces show reflections in full effect, like the marble floors at the end of the game's second level. For the most part though, the remix of textures from this mod is subtle, with many textures still being as diffuse as found in the original game: rocky and dirty areas in particular look much the same as before, just with more accurately rendered shadows and bounce lighting - but without the plasticy sheen you might typically find in a seventh generation game. Whether maxed on an RTX 5090 or running on optimised settings on an RTX 4060, the current work-in-progress version of Painkiller RTX can certainly challenge hardware. | Image credit: Digital Foundry Make no mistake though: path tracing doesn't come cheap and to play this game at decent frame-rates, you either need to invest in high performance hardware or else accept some compromises to settings. Being a user mod that's still in development, I imagine this could improve in later versions but at the moment, Painkiller RTX maxed out is very heavy - even heavier than Portal RTX. So if you want to play it on a lower-end GPU, I recommend my optimised settings for Portal RTX, which basically amounts to turning down the amount of possible light bounces to save on performance and skimping a bit in other areas. Even with that, an RTX 4060 was really struggling to run the game well. With frame generation on and DLSS set to 1080p balanced with the transformer model, 80fps to 90fps was the best I could achieve in the general combat zones, with the heaviest stages dipping into the 70s - and even into the 60s with frame generation. The mod is still work-in-progress, but even now, Painkiller RTX is still a lot of fun and it can look stunning if your hardware is up to it. But even if you can't run it, I do hope this piece and its accompanying video pique your interest in checking out Painkiller in some form. Even without the path-traced upgrade, this is a classic first-person shooter that's often overlooked and more than holds its own against some of the period's better known games.

Remember the banana peels, apple cores, and leftover pizza you recently threw in the garbage? Today, your food waste—and your neighbors’—is emitting climate-warming greenhouse gases as it decomposes in a nearby municipal landfill. Buried food scraps and yard waste at 51 dumps across Colorado generate an amount of methane equivalent to driving 1 million gasoline-powered cars for a year. About 80 times as potent as carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas over a period of 20 years, methane accounts for 11% of global emissions that scientists say are warming the atmosphere and contributing to more intense and severe weather, wildfires, and drought. Landfills are the third-largest source of methane pollution in Colorado, after agriculture and fossil fuel extraction. Draft methane rules released last month by the state’s Department of Public Health and Environment would, for the first time, require some dump operators to measure and quantify methane releases and to fix leaks. The proposal mandates that waste managers install a gas collection system if their dump generates a certain amount of the climate-warming gas.  It also addresses loopholes in federal law that allow waste to sit for five years before such systems are required—even though science has shown that half of all food waste decays within about three and a half years. The draft rule surpasses U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards in the amount of landfill area operators must monitor for emissions. It’s set to be heard by the state’s Air Quality Control Commission in August. Proposed regulations require the elimination of open gas flares—burning emissions directly into the atmosphere—and urge the use of biocovers and biofilters, which rely on bacteria to break down gases. The 70-page draft also calls for more routine and thorough monitoring of a dump surface with advanced technologies like satellites, which recently recorded large plumes of methane escaping from a Denver-area landfill. “We’ve had our eyes opened thanks to technology that has made the invisible, visible—now we know the extent of the problem, which is much greater than what estimates have portrayed,” said Katherine Blauvelt, circular economy director at Industrious Labs, a nonprofit working to decarbonize industry.  “When landfill operators fail to control leaks, we know harmful pollutants are coming along for the ride.” Cancer-causing volatile organic compounds, such as benzene and toluene, escape with methane leaching from landfills. These chemicals also contribute to the formation of lung-damaging ozone pollution, an increasing problem for the 3.6 million people who live in the greater Denver metropolitan area. Indeed, the region along the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains ranked sixth in the nation for the most polluted air—with unhealthy ozone levels reported on one out of every 10 days, on average, according to the American Lung Association’s 2025 “State of the Air” report. The state is also woefully behind in its compliance with federal air quality standards. State officials and environmental advocates agree that reducing methane emissions from landfills, which are easier to mitigate than cow burps, for example, is one of the quickest and most efficient ways to slow warming in the short term. “Waste deposited in landfills continues producing methane for decades as it breaks down—and it’s one sector where Colorado has yet to directly take action to reduce these greenhouse gases,” said Tim Taylor, a supervisor in the state’s air pollution control division, in an online hearing last February on the proposed landfill methane rules. Colorado’s draft regulations are similar to those in California, Oregon, Maryland, and Washington, he added. More than 10 landfills in the state are already required under federal rules to have gas collection and control systems. Yet even with such technology in place, disposal facilities routinely exceed federal methane emissions caps. The state’s health department has also identified a dozen municipal solid waste landfills, based on a preliminary analysis, that would be required to put such systems in place under the proposed rules, Zachary Aedo, an agency spokesman, said in an email to Capital & Main. Many of these facilities are operated by counties, some of which expressed concerns about their ability to pay for such systems. “We are a small rural county, and a multimillion-dollar containment system is going to be more than we can build,” testified Delta County Commissioner Craig Fuller at the February hearing. “The financial equation of this whole thing is absolutely mind-boggling—we are struggling as it is to provide health and human services.” Other county officials embraced the proposed tightening of rules. “Landfills across Colorado, including in Eagle County, are leading sources of methane pollution,” said Eagle County Commissioner Matt Scherr in a March 6 statement. “As a local elected official I support a robust rule that embraces advanced technologies to cut pollution, protect public health and help the methane mitigation industry thrive.” For larger landfill companies, like Waste Management, which operates 283 active disposal sites nationwide, figuring out which technology works to best monitor emissions from a dump’s surface is proving a complex challenge. The company is testing technologies at facilities with different topographies and climate fluctuations to understand what causes emissions releases, said Amy Banister, Waste Management senior director of air programs. “Landfills are complicated, emissions vary over time, and we have emissions 24/7,” said Banister at an online meeting last September of a technical group created by Colorado health department officials. “Drones produced a lot of false positives—and we need more work understanding how fixed sensors can be applied in a landfill environment.” State health officials suggested municipalities could offset the costs of installing gas collection systems at disposal sites by converting methane into energy. Several landfill operations in Colorado currently have such waste-to-energy systems—which send power they generate to the state’s power grid. “We are mindful of the costs of complying with this rule and how tipping fees may be impacted,” said Taylor, an air quality supervisor, at the February hearing. “Analyses conducted in other states of their landfill methane rules found there wasn’t an increase in tipping fees as a result of regulations over time.” Tipping fees are paid by those who dispose of waste in a landfill. If operators passed on compliance costs to households, a state analysis found, the yearly average annual fee would increase $22.90 per household. Colorado’s push comes as the EPA issued an enforcement alert in September that found “recurring Clean Air Act compliance issues” at municipal solid waste landfills that led to the “significant release of methane,” based on 100 inspections conducted over three years.  Such violations included improper design and installation of gas collection and control systems, failure to maintain adequate “cover integrity,” and improper monitoring of facilities for emissions. To address gaps in federal regulations, which require operators to measure emissions four times a year by walking in a grid pattern across the face of the landfill with a handheld sensor, Colorado’s draft rules require third-party monitoring. Such measurements must be conducted offsite by an entity approved by the state’s air pollution control division that uses a satellite, aircraft or mobile monitoring platform. The infrequency of such grid walks—which skip spots that operators deem dangerous—contributes to the undercounting of methane emissions from landfills, according to a satellite-based analysis. An international team of scientists estimated potent greenhouse gas emissions from landfills are 50% higher than EPA estimates. Satellites like one operated by nonprofit Carbon Mapper found large methane plumes outside the quarterly monitoring periods over the Tower Landfill in Commerce City, northeast of Denver. The satellite allowed scientists to see parts of the landfill not accessible with traditional monitoring—measurements that found that such landfills are underreporting their methane emissions to state regulators, said Tia Scarpelli, a research scientist and waste sector lead at Carbon Mapper. “Landfill emissions tend to be quite persistent—if a landfill is emitting when it’s first observed, it’s likely to be emitting later on,” she added. Scarpelli cautioned that it’s important for regulators to investigate with operators what was happening on the landfill surface at the time the leak was measured. Tower Landfill’s operator, Allied Waste Systems of Colorado, provided reasons for such large methane releases in a January 2024 report to the state’s health department, including equipment malfunctions. The fix for about 22 emissions events over the federal methane limits detected in August 2023 by surface monitoring: “Soil added as cover maintenance.” Like many dumps across Colorado and the nation, the Tower Landfill is located near a community that’s already disproportionately impacted by emissions from industrial activities. “These landfills are not only driving climate change, they are also driving a public health crisis in our community,” said Guadalupe Solis, director of environmental justice programs at Cultivando, a nonprofit led by Latina and Indigenous women in northern Denver. “The Tower Landfill is near nursing homes, clinics, near schools with majority Hispanic students.” Physicians in the state warned that those who live the closest to dumps suffer the worst health effects from pollutants like benzene and hydrogen sulfide, which are linked to cancer, heart, and other health conditions. “People living near landfills, like myself, my family and my patients, experience higher exposure to air pollution,” testified Dr. Nikita Habermehl, a specialist in pediatric emergency medicine who lives near a landfill in Larimer County, at the February 26 public hearing, “leading to increased rates of respiratory issues and headaches and asthma worsened by poor air quality.” —By Jennifer Oldham, Capital & Main This piece was originally published by Capital & Main, which reports from California on economic, political, and social issues.

If Nielsen stats are to be believed, we collectively spend more time in front of YouTube than any other streaming service—including Disney+ and Netflix. That's a lot of watch hours, especially for an app that demands a great deal of trust when it comes to its algorithmic recommendations, which can easily steer you into strange, inflammatory, or downright dark directions. If you'd like a little more control over what you see, allow me to share with you the steps I took to finally tame my own YouTube algorithm.Despite how much time we devote to watching YouTube, the app doesn't behave quite like most other streamers. Rather than loading up the hub page for a show or movie you want to watch, you often have to hope that if there's a new episode of a thing you like, YouTube will show it to you. (As someone who dabbles as a YouTube creator myself, I would love if the app offered show-specific landing pages, instead of a collection of playlists.)And since the content on YouTube is so varied, it's easy to get your algorithm off track. Maybe you're in the habit habit of watching long-form content on YouTube, only to see that disrupted by one errant cat video—suddenly, YouTube seems to think you want to see only cat videos, and nothing more. As YouTube has yet to answer my pleas for context-specific browsing profiles, I've had to make do with learning every trick I can to direct the algorithm myself. The basics: Likes, Dislikes, Subscriptions, and the BellYou can't spend 20 minutes on the app without a YouTuber preaching the gospel of like, share, and subscribe. You know by now how those actions help your favorite creators, but how do they help you? Unfortunately, there's no way to know exactly what effect your engagement has on the algorithm (even YouTube can't know for sure), but there are a few useful things to keep in mind:Use Likes and Dislikes to nudge your recommendations, not to express approval or disapproval. The thumbs up/down buttons are the most direct way to express your interest (or lack thereof) to YouTube. They're also one of the most widely misunderstood tools. Don't think of them as a way to communicate with the creator about the substance of their content. In general, it's best to think of them as nudges for your personal recommendations. Likes are pretty strong indicators that you want to see more similar content, but Dislikes won't necessarily block a particular creator or topic from appearing in your feeds. Subscribing is good, but not a guarantee. You can think of subscribing to a channel as sort of a super-like for the channel as a whole. This tells YouTube you want to see what they make next (or see more of their backlog). The downside is, subscribing doesn't guarantee you'll see anything. YouTube tends to favor more recent subs in your recommendations. If you want to see everything all the people you subscribe to make, you actually need to seek out your Subscriptions tab.Clicking the bell really is the best thing you can do. Creators often like to remind you to "click the bell," and they do it for a reason: This will send you a push notification (assuming you allow notifications from your YouTube app) whenever one of your subs uploads a new video. Not only does that increase the likelihood you'll see new videos you care about, but it gives those creators important metrics they can use to understand their audience.These are all extremely basic tools for refining your suggestions, but it's also important to understand them in context. YouTube doesn't just look at what you say you want, it watches how you actually behave on the app. If you like a video, subscribe to the channel, and hit the bell, but then you never watch a video from that creator again, YouTube will eventually stop recommending them.That's neither a good nor bad thing on its own, and contrary to some paranoia among creators, it's not even bad for the channels themselves. The YouTube algorithm's goal is to put something in front of you that you're likely to spend time watching. If the videos it suggests aren't meeting that goal—no matter how much you've told the algorithm to show those videos to you—it will move on to something else. Understanding that gives us some context for moving on to some next-level algorithm taming.Intermediate algorithm training: Refine your history and reject videos you don't want to see Credit: Eric Ravenscraft If likes, subscriptions, and the bell are all small nudges to the algorithm, are there big nudges you can use? I'm so glad you asked. Watch time is the most obvious, but that's just using YouTube. And no, there's not much benefit in trying to manipulate this. Just keep watching things you like and stop watching things you dislike, and YouTube will try to follow your patterns."Try to" being the operative word. Anyone who's ever fixed a door knows that YouTube can be a bit over-eager to show you hours of content about something you spent five minutes watching. One quick way to fix this is to head to your History, find the video in question, and click "Remove from watch history." In addition to not showing up in your previously-watched videos list, YouTube also won't consider it something you spent time on when recommending new videos.This trick only works for individual videos you've previously watched, though. If you're getting recommendations based on broad topics you don't like, you can ask not to see those recommendations before you even click on the video. Tap the menu button on a video's thumbnail to find options labeled "Not interested" (good for indicating you don't like this particular video suggestion) and "Don't recommend channel," which is the closest thing YouTube has to completely blocking a channel.Frustratingly, if you allow YouTube to autoplay videos from the thumbnail before you ever click on a video—a feature you can and arguably should turn off—then that can count as a "view" in your watch history. I've lost track of how often I've set my phone down and accidentally "watched" a video for a few minutes. Even if you select "not interested" before clicking on a video, if it has autoplayed, you might need to remove it from your history as well.Advanced algorithm mastery: Use playlists and multiple accounts to get recommendations silos Credit: Eric Ravenscraft I will die on the hill of my belief that YouTube should have a mode switcher. I want to be able to have a profile for watching in-depth video essays on niche topics and another profile for dumb cat videos. YouTube has come sort of close with the introduction of category tags. In some places, like YouTube on the web or certain views in apps, you'll see a list of tags for things like "Gaming" or "News" that will filter suggestions. In my opinion these are useful, but inadequate.I'd rather have something that lets me train my personal recommendations in different buckets directly. And over the years I've developed two main strategies for accomplishing this: playlists and account switching.PlaylistsFor the playlists approach, I save videos that I liked on a particular topic to a specific list. Then, if I want to see more videos on that topic, I'll open up the playlist and look through the sidebar. This usually gives me more specific video recommendations to that topic (interspersed with the usual recommendation buckshot), as well as more specific genre filters for me to drill deeper. The only downside to this approach is that it all happens in the sidebar of another video. It's a little nicer on mobile, but it can feel a little hacky at times.Account switchingThe account switching workaround feels more natural while browsing, but it's a bit more cumbersome to change modes. YouTube has gotten much better at account switching, with a simple "Switch accounts" dropdown in most of its apps. Of course, each one requires an entire Google account, but there's a decent chance you already have at least five of these by now, anyway.There's nothing special about filtering videos this way, but it gives you a few different blank slates to work from, instead of one giant one. For example, I have a Gmail account that I only use as a throwaway for junk where I don't want to give my real email address. On YouTube, if I decide I want to indulge in junk video compilations, I'll switch accounts first. That way, any garbage I watch won't affect my primary account's recommendations. (This is also helpful if you want to have guests over but don't want them to poison your well with videos they pull up.) The only downside? If you use YouTube Premium to avoid ads, then that won't carry over to all your other accounts.All of this tinkering will result in a streaming experience that is still less ideal than how apps like Netflix and Disney+ work. On those services, you can set up multiple profiles within your a single account, and pretend it's actually your aunt that's watching all that garbage TV when she comes to visit. Until YouTube makes that an official feature, the tricks outlined above will hopefully help you get better suggestions.

I've worked as a bartender for over a decade. David Fuentes Prieto/Getty Images Updated 2025-05-29T15:32:17Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? I've been a bartender for over a decade, but I still get frustrated by certain customer behaviors.  Yelling my name and waving money in my face when I'm clearly busy won't get my attention. It's usually best not to alter specialty drinks. I've been bartending for over a decade, and I can tell you it isn't easy. The job can be physically and mentally demanding while requiring long, late hours — plus, we have to be pretty charming while doing it. Sometimes customers can make our job better, but at the very least, we'd prefer if they don't make it worse. Next time you're out having a pint or a margarita with your pals, don't make these mistakes. Being obnoxious while trying to get a bartender's attentionThe most common customer offense, by far, is waving cash at the bartender, yelling their name, or otherwise trying to get their attention while they're doing something else.Most of the time, simply being at the bar without a fresh drink is enough to let the bartender know you want one.If you really think the bartender doesn't know you're waiting to order, some eye contact and a nod will suffice.Stepping up to a busy counter when you don't know what you want  Know your order before you steup up to the counter. Business Insider/Will Martin If the bar is busy and you have to wait to order a drink, take that time to figure out what you're going to get.Don't lose your spot in line with the bartender by saying "I don't know" or turning around to ask your friends what they want. They don't have time for that.Assuming a bartender's gender or sexualityAssuming the bartender's gender or sexuality is a great way to get ignored for the rest of the night.Also, if they want to flirt with you, you'll know. Otherwise, let's keep it professional. Trying to order a drink without an IDNobody cares about the story behind why you don't have your ID.A bartender usually isn't willing to risk their job or get into legal trouble just to help you out.Altering special cocktails on the menu The bartender usually knows best when it comes to mixed drinks. Maksym Fesenko/Shutterstock If you want to make your own cocktail recipes, do it at home.Nine times out of 10, the altered cocktail tastes like garbage and gets sent back. Just order a drink that sounds good to you as listed. Asking the bartender to play your musicIf there isn't a jukebox, the bar is not interested in hearing your playlists. Don't ask the bartender to change the music, play a song, or adjust the volume. They're not a DJ.Telling the bartender your first name for your tabWhen asked what the name on your tab is, give the bartender your last name.We know you think you're the only Brandon in here, but you're probably not. Relying on the bartender to remember your drink orderThey might remember it, or you might be getting them confused with the other bartender.Either way, it's better if you know your own order. Taking up more space than you need Being rowdy and taking up a lot of space in a bar can be rude. Nomad_Soul/Shutterstock Be mindful of other people's space at the bar.Don't lean over and take up multiple seats or leave your trash on the patio. And for heaven's sake, don't leave a trail of dirty glasses behind you while you're mingling — just bring your empty cup with you when you come up for your next drink.The less time the bartender has to spend cleaning up after you, the more time they can spend making everyone's drinks. Wasting time by asking what we haveDo you really want me to start listing everything we have? It's a bar. Read a menu or be more specific. Asking "What pilsners do you have?" or "What gins do you have?" is perfectly fine. That helps us to narrow it down a bit if we're going to have to help you figure out what you feel like drinking.Leaving only a verbal tipBartenders love compliments, but those don't pay the bills.Remember, we're working for money. If you really think they make the best margarita in town, show them with a big tip.This story was originally published on January 7, 2023, and most recently updated on May 29, 2025.

The Australian white ibis (Threskiornis molucca) is a wading bird of the ibis family, Threskiornithidae. It is widespread across much of Australia, and has a predominantly white plumage with a bare, black head, long downcurved bill, and black legs. While it is closely related to the African sacred ibis, the Australian white ibis is a native Australian bird. Due to its increasing presence in the urban environment and its habit of rummaging in garbage, the species has acquired a variety of colloquial names such as "tip turkey" and "bin chicken". This Australian white ibis was photographed at the Royal Botanic Garden, Sydney. Photograph credit: Charles J. Sharp Recently featured: Hell Gate Bridge Anemonoides blanda Bluespotted ribbontail ray Archive More featured pictures

With the weather warming up, your thoughts may be turning to spending lazy summer afternoons at the beach with a good book. Tina, an online creator and co-host of the podcast Book Talk, Etc., opened her edition of the Chicago Sun-Times on Monday to find the newspaper's "Summer reading list for 2025." If Tina were me, someone who isn't in-tune with the latest in literature, this article might have seemed like a useful jumping-off point for some new book recommendations. But seeing as Tina creates content all about books, I imagine she is acutely aware of which authors are writing which books—which is why she was able to immediately spot a number of books on the list that simply do not exist.Tina took a photo of the article and posted it to her Threads account, accusing the newspaper of using AI to generate its recommendations. That image of the article is now circulating on Bluesky, as well as the Chicago subreddit. I'm not a subscriber, and the article doesn't appear to be on the Sun-Times' website, so I can't verify the list myself. But the Sun-Times has since confirmed the list is real. View on Threads Of the 15 "books" on this summer reading list, only five are real books you can actually, you know, read: Bonjour Tristesse by Françoise Sagan; Beautiful Ruins by Jess Walter; Dandelion Wine by Ray Bradbury; Call Me By Your Name by André Aciman; and Atonement by Ian McEwan. Coincidentally, they are the last five books on the list, and are not new. The other 10 are totally made up, including such "hey, I'd read that" entries as The Last Algorithm, a new AI thriller from The Martian author Andy Weir; and Boiling Point, a smart-sounding story of environmental ethics by critical darling Rebecca Makki. Alas. Given these fake books have real authors attached to them, fans of those authors may believe their favorite writer has a new, intriguing novel out. Even if you have no idea who any of the named authors are, you might use this piece to head to your library or book store to get a jump on your summer reading list—and if you're pulling from the first 10 recommendations, you're going to be looking for a long time. What happened here?According to a Bluesky post from the Sun-Times, the article was not editorial content, and was not approved or created by the newsroom. The post does not say one way or another whether the content is AI-generated, however 404 Media spoke with the author, who admitted to using AI for this article as well as others: "I do use AI for background at times but always check out the material first. This time, I did not and I can't believe I missed it because it's so obvious. No excuses."Even before we had this confirmation, it did seem like the newspaper used generative AI to write this piece. That's not just because the writing is stilted. AI often hallucinates, or, in other words, sometimes makes things up. It's not totally clear why the models do this—it could be an issue with the training data, or the conclusions the models draw from that training—but the problem is only getting worse even as AI models ostensibly improve. This isn't something you can avoid with better prompts, either: If you use generative AI, it's going to hallucinate sometimes, which means you need to check the outputs for inaccuracies (or straight-up lies). I follow that someone who doesn't understand this technology would see what a program like ChatGPT can do and want to use it to generate articles like this, but as many writers and artists have been arguing for years now, you can't replace a human worker with an AI chatbot and expect the same quality work. Sure, ChatGPT will happily generate you a list of 15 book recommendations in under a minute—but it's possible some (if not most) of those recommendations will be garbage.I don't believe in using generative AI to publish stories like this. But if a newspaper is going to outsource the writing to a bot, it needs a human fact-checker (or perhaps, I don't know, an editor) to review the generation and make sure everything is correct. Though at that point, I'd suggest just paying a human writer to offer the book recommendations themself. I guarantee you there are plenty of out-of-work or underemployed journalists who would jump at the chance. While it seems the Sun-Times has such a human writer behind the AI, that work needs to happen with each generation. If not, you get articles like this.Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT for the synopsis of The Last Algorithm by Andy Weir. The bot searched the web for an answer, and, to its credit, accurately reported that the book doesn't actually exist. It made some assumptions, saying the Sun-Times definitely used AI to generate the article (though I suppose a very lazy intern who was hoping to be fired could have made up the books as well), likely because the social media posts it was pulling from suggested as much. But I also found its final thought to be particularly on-point (and accidentally self-aware): "This incident underscores the importance of verifying information, especially when AI-generated content is involved," ChatGPT wrote.

At Google I/O 2025, the company announced that Gemini Live Camera and Screen Sharing is rolling out to iPhone starting today. This means that you'll be able to use your phone's camera to live stream a feed to Gemini, and have a conversation about with the AI agent about what it sees. This feature has been available on Android for some time, but it's coming to iPhone for the first time starting today.This could be useful for many things, such as showing Gemini a video of something in your neighborhood and asking it to identify the item. In theory, you could ask it to identify cars, trees, or important landmarks in your neighborhood, or ask it general knowledge questions about historical landmarks while you're on holiday. Unfortunately though, Google chose an unbelievably cringey video to demonstrate what the Gemini Live Camera can do. It featured a person being deliberately obtuse and asking exceptionally...dumb...questions to the AI, presumably to demonstrate that Gemini isn't a complete idiot (or, as Google said, that it's not afraid to tell you when you're wrong). They pointed the camera at a garbage truck while calling it a "convertible," but Gemini was able to clarify that it was indeed, a garbage truck. They repeated the same routine by calling a light pole a "tall skinny building" and a shadow "someone following" them. If you were to only go by the demo to figure out the extent of Gemini Live's Camera Sharing capabilities, it'd be pretty hard to know how it holds up to stress testing.Fortunately, there are much better examples of what you can do with Gemini Live Camera on the Android blog. You can ask Gemini Live for advice on a color palette for your home, gift ideas, and much more. As long as the AI doesn't hallucinate, this could a genuinely useful tool, since it also works with screen sharing, too. Just… don't ask it if your shadow is a real person.