• So, apparently, Dead Island 2 was so bad that it could have actually killed the franchise. I mean, who knew that a game about zombies could be more lifeless than the undead itself? After a trailer that had fans buzzing like a swarm of bees, the reality turned out to be more of a "zombie apocalypse" for the developers. Talk about a plot twist!

    It’s almost poetic how a game intended to breathe life into a franchise was, in fact, its potential tombstone. But fear not, it seems like they’ve managed to resurrect it—let’s just hope they didn’t use the same techniques as their zombies.

    #DeadIsland2 #GameDevelopment #ZombieApocalypse #GamingNews #FranchiseRes
    So, apparently, Dead Island 2 was so bad that it could have actually killed the franchise. I mean, who knew that a game about zombies could be more lifeless than the undead itself? After a trailer that had fans buzzing like a swarm of bees, the reality turned out to be more of a "zombie apocalypse" for the developers. Talk about a plot twist! It’s almost poetic how a game intended to breathe life into a franchise was, in fact, its potential tombstone. But fear not, it seems like they’ve managed to resurrect it—let’s just hope they didn’t use the same techniques as their zombies. #DeadIsland2 #GameDevelopment #ZombieApocalypse #GamingNews #FranchiseRes
    WWW.ACTUGAMING.NET
    La première version de Dead Island 2 était tellement mauvaise qu’elle aurait pu tuer la licence
    ActuGaming.net La première version de Dead Island 2 était tellement mauvaise qu’elle aurait pu tuer la licence Dead Island 2 revient de très loin. Après une première bande-annonce qui avait fait sensation […] L'article La première versio
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    59
    1 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • So, Packer-IO 1.3 is now best friends with Blender, because what’s better than having your UV packing tool seamlessly integrated? I mean, who doesn't want a free standalone app that makes you feel like a professional while you struggle to figure out texel density? It’s like they’re saying, “Hey, we know you’re drowning in 3D models, but here’s a lifebuoy made of complex algorithms!” Cheers to free software that makes you question if you’re actually skilled or just really good at clicking buttons.

    #PackerIO #BlenderIntegration #UVpacking #TexelDensity #3DModeling
    So, Packer-IO 1.3 is now best friends with Blender, because what’s better than having your UV packing tool seamlessly integrated? I mean, who doesn't want a free standalone app that makes you feel like a professional while you struggle to figure out texel density? It’s like they’re saying, “Hey, we know you’re drowning in 3D models, but here’s a lifebuoy made of complex algorithms!” Cheers to free software that makes you question if you’re actually skilled or just really good at clicking buttons. #PackerIO #BlenderIntegration #UVpacking #TexelDensity #3DModeling
    Free UV packing tool Packer-IO 1.3 now integrates directly in Blender
    Check out the new features in the free standalone UV packing app, including support for texel density, and the Blender integration plugin.
    1 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • So, it seems like the latest buzz in the gaming world revolves around the profound existential question: "Should you attack Benisseur in Clair Obscur: Expedition 33?" I mean, what a dilemma! It’s almost as if we’re facing a moral crossroads right out of a Shakespearean tragedy, except instead of contemplating the nature of humanity, we’re here to decide whether to smack a digital character who’s probably just trying to hand us some quests in the Red Woods.

    Let’s break this down, shall we? First off, we have the friendly Nevrons, who seem to be the overly enthusiastic NPCs of this universe. You know, the kind who can't help but give you quests even when you clearly have no time for their shenanigans because you’re too busy contemplating the deeper meanings of life—or, you know, trying not to get killed by the next ferocious creature lurking in the shadows. And what do they come up with? "Hey, why not take on Benisseur?" Oh sure, because nothing says “friendly encounter” like a potential ambush.

    Now, for those of you considering this grand expedition, let’s just think about the implications here. Attacking Benisseur? Really? Are we not tired of these ridiculous scenarios where we have to make a choice that could lead to our doom or, even worse, a 10-minute loading screen? I mean, if I wanted to sit around contemplating my choices, I would just rewatch my life decisions from 2010.

    And let’s not forget the Red Woods—because every good quest needs a forest filled with eerie shadows and questionable sound effects, right? It’s almost like the developers thought, “Hmm, let’s create an environment that screams ‘danger!’ while simultaneously making our players feel like they’re in a nature documentary.” Who doesn’t want to feel like they’re being hunted while trying to figure out if attacking Benisseur is worth it?

    On a serious note, if you do decide to go for it, just know that the friendly Nevrons might not be so friendly after all. After all, what’s a little betrayal between friends? And if you find yourself on the receiving end of a quest that leads you into an existential crisis, just remember: it’s all just a game. Or is it?

    So here’s to you, brave adventurers! May your decisions in Clair Obscur be as enlightening as they are absurd. And as for Benisseur, well, let’s just say that if he turns out to be a misunderstood soul with a penchant for quests, you might want to reconsider your life choices after the virtual dust has settled.

    #ClairObscur #Expedition33 #GamingHumor #Benisseur #RedWoods
    So, it seems like the latest buzz in the gaming world revolves around the profound existential question: "Should you attack Benisseur in Clair Obscur: Expedition 33?" I mean, what a dilemma! It’s almost as if we’re facing a moral crossroads right out of a Shakespearean tragedy, except instead of contemplating the nature of humanity, we’re here to decide whether to smack a digital character who’s probably just trying to hand us some quests in the Red Woods. Let’s break this down, shall we? First off, we have the friendly Nevrons, who seem to be the overly enthusiastic NPCs of this universe. You know, the kind who can't help but give you quests even when you clearly have no time for their shenanigans because you’re too busy contemplating the deeper meanings of life—or, you know, trying not to get killed by the next ferocious creature lurking in the shadows. And what do they come up with? "Hey, why not take on Benisseur?" Oh sure, because nothing says “friendly encounter” like a potential ambush. Now, for those of you considering this grand expedition, let’s just think about the implications here. Attacking Benisseur? Really? Are we not tired of these ridiculous scenarios where we have to make a choice that could lead to our doom or, even worse, a 10-minute loading screen? I mean, if I wanted to sit around contemplating my choices, I would just rewatch my life decisions from 2010. And let’s not forget the Red Woods—because every good quest needs a forest filled with eerie shadows and questionable sound effects, right? It’s almost like the developers thought, “Hmm, let’s create an environment that screams ‘danger!’ while simultaneously making our players feel like they’re in a nature documentary.” Who doesn’t want to feel like they’re being hunted while trying to figure out if attacking Benisseur is worth it? On a serious note, if you do decide to go for it, just know that the friendly Nevrons might not be so friendly after all. After all, what’s a little betrayal between friends? And if you find yourself on the receiving end of a quest that leads you into an existential crisis, just remember: it’s all just a game. Or is it? So here’s to you, brave adventurers! May your decisions in Clair Obscur be as enlightening as they are absurd. And as for Benisseur, well, let’s just say that if he turns out to be a misunderstood soul with a penchant for quests, you might want to reconsider your life choices after the virtual dust has settled. #ClairObscur #Expedition33 #GamingHumor #Benisseur #RedWoods
    Should You Attack Benisseur In Clair Obscur: Expedition 33?
    In Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, you’ll come across friendly Nevrons that’ll hand out quests for the party to take on. Some are easier than others, including this one located in the Red Woods.Read more...
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    245
    1 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • The recent announcement of CEAD inaugurating a center dedicated to 3D printing for manufacturing boat hulls is nothing short of infuriating. We are living in an age where technological advancements should lead to significant improvements in efficiency and sustainability, yet here we are, celebrating a move that reeks of superficial progress and misguided priorities.

    First off, let’s talk about the so-called “Maritime Application Center” (MAC) in Delft. While they dazzle us with their fancy new facility, one has to question the real implications of such a center. Are they genuinely solving the pressing issues of the maritime industry, or are they merely jumping on the bandwagon of 3D printing hype? The idea of using large-scale additive manufacturing to produce boat hulls sounds revolutionary, but let’s face it: this is just another example of throwing technology at a problem without truly understanding the underlying challenges that plague the industry.

    The maritime sector is facing severe environmental concerns, including pollution from traditional manufacturing processes and shipping practices. Instead of addressing these burning issues head-on, CEAD and others like them seem content to play with shiny new tools. 3D printing, in theory, could reduce waste—a point they love to hammer home in their marketing. But what about the energy consumption and material sourcing involved? Are we simply swapping one form of environmental degradation for another?

    Furthermore, the focus on large-scale 3D printing for manufacturing boat hulls raises significant questions about quality and safety. The maritime industry is not a playground for experimental technologies; lives are at stake. Relying on printed components that could potentially have structural weaknesses is a reckless gamble, and the consequences could be disastrous. Are we prepared to accept the liability if these hulls fail at sea?

    Let’s not forget the economic implications of this move. Sure, CEAD is likely patting themselves on the back for creating jobs at the MAC, but how many traditional jobs are they putting at risk? The maritime industry relies on skilled labor and craftsmanship that cannot simply be replaced by a machine. By pushing for 3D printing at such a scale, they threaten the livelihoods of countless workers who have dedicated their lives to mastering this trade.

    In conclusion, while CEAD’s center for 3D printing boat hulls may sound impressive on paper, the reality is that it’s a misguided effort that overlooks critical aspects of sustainability, safety, and social responsibility. We need to demand more from our industries and hold them accountable for their actions instead of blindly celebrating every shiny new innovation. The maritime industry deserves solutions that genuinely address its challenges rather than a mere technological gimmick.

    #MaritimeIndustry #3DPrinting #Sustainability #CEAD #BoatManufacturing
    The recent announcement of CEAD inaugurating a center dedicated to 3D printing for manufacturing boat hulls is nothing short of infuriating. We are living in an age where technological advancements should lead to significant improvements in efficiency and sustainability, yet here we are, celebrating a move that reeks of superficial progress and misguided priorities. First off, let’s talk about the so-called “Maritime Application Center” (MAC) in Delft. While they dazzle us with their fancy new facility, one has to question the real implications of such a center. Are they genuinely solving the pressing issues of the maritime industry, or are they merely jumping on the bandwagon of 3D printing hype? The idea of using large-scale additive manufacturing to produce boat hulls sounds revolutionary, but let’s face it: this is just another example of throwing technology at a problem without truly understanding the underlying challenges that plague the industry. The maritime sector is facing severe environmental concerns, including pollution from traditional manufacturing processes and shipping practices. Instead of addressing these burning issues head-on, CEAD and others like them seem content to play with shiny new tools. 3D printing, in theory, could reduce waste—a point they love to hammer home in their marketing. But what about the energy consumption and material sourcing involved? Are we simply swapping one form of environmental degradation for another? Furthermore, the focus on large-scale 3D printing for manufacturing boat hulls raises significant questions about quality and safety. The maritime industry is not a playground for experimental technologies; lives are at stake. Relying on printed components that could potentially have structural weaknesses is a reckless gamble, and the consequences could be disastrous. Are we prepared to accept the liability if these hulls fail at sea? Let’s not forget the economic implications of this move. Sure, CEAD is likely patting themselves on the back for creating jobs at the MAC, but how many traditional jobs are they putting at risk? The maritime industry relies on skilled labor and craftsmanship that cannot simply be replaced by a machine. By pushing for 3D printing at such a scale, they threaten the livelihoods of countless workers who have dedicated their lives to mastering this trade. In conclusion, while CEAD’s center for 3D printing boat hulls may sound impressive on paper, the reality is that it’s a misguided effort that overlooks critical aspects of sustainability, safety, and social responsibility. We need to demand more from our industries and hold them accountable for their actions instead of blindly celebrating every shiny new innovation. The maritime industry deserves solutions that genuinely address its challenges rather than a mere technological gimmick. #MaritimeIndustry #3DPrinting #Sustainability #CEAD #BoatManufacturing
    CEAD inaugura un centro dedicado a la impresión 3D para fabricar cascos de barcos
    La industria marítima está experimentando una transformación importante gracias a la impresión 3D de gran formato. El grupo holandés CEAD, especialista en fabricación aditiva a gran escala, ha inaugurado recientemente su Maritime Application Center (
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    587
    1 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • Q&A: How anacondas, chickens, and locals may be able to coexist in the Amazon

    A coiled giant anaconda. They are the largest snake species in Brazil and play a major role in legends including the ‘Boiuna’ and the ‘Cobra Grande.’ CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey.

    Get the Popular Science daily newsletter
    Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday.

    South America’s lush Amazon region is a biodiversity hotspot, which means that every living thing must find a way to co-exist. Even some of the most feared snakes on the planet–anacondas. In a paper published June 16 in the journal Frontiers in Amphibian and Reptile Science, conservation biologists Beatriz Cosendey and Juarez Carlos Brito Pezzuti from the Federal University of Pará’s Center for Amazonian Studies in Brazil, analyze the key points behind the interactions between humans and the local anaconda populations.
    Ahead of the paper’s publication, the team at Frontiers conducted this wide-ranging Q&A with Conesday. It has not been altered.
    Frontiers: What inspired you to become a researcher?
    Beatriz Cosendey: As a child, I was fascinated by reports and documentaries about field research and often wondered what it took to be there and what kind of knowledge was being produced. Later, as an ecologist, I felt the need for approaches that better connected scientific research with real-world contexts. I became especially interested in perspectives that viewed humans not as separate from nature, but as part of ecological systems. This led me to explore integrative methods that incorporate local and traditional knowledge, aiming to make research more relevant and accessible to the communities involved.
    F: Can you tell us about the research you’re currently working on?
    BC: My research focuses on ethnobiology, an interdisciplinary field intersecting ecology, conservation, and traditional knowledge. We investigate not only the biodiversity of an area but also the relationship local communities have with surrounding species, providing a better understanding of local dynamics and areas needing special attention for conservation. After all, no one knows a place better than those who have lived there for generations. This deep familiarity allows for early detection of changes or environmental shifts. Additionally, developing a collaborative project with residents generates greater engagement, as they recognize themselves as active contributors; and collective participation is essential for effective conservation.
    Local boating the Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey.
    F: Could you tell us about one of the legends surrounding anacondas?
    BC: One of the greatest myths is about the Great Snake—a huge snake that is said to inhabit the Amazon River and sleep beneath the town. According to the dwellers, the Great Snake is an anaconda that has grown too large; its movements can shake the river’s waters, and its eyes look like fire in the darkness of night. People say anacondas can grow so big that they can swallow large animals—including humans or cattle—without difficulty.
    F: What could be the reasons why the traditional role of anacondas as a spiritual and mythological entity has changed? Do you think the fact that fewer anacondas have been seen in recent years contributes to their diminished importance as an mythological entity?
    BC: Not exactly. I believe the two are related, but not in a direct way. The mythology still exists, but among Aritapera dwellers, there’s a more practical, everyday concern—mainly the fear of losing their chickens. As a result, anacondas have come to be seen as stealthy thieves. These traits are mostly associated with smaller individuals, while the larger ones—which may still carry the symbolic weight of the ‘Great Snake’—tend to retreat to more sheltered areas; because of the presence of houses, motorized boats, and general noise, they are now seen much less frequently.
    A giant anaconda is being measured. Credit: Pedro Calazans.
    F: Can you share some of the quotes you’ve collected in interviews that show the attitude of community members towards anacondas? How do chickens come into play?
    BC: When talking about anacondas, one thing always comes up: chickens. “Chicken is herfavorite dish. If one clucks, she comes,” said one dweller. This kind of remark helps explain why the conflict is often framed in economic terms. During the interviews and conversations with local dwellers, many emphasized the financial impact of losing their animals: “The biggest loss is that they keep taking chicks and chickens…” or “You raise the chicken—you can’t just let it be eaten for free, right?”
    For them, it’s a loss of investment, especially since corn, which is used as chicken feed, is expensive. As one person put it: “We spend time feeding and raising the birds, and then the snake comes and takes them.” One dweller shared that, in an attempt to prevent another loss, he killed the anaconda and removed the last chicken it had swallowed from its belly—”it was still fresh,” he said—and used it for his meal, cooking the chicken for lunch so it wouldn’t go to waste.
    One of the Amazonas communities where the researchers conducted their research. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey.
    Some interviewees reported that they had to rebuild their chicken coops and pigsties because too many anacondas were getting in. Participants would point out where the anaconda had entered and explained that they came in through gaps or cracks but couldn’t get out afterwards because they ‘tufavam’ — a local term referring to the snake’s body swelling after ingesting prey.
    We saw chicken coops made with mesh, with nylon, some that worked and some that didn’t. Guided by the locals’ insights, we concluded that the best solution to compensate for the gaps between the wooden slats is to line the coop with a fine nylon mesh, and on the outside, a layer of wire mesh, which protects the inner mesh and prevents the entry of larger animals.
    F: Are there any common misconceptions about this area of research? How would you address them?
    BC: Yes, very much. Although ethnobiology is an old science, it’s still underexplored and often misunderstood. In some fields, there are ongoing debates about the robustness and scientific validity of the field and related areas. This is largely because the findings don’t always rely only on hard statistical data.
    However, like any other scientific field, it follows standardized methodologies, and no result is accepted without proper grounding. What happens is that ethnobiology leans more toward the human sciences, placing human beings and traditional knowledge as key variables within its framework.
    To address these misconceptions, I believe it’s important to emphasize that ethnobiology produces solid and relevant knowledge—especially in the context of conservation and sustainable development. It offers insights that purely biological approaches might overlook and helps build bridges between science and society.
    The study focused on the várzea regions of the Lower Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey.
    F: What are some of the areas of research you’d like to see tackled in the years ahead?
    BC: I’d like to see more conservation projects that include local communities as active participants rather than as passive observers. Incorporating their voices, perspectives, and needs not only makes initiatives more effective, but also more just. There is also great potential in recognizing and valuing traditional knowledge. Beyond its cultural significance, certain practices—such as the use of natural compounds—could become practical assets for other vulnerable regions. Once properly documented and understood, many of these approaches offer adaptable forms of environmental management and could help inform broader conservation strategies elsewhere.
    F: How has open science benefited the reach and impact of your research?
    BC: Open science is crucial for making research more accessible. By eliminating access barriers, it facilitates a broader exchange of knowledge—important especially for interdisciplinary research like mine which draws on multiple knowledge systems and gains value when shared widely. For scientific work, it ensures that knowledge reaches a wider audience, including practitioners and policymakers. This openness fosters dialogue across different sectors, making research more inclusive and encouraging greater collaboration among diverse groups.
    The Q&A can also be read here.
    #qampampa #how #anacondas #chickens #locals
    Q&A: How anacondas, chickens, and locals may be able to coexist in the Amazon
    A coiled giant anaconda. They are the largest snake species in Brazil and play a major role in legends including the ‘Boiuna’ and the ‘Cobra Grande.’ CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. South America’s lush Amazon region is a biodiversity hotspot, which means that every living thing must find a way to co-exist. Even some of the most feared snakes on the planet–anacondas. In a paper published June 16 in the journal Frontiers in Amphibian and Reptile Science, conservation biologists Beatriz Cosendey and Juarez Carlos Brito Pezzuti from the Federal University of Pará’s Center for Amazonian Studies in Brazil, analyze the key points behind the interactions between humans and the local anaconda populations. Ahead of the paper’s publication, the team at Frontiers conducted this wide-ranging Q&A with Conesday. It has not been altered. Frontiers: What inspired you to become a researcher? Beatriz Cosendey: As a child, I was fascinated by reports and documentaries about field research and often wondered what it took to be there and what kind of knowledge was being produced. Later, as an ecologist, I felt the need for approaches that better connected scientific research with real-world contexts. I became especially interested in perspectives that viewed humans not as separate from nature, but as part of ecological systems. This led me to explore integrative methods that incorporate local and traditional knowledge, aiming to make research more relevant and accessible to the communities involved. F: Can you tell us about the research you’re currently working on? BC: My research focuses on ethnobiology, an interdisciplinary field intersecting ecology, conservation, and traditional knowledge. We investigate not only the biodiversity of an area but also the relationship local communities have with surrounding species, providing a better understanding of local dynamics and areas needing special attention for conservation. After all, no one knows a place better than those who have lived there for generations. This deep familiarity allows for early detection of changes or environmental shifts. Additionally, developing a collaborative project with residents generates greater engagement, as they recognize themselves as active contributors; and collective participation is essential for effective conservation. Local boating the Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. F: Could you tell us about one of the legends surrounding anacondas? BC: One of the greatest myths is about the Great Snake—a huge snake that is said to inhabit the Amazon River and sleep beneath the town. According to the dwellers, the Great Snake is an anaconda that has grown too large; its movements can shake the river’s waters, and its eyes look like fire in the darkness of night. People say anacondas can grow so big that they can swallow large animals—including humans or cattle—without difficulty. F: What could be the reasons why the traditional role of anacondas as a spiritual and mythological entity has changed? Do you think the fact that fewer anacondas have been seen in recent years contributes to their diminished importance as an mythological entity? BC: Not exactly. I believe the two are related, but not in a direct way. The mythology still exists, but among Aritapera dwellers, there’s a more practical, everyday concern—mainly the fear of losing their chickens. As a result, anacondas have come to be seen as stealthy thieves. These traits are mostly associated with smaller individuals, while the larger ones—which may still carry the symbolic weight of the ‘Great Snake’—tend to retreat to more sheltered areas; because of the presence of houses, motorized boats, and general noise, they are now seen much less frequently. A giant anaconda is being measured. Credit: Pedro Calazans. F: Can you share some of the quotes you’ve collected in interviews that show the attitude of community members towards anacondas? How do chickens come into play? BC: When talking about anacondas, one thing always comes up: chickens. “Chicken is herfavorite dish. If one clucks, she comes,” said one dweller. This kind of remark helps explain why the conflict is often framed in economic terms. During the interviews and conversations with local dwellers, many emphasized the financial impact of losing their animals: “The biggest loss is that they keep taking chicks and chickens…” or “You raise the chicken—you can’t just let it be eaten for free, right?” For them, it’s a loss of investment, especially since corn, which is used as chicken feed, is expensive. As one person put it: “We spend time feeding and raising the birds, and then the snake comes and takes them.” One dweller shared that, in an attempt to prevent another loss, he killed the anaconda and removed the last chicken it had swallowed from its belly—”it was still fresh,” he said—and used it for his meal, cooking the chicken for lunch so it wouldn’t go to waste. One of the Amazonas communities where the researchers conducted their research. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. Some interviewees reported that they had to rebuild their chicken coops and pigsties because too many anacondas were getting in. Participants would point out where the anaconda had entered and explained that they came in through gaps or cracks but couldn’t get out afterwards because they ‘tufavam’ — a local term referring to the snake’s body swelling after ingesting prey. We saw chicken coops made with mesh, with nylon, some that worked and some that didn’t. Guided by the locals’ insights, we concluded that the best solution to compensate for the gaps between the wooden slats is to line the coop with a fine nylon mesh, and on the outside, a layer of wire mesh, which protects the inner mesh and prevents the entry of larger animals. F: Are there any common misconceptions about this area of research? How would you address them? BC: Yes, very much. Although ethnobiology is an old science, it’s still underexplored and often misunderstood. In some fields, there are ongoing debates about the robustness and scientific validity of the field and related areas. This is largely because the findings don’t always rely only on hard statistical data. However, like any other scientific field, it follows standardized methodologies, and no result is accepted without proper grounding. What happens is that ethnobiology leans more toward the human sciences, placing human beings and traditional knowledge as key variables within its framework. To address these misconceptions, I believe it’s important to emphasize that ethnobiology produces solid and relevant knowledge—especially in the context of conservation and sustainable development. It offers insights that purely biological approaches might overlook and helps build bridges between science and society. The study focused on the várzea regions of the Lower Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. F: What are some of the areas of research you’d like to see tackled in the years ahead? BC: I’d like to see more conservation projects that include local communities as active participants rather than as passive observers. Incorporating their voices, perspectives, and needs not only makes initiatives more effective, but also more just. There is also great potential in recognizing and valuing traditional knowledge. Beyond its cultural significance, certain practices—such as the use of natural compounds—could become practical assets for other vulnerable regions. Once properly documented and understood, many of these approaches offer adaptable forms of environmental management and could help inform broader conservation strategies elsewhere. F: How has open science benefited the reach and impact of your research? BC: Open science is crucial for making research more accessible. By eliminating access barriers, it facilitates a broader exchange of knowledge—important especially for interdisciplinary research like mine which draws on multiple knowledge systems and gains value when shared widely. For scientific work, it ensures that knowledge reaches a wider audience, including practitioners and policymakers. This openness fosters dialogue across different sectors, making research more inclusive and encouraging greater collaboration among diverse groups. The Q&A can also be read here. #qampampa #how #anacondas #chickens #locals
    WWW.POPSCI.COM
    Q&A: How anacondas, chickens, and locals may be able to coexist in the Amazon
    A coiled giant anaconda. They are the largest snake species in Brazil and play a major role in legends including the ‘Boiuna’ and the ‘Cobra Grande.’ CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. South America’s lush Amazon region is a biodiversity hotspot, which means that every living thing must find a way to co-exist. Even some of the most feared snakes on the planet–anacondas. In a paper published June 16 in the journal Frontiers in Amphibian and Reptile Science, conservation biologists Beatriz Cosendey and Juarez Carlos Brito Pezzuti from the Federal University of Pará’s Center for Amazonian Studies in Brazil, analyze the key points behind the interactions between humans and the local anaconda populations. Ahead of the paper’s publication, the team at Frontiers conducted this wide-ranging Q&A with Conesday. It has not been altered. Frontiers: What inspired you to become a researcher? Beatriz Cosendey: As a child, I was fascinated by reports and documentaries about field research and often wondered what it took to be there and what kind of knowledge was being produced. Later, as an ecologist, I felt the need for approaches that better connected scientific research with real-world contexts. I became especially interested in perspectives that viewed humans not as separate from nature, but as part of ecological systems. This led me to explore integrative methods that incorporate local and traditional knowledge, aiming to make research more relevant and accessible to the communities involved. F: Can you tell us about the research you’re currently working on? BC: My research focuses on ethnobiology, an interdisciplinary field intersecting ecology, conservation, and traditional knowledge. We investigate not only the biodiversity of an area but also the relationship local communities have with surrounding species, providing a better understanding of local dynamics and areas needing special attention for conservation. After all, no one knows a place better than those who have lived there for generations. This deep familiarity allows for early detection of changes or environmental shifts. Additionally, developing a collaborative project with residents generates greater engagement, as they recognize themselves as active contributors; and collective participation is essential for effective conservation. Local boating the Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. F: Could you tell us about one of the legends surrounding anacondas? BC: One of the greatest myths is about the Great Snake—a huge snake that is said to inhabit the Amazon River and sleep beneath the town. According to the dwellers, the Great Snake is an anaconda that has grown too large; its movements can shake the river’s waters, and its eyes look like fire in the darkness of night. People say anacondas can grow so big that they can swallow large animals—including humans or cattle—without difficulty. F: What could be the reasons why the traditional role of anacondas as a spiritual and mythological entity has changed? Do you think the fact that fewer anacondas have been seen in recent years contributes to their diminished importance as an mythological entity? BC: Not exactly. I believe the two are related, but not in a direct way. The mythology still exists, but among Aritapera dwellers, there’s a more practical, everyday concern—mainly the fear of losing their chickens. As a result, anacondas have come to be seen as stealthy thieves. These traits are mostly associated with smaller individuals (up to around 2–2.5 meters), while the larger ones—which may still carry the symbolic weight of the ‘Great Snake’—tend to retreat to more sheltered areas; because of the presence of houses, motorized boats, and general noise, they are now seen much less frequently. A giant anaconda is being measured. Credit: Pedro Calazans. F: Can you share some of the quotes you’ve collected in interviews that show the attitude of community members towards anacondas? How do chickens come into play? BC: When talking about anacondas, one thing always comes up: chickens. “Chicken is her [the anaconda’s] favorite dish. If one clucks, she comes,” said one dweller. This kind of remark helps explain why the conflict is often framed in economic terms. During the interviews and conversations with local dwellers, many emphasized the financial impact of losing their animals: “The biggest loss is that they keep taking chicks and chickens…” or “You raise the chicken—you can’t just let it be eaten for free, right?” For them, it’s a loss of investment, especially since corn, which is used as chicken feed, is expensive. As one person put it: “We spend time feeding and raising the birds, and then the snake comes and takes them.” One dweller shared that, in an attempt to prevent another loss, he killed the anaconda and removed the last chicken it had swallowed from its belly—”it was still fresh,” he said—and used it for his meal, cooking the chicken for lunch so it wouldn’t go to waste. One of the Amazonas communities where the researchers conducted their research. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. Some interviewees reported that they had to rebuild their chicken coops and pigsties because too many anacondas were getting in. Participants would point out where the anaconda had entered and explained that they came in through gaps or cracks but couldn’t get out afterwards because they ‘tufavam’ — a local term referring to the snake’s body swelling after ingesting prey. We saw chicken coops made with mesh, with nylon, some that worked and some that didn’t. Guided by the locals’ insights, we concluded that the best solution to compensate for the gaps between the wooden slats is to line the coop with a fine nylon mesh (to block smaller animals), and on the outside, a layer of wire mesh, which protects the inner mesh and prevents the entry of larger animals. F: Are there any common misconceptions about this area of research? How would you address them? BC: Yes, very much. Although ethnobiology is an old science, it’s still underexplored and often misunderstood. In some fields, there are ongoing debates about the robustness and scientific validity of the field and related areas. This is largely because the findings don’t always rely only on hard statistical data. However, like any other scientific field, it follows standardized methodologies, and no result is accepted without proper grounding. What happens is that ethnobiology leans more toward the human sciences, placing human beings and traditional knowledge as key variables within its framework. To address these misconceptions, I believe it’s important to emphasize that ethnobiology produces solid and relevant knowledge—especially in the context of conservation and sustainable development. It offers insights that purely biological approaches might overlook and helps build bridges between science and society. The study focused on the várzea regions of the Lower Amazon River. CREDIT: Beatriz Cosendey. F: What are some of the areas of research you’d like to see tackled in the years ahead? BC: I’d like to see more conservation projects that include local communities as active participants rather than as passive observers. Incorporating their voices, perspectives, and needs not only makes initiatives more effective, but also more just. There is also great potential in recognizing and valuing traditional knowledge. Beyond its cultural significance, certain practices—such as the use of natural compounds—could become practical assets for other vulnerable regions. Once properly documented and understood, many of these approaches offer adaptable forms of environmental management and could help inform broader conservation strategies elsewhere. F: How has open science benefited the reach and impact of your research? BC: Open science is crucial for making research more accessible. By eliminating access barriers, it facilitates a broader exchange of knowledge—important especially for interdisciplinary research like mine which draws on multiple knowledge systems and gains value when shared widely. For scientific work, it ensures that knowledge reaches a wider audience, including practitioners and policymakers. This openness fosters dialogue across different sectors, making research more inclusive and encouraging greater collaboration among diverse groups. The Q&A can also be read here.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    443
    2 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • The stunning reversal of humanity’s oldest bias

    Perhaps the oldest, most pernicious form of human bias is that of men toward women. It often started at the moment of birth. In ancient Athens, at a public ceremony called the amphidromia, fathers would inspect a newborn and decide whether it would be part of the family, or be cast away. One often socially acceptable reason for abandoning the baby: It was a girl. Female infanticide has been distressingly common in many societies — and its practice is not just ancient history. In 1990, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen looked at birth ratios in Asia, North Africa, and China and calculated that more than 100 million women were essentially “missing” — meaning that, based on the normal ratio of boys to girls at birth and the longevity of both genders, there was a huge missing number of girls who should have been born, but weren’t. Sen’s estimate came before the truly widespread adoption of ultrasound tests that could determine the sex of a fetus in utero — which actually made the problem worse, leading to a wave of sex-selective abortions. These were especially common in countries like India and China; the latter’s one-child policy and old biases made families desperate for their one child to be a boy. The Economist has estimated that since 1980 alone, there have been approximately 50 million fewer girls born worldwide than would naturally be expected, which almost certainly means that roughly that nearly all of those girls were aborted for no other reason than their sex. The preference for boys was a bias that killed in mass numbers.But in one of the most important social shifts of our time, that bias is changing. In a great cover story earlier this month, The Economist reported that the number of annual excess male births has fallen from a peak of 1.7 million in 2000 to around 200,000, which puts it back within the biologically standard birth ratio of 105 boys for every 100 girls. Countries that once had highly skewed sex ratios — like South Korea, which saw almost 116 boys born for every 100 girls in 1990 — now have normal or near-normal ratios. Altogether, The Economist estimated that the decline in sex preference at birth in the past 25 years has saved the equivalent of 7 million girls. That’s comparable to the number of lives saved by anti-smoking efforts in the US. So how, exactly, have we overcome a prejudice that seemed so embedded in human society?Success in school and the workplaceFor one, we have relaxed discrimination against girls and women in other ways — in school and in the workplace. With fewer limits, girls are outperforming boys in the classroom. In the most recent international PISA tests, considered the gold standard for evaluating student performance around the world, 15-year-old girls beat their male counterparts in reading in 79 out of 81 participating countries or economies, while the historic male advantage in math scores has fallen to single digits. Girls are also dominating in higher education, with 113 female students at that level for every 100 male students. While women continue to earn less than men, the gender pay gap has been shrinking, and in a number of urban areas in the US, young women have actually been outearning young men. Government policies have helped accelerate that shift, in part because they have come to recognize the serious social problems that eventually result from decades of anti-girl discrimination. In countries like South Korea and China, which have long had some of the most skewed gender ratios at birth, governments have cracked down on technologies that enable sex-selective abortion. In India, where female infanticide and neglect have been particularly horrific, slogans like “the Daughter, Educate the Daughter” have helped change opinions. A changing preferenceThe shift is being seen not just in birth sex ratios, but in opinion polls — and in the actions of would-be parents.Between 1983 and 2003, The Economist reported, the proportion of South Korean women who said it was “necessary” to have a son fell from 48 percent to 6 percent, while nearly half of women now say they want daughters. In Japan, the shift has gone even further — as far back as 2002, 75 percent of couples who wanted only one child said they hoped for a daughter.In the US, which allows sex selection for couples doing in-vitro fertilization, there is growing evidence that would-be parents prefer girls, as do potential adoptive parents. While in the past, parents who had a girl first were more likely to keep trying to have children in an effort to have a boy, the opposite is now true — couples who have a girl first are less likely to keep trying. A more equal futureThere’s still more progress to be made. In northwest of India, for instance, birth ratios that overly skew toward boys are still the norm. In regions of sub-Saharan Africa, birth sex ratios may be relatively normal, but post-birth discrimination in the form of poorer nutrition and worse medical care still lingers. And course, women around the world are still subject to unacceptable levels of violence and discrimination from men.And some of the reasons for this shift may not be as high-minded as we’d like to think. Boys around the world are struggling in the modern era. They increasingly underperform in education, are more likely to be involved in violent crime, and in general, are failing to launch into adulthood. In the US, 20 percent of American men between 25 and 34 still live with their parents, compared to 15 percent of similarly aged women. It also seems to be the case that at least some of the increasing preference for girls is rooted in sexist stereotypes. Parents around the world may now prefer girls partly because they see them as more likely to take care of them in their old age — meaning a different kind of bias against women, that they are more natural caretakers, may be paradoxically driving the decline in prejudice against girls at birth.But make no mistake — the decline of boy preference is a clear mark of social progress, one measured in millions of girls’ lives saved. And maybe one Father’s Day, not too long from now, we’ll reach the point where daughters and sons are simply children: equally loved and equally welcomed.A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!See More:
    #stunning #reversal #humanitys #oldest #bias
    The stunning reversal of humanity’s oldest bias
    Perhaps the oldest, most pernicious form of human bias is that of men toward women. It often started at the moment of birth. In ancient Athens, at a public ceremony called the amphidromia, fathers would inspect a newborn and decide whether it would be part of the family, or be cast away. One often socially acceptable reason for abandoning the baby: It was a girl. Female infanticide has been distressingly common in many societies — and its practice is not just ancient history. In 1990, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen looked at birth ratios in Asia, North Africa, and China and calculated that more than 100 million women were essentially “missing” — meaning that, based on the normal ratio of boys to girls at birth and the longevity of both genders, there was a huge missing number of girls who should have been born, but weren’t. Sen’s estimate came before the truly widespread adoption of ultrasound tests that could determine the sex of a fetus in utero — which actually made the problem worse, leading to a wave of sex-selective abortions. These were especially common in countries like India and China; the latter’s one-child policy and old biases made families desperate for their one child to be a boy. The Economist has estimated that since 1980 alone, there have been approximately 50 million fewer girls born worldwide than would naturally be expected, which almost certainly means that roughly that nearly all of those girls were aborted for no other reason than their sex. The preference for boys was a bias that killed in mass numbers.But in one of the most important social shifts of our time, that bias is changing. In a great cover story earlier this month, The Economist reported that the number of annual excess male births has fallen from a peak of 1.7 million in 2000 to around 200,000, which puts it back within the biologically standard birth ratio of 105 boys for every 100 girls. Countries that once had highly skewed sex ratios — like South Korea, which saw almost 116 boys born for every 100 girls in 1990 — now have normal or near-normal ratios. Altogether, The Economist estimated that the decline in sex preference at birth in the past 25 years has saved the equivalent of 7 million girls. That’s comparable to the number of lives saved by anti-smoking efforts in the US. So how, exactly, have we overcome a prejudice that seemed so embedded in human society?Success in school and the workplaceFor one, we have relaxed discrimination against girls and women in other ways — in school and in the workplace. With fewer limits, girls are outperforming boys in the classroom. In the most recent international PISA tests, considered the gold standard for evaluating student performance around the world, 15-year-old girls beat their male counterparts in reading in 79 out of 81 participating countries or economies, while the historic male advantage in math scores has fallen to single digits. Girls are also dominating in higher education, with 113 female students at that level for every 100 male students. While women continue to earn less than men, the gender pay gap has been shrinking, and in a number of urban areas in the US, young women have actually been outearning young men. Government policies have helped accelerate that shift, in part because they have come to recognize the serious social problems that eventually result from decades of anti-girl discrimination. In countries like South Korea and China, which have long had some of the most skewed gender ratios at birth, governments have cracked down on technologies that enable sex-selective abortion. In India, where female infanticide and neglect have been particularly horrific, slogans like “the Daughter, Educate the Daughter” have helped change opinions. A changing preferenceThe shift is being seen not just in birth sex ratios, but in opinion polls — and in the actions of would-be parents.Between 1983 and 2003, The Economist reported, the proportion of South Korean women who said it was “necessary” to have a son fell from 48 percent to 6 percent, while nearly half of women now say they want daughters. In Japan, the shift has gone even further — as far back as 2002, 75 percent of couples who wanted only one child said they hoped for a daughter.In the US, which allows sex selection for couples doing in-vitro fertilization, there is growing evidence that would-be parents prefer girls, as do potential adoptive parents. While in the past, parents who had a girl first were more likely to keep trying to have children in an effort to have a boy, the opposite is now true — couples who have a girl first are less likely to keep trying. A more equal futureThere’s still more progress to be made. In northwest of India, for instance, birth ratios that overly skew toward boys are still the norm. In regions of sub-Saharan Africa, birth sex ratios may be relatively normal, but post-birth discrimination in the form of poorer nutrition and worse medical care still lingers. And course, women around the world are still subject to unacceptable levels of violence and discrimination from men.And some of the reasons for this shift may not be as high-minded as we’d like to think. Boys around the world are struggling in the modern era. They increasingly underperform in education, are more likely to be involved in violent crime, and in general, are failing to launch into adulthood. In the US, 20 percent of American men between 25 and 34 still live with their parents, compared to 15 percent of similarly aged women. It also seems to be the case that at least some of the increasing preference for girls is rooted in sexist stereotypes. Parents around the world may now prefer girls partly because they see them as more likely to take care of them in their old age — meaning a different kind of bias against women, that they are more natural caretakers, may be paradoxically driving the decline in prejudice against girls at birth.But make no mistake — the decline of boy preference is a clear mark of social progress, one measured in millions of girls’ lives saved. And maybe one Father’s Day, not too long from now, we’ll reach the point where daughters and sons are simply children: equally loved and equally welcomed.A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!See More: #stunning #reversal #humanitys #oldest #bias
    WWW.VOX.COM
    The stunning reversal of humanity’s oldest bias
    Perhaps the oldest, most pernicious form of human bias is that of men toward women. It often started at the moment of birth. In ancient Athens, at a public ceremony called the amphidromia, fathers would inspect a newborn and decide whether it would be part of the family, or be cast away. One often socially acceptable reason for abandoning the baby: It was a girl. Female infanticide has been distressingly common in many societies — and its practice is not just ancient history. In 1990, the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen looked at birth ratios in Asia, North Africa, and China and calculated that more than 100 million women were essentially “missing” — meaning that, based on the normal ratio of boys to girls at birth and the longevity of both genders, there was a huge missing number of girls who should have been born, but weren’t. Sen’s estimate came before the truly widespread adoption of ultrasound tests that could determine the sex of a fetus in utero — which actually made the problem worse, leading to a wave of sex-selective abortions. These were especially common in countries like India and China; the latter’s one-child policy and old biases made families desperate for their one child to be a boy. The Economist has estimated that since 1980 alone, there have been approximately 50 million fewer girls born worldwide than would naturally be expected, which almost certainly means that roughly that nearly all of those girls were aborted for no other reason than their sex. The preference for boys was a bias that killed in mass numbers.But in one of the most important social shifts of our time, that bias is changing. In a great cover story earlier this month, The Economist reported that the number of annual excess male births has fallen from a peak of 1.7 million in 2000 to around 200,000, which puts it back within the biologically standard birth ratio of 105 boys for every 100 girls. Countries that once had highly skewed sex ratios — like South Korea, which saw almost 116 boys born for every 100 girls in 1990 — now have normal or near-normal ratios. Altogether, The Economist estimated that the decline in sex preference at birth in the past 25 years has saved the equivalent of 7 million girls. That’s comparable to the number of lives saved by anti-smoking efforts in the US. So how, exactly, have we overcome a prejudice that seemed so embedded in human society?Success in school and the workplaceFor one, we have relaxed discrimination against girls and women in other ways — in school and in the workplace. With fewer limits, girls are outperforming boys in the classroom. In the most recent international PISA tests, considered the gold standard for evaluating student performance around the world, 15-year-old girls beat their male counterparts in reading in 79 out of 81 participating countries or economies, while the historic male advantage in math scores has fallen to single digits. Girls are also dominating in higher education, with 113 female students at that level for every 100 male students. While women continue to earn less than men, the gender pay gap has been shrinking, and in a number of urban areas in the US, young women have actually been outearning young men. Government policies have helped accelerate that shift, in part because they have come to recognize the serious social problems that eventually result from decades of anti-girl discrimination. In countries like South Korea and China, which have long had some of the most skewed gender ratios at birth, governments have cracked down on technologies that enable sex-selective abortion. In India, where female infanticide and neglect have been particularly horrific, slogans like “Save the Daughter, Educate the Daughter” have helped change opinions. A changing preferenceThe shift is being seen not just in birth sex ratios, but in opinion polls — and in the actions of would-be parents.Between 1983 and 2003, The Economist reported, the proportion of South Korean women who said it was “necessary” to have a son fell from 48 percent to 6 percent, while nearly half of women now say they want daughters. In Japan, the shift has gone even further — as far back as 2002, 75 percent of couples who wanted only one child said they hoped for a daughter.In the US, which allows sex selection for couples doing in-vitro fertilization, there is growing evidence that would-be parents prefer girls, as do potential adoptive parents. While in the past, parents who had a girl first were more likely to keep trying to have children in an effort to have a boy, the opposite is now true — couples who have a girl first are less likely to keep trying. A more equal futureThere’s still more progress to be made. In northwest of India, for instance, birth ratios that overly skew toward boys are still the norm. In regions of sub-Saharan Africa, birth sex ratios may be relatively normal, but post-birth discrimination in the form of poorer nutrition and worse medical care still lingers. And course, women around the world are still subject to unacceptable levels of violence and discrimination from men.And some of the reasons for this shift may not be as high-minded as we’d like to think. Boys around the world are struggling in the modern era. They increasingly underperform in education, are more likely to be involved in violent crime, and in general, are failing to launch into adulthood. In the US, 20 percent of American men between 25 and 34 still live with their parents, compared to 15 percent of similarly aged women. It also seems to be the case that at least some of the increasing preference for girls is rooted in sexist stereotypes. Parents around the world may now prefer girls partly because they see them as more likely to take care of them in their old age — meaning a different kind of bias against women, that they are more natural caretakers, may be paradoxically driving the decline in prejudice against girls at birth.But make no mistake — the decline of boy preference is a clear mark of social progress, one measured in millions of girls’ lives saved. And maybe one Father’s Day, not too long from now, we’ll reach the point where daughters and sons are simply children: equally loved and equally welcomed.A version of this story originally appeared in the Good News newsletter. Sign up here!See More:
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    525
    0 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • Government ditches public sector decarbonisation scheme

    The government has axed a scheme for upgrading energy efficiency in public sector buildings.
    The Public Sector Decarbonisation Schemedelivered more than £2.5bn in its first three phases for measures such as heat pumps, solar panels, insulation and double glazing, with further funding of nearly £1bn recently announced.
    But the Department for Energy Security and Net Zerohas told Building Design that the scheme has been dropped after the spending review, leaving uncertainty about how upgrades will be funded when the current phase expires in 2028.

    Source: UK Government/FlickrEd Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is responsible for the scheme
    The department said it would set out plans for the period after 2028 in due course.
    In a post on LinkedIn, Dave Welkin, director of sustainability at Gleeds, said he had waited for the release of the spending review with a “sense of trepidation” and was unable to find mention of public sector decarbonisation when Treasury documents were released.
    “I hoped because it was already committed in the Budget that its omission wasn’t ominous,” he wrote.
    Yesterday, he was told by Salix Finance, the non-departmental public body that delivers funding for the scheme, that it was no longer being funded.
    It comes after the withdrawal of funding for the Low Carbon Skills Fundin May.
    According to the government’s website, PSDS and LCSF were intended to support the reduction of emissions from public sector buildings by 75% by 2037, compared to a 2017 baseline.
    “Neither LCSF or PSDS were perfect by any means, but they did provide a vital source of funding for local authorities, hospitals, schools and many other public sector organisations to save energy, carbon and money,” Welkin said.
    “PSDS has helped replace failed heating systems in schools, keeping students warm. It’s replaced roofs on hospitals, helping patients recover from illness. It’s replaced windows in our prisons, improving security and stopping drugs getting behind bars.”
    However, responding to Welkin’s post, Steve Connolly, chief executive at Arriba Technologies, a low carbon heating and cooling firm, said that the scheme was being “mismanaged” with a small number of professional services firms “scooping up disproportionately large grants for their clients”.
    The fourth phase of the scheme was confirmed last September, with allocations confirmed only last month.
    This latest phase, which covers the financial years between 2025/26 and 2027/28, saw the distribution of £940m across the country.
    A DESNZ spokesperson said: “Our settlement is about investing in Britain’s renewal to create energy security, sprint to clean power by 2030, encourage investment, create jobs and bring down bills for good.
    “We will deliver £1bn in current allocations of the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme until 2028 and, through Great British Energy, have invested in new rooftop solar power and renewable schemes to lower energy bills for schools and hospitals across the UK.
    “We want to build on this progress by incentivising the public sector to decarbonise, so they can reap the benefits in lower bills and emissions, sharing best practice across government and exploring the use of repayable finance, where appropriate.”
    A government assessment of phase 3a and 3b projects identified a number of issues with the scheme, including delays and cost inflation, with more than a tenth being abandoned subsequent to grants being offered.
    Stakeholders interviewed for the report also identified “difficulties in obtaining skilled contractors and equipment”, especially air source heat pumps.
    The first come first served approach to awarding funding was also said to be “encouraging applicants to opt for more straightforward projects” and “potentially undermining the achievement of PSDS objective by restricting the opportunity for largermore complex measures which may have delivered greater carbon reduction benefits”.
    But the consensus among stakeholders and industry representatives interviewed for the report was that the scheme was “currently key to sustaining the existing UK heat pump market” and that it was “seen as vital in enabling many public sector organisations to invest in heat decarbonisation”.
    #government #ditches #public #sector #decarbonisation
    Government ditches public sector decarbonisation scheme
    The government has axed a scheme for upgrading energy efficiency in public sector buildings. The Public Sector Decarbonisation Schemedelivered more than £2.5bn in its first three phases for measures such as heat pumps, solar panels, insulation and double glazing, with further funding of nearly £1bn recently announced. But the Department for Energy Security and Net Zerohas told Building Design that the scheme has been dropped after the spending review, leaving uncertainty about how upgrades will be funded when the current phase expires in 2028. Source: UK Government/FlickrEd Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is responsible for the scheme The department said it would set out plans for the period after 2028 in due course. In a post on LinkedIn, Dave Welkin, director of sustainability at Gleeds, said he had waited for the release of the spending review with a “sense of trepidation” and was unable to find mention of public sector decarbonisation when Treasury documents were released. “I hoped because it was already committed in the Budget that its omission wasn’t ominous,” he wrote. Yesterday, he was told by Salix Finance, the non-departmental public body that delivers funding for the scheme, that it was no longer being funded. It comes after the withdrawal of funding for the Low Carbon Skills Fundin May. According to the government’s website, PSDS and LCSF were intended to support the reduction of emissions from public sector buildings by 75% by 2037, compared to a 2017 baseline. “Neither LCSF or PSDS were perfect by any means, but they did provide a vital source of funding for local authorities, hospitals, schools and many other public sector organisations to save energy, carbon and money,” Welkin said. “PSDS has helped replace failed heating systems in schools, keeping students warm. It’s replaced roofs on hospitals, helping patients recover from illness. It’s replaced windows in our prisons, improving security and stopping drugs getting behind bars.” However, responding to Welkin’s post, Steve Connolly, chief executive at Arriba Technologies, a low carbon heating and cooling firm, said that the scheme was being “mismanaged” with a small number of professional services firms “scooping up disproportionately large grants for their clients”. The fourth phase of the scheme was confirmed last September, with allocations confirmed only last month. This latest phase, which covers the financial years between 2025/26 and 2027/28, saw the distribution of £940m across the country. A DESNZ spokesperson said: “Our settlement is about investing in Britain’s renewal to create energy security, sprint to clean power by 2030, encourage investment, create jobs and bring down bills for good. “We will deliver £1bn in current allocations of the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme until 2028 and, through Great British Energy, have invested in new rooftop solar power and renewable schemes to lower energy bills for schools and hospitals across the UK. “We want to build on this progress by incentivising the public sector to decarbonise, so they can reap the benefits in lower bills and emissions, sharing best practice across government and exploring the use of repayable finance, where appropriate.” A government assessment of phase 3a and 3b projects identified a number of issues with the scheme, including delays and cost inflation, with more than a tenth being abandoned subsequent to grants being offered. Stakeholders interviewed for the report also identified “difficulties in obtaining skilled contractors and equipment”, especially air source heat pumps. The first come first served approach to awarding funding was also said to be “encouraging applicants to opt for more straightforward projects” and “potentially undermining the achievement of PSDS objective by restricting the opportunity for largermore complex measures which may have delivered greater carbon reduction benefits”. But the consensus among stakeholders and industry representatives interviewed for the report was that the scheme was “currently key to sustaining the existing UK heat pump market” and that it was “seen as vital in enabling many public sector organisations to invest in heat decarbonisation”. #government #ditches #public #sector #decarbonisation
    WWW.BDONLINE.CO.UK
    Government ditches public sector decarbonisation scheme
    The government has axed a scheme for upgrading energy efficiency in public sector buildings. The Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme (PSDS) delivered more than £2.5bn in its first three phases for measures such as heat pumps, solar panels, insulation and double glazing, with further funding of nearly £1bn recently announced. But the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has told Building Design that the scheme has been dropped after the spending review, leaving uncertainty about how upgrades will be funded when the current phase expires in 2028. Source: UK Government/FlickrEd Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is responsible for the scheme The department said it would set out plans for the period after 2028 in due course. In a post on LinkedIn, Dave Welkin, director of sustainability at Gleeds, said he had waited for the release of the spending review with a “sense of trepidation” and was unable to find mention of public sector decarbonisation when Treasury documents were released. “I hoped because it was already committed in the Budget that its omission wasn’t ominous,” he wrote. Yesterday, he was told by Salix Finance, the non-departmental public body that delivers funding for the scheme, that it was no longer being funded. It comes after the withdrawal of funding for the Low Carbon Skills Fund (LCSF) in May. According to the government’s website, PSDS and LCSF were intended to support the reduction of emissions from public sector buildings by 75% by 2037, compared to a 2017 baseline. “Neither LCSF or PSDS were perfect by any means, but they did provide a vital source of funding for local authorities, hospitals, schools and many other public sector organisations to save energy, carbon and money,” Welkin said. “PSDS has helped replace failed heating systems in schools, keeping students warm. It’s replaced roofs on hospitals, helping patients recover from illness. It’s replaced windows in our prisons, improving security and stopping drugs getting behind bars.” However, responding to Welkin’s post, Steve Connolly, chief executive at Arriba Technologies, a low carbon heating and cooling firm, said that the scheme was being “mismanaged” with a small number of professional services firms “scooping up disproportionately large grants for their clients”. The fourth phase of the scheme was confirmed last September, with allocations confirmed only last month. This latest phase, which covers the financial years between 2025/26 and 2027/28, saw the distribution of £940m across the country. A DESNZ spokesperson said: “Our settlement is about investing in Britain’s renewal to create energy security, sprint to clean power by 2030, encourage investment, create jobs and bring down bills for good. “We will deliver £1bn in current allocations of the Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme until 2028 and, through Great British Energy, have invested in new rooftop solar power and renewable schemes to lower energy bills for schools and hospitals across the UK. “We want to build on this progress by incentivising the public sector to decarbonise, so they can reap the benefits in lower bills and emissions, sharing best practice across government and exploring the use of repayable finance, where appropriate.” A government assessment of phase 3a and 3b projects identified a number of issues with the scheme, including delays and cost inflation, with more than a tenth being abandoned subsequent to grants being offered. Stakeholders interviewed for the report also identified “difficulties in obtaining skilled contractors and equipment”, especially air source heat pumps. The first come first served approach to awarding funding was also said to be “encouraging applicants to opt for more straightforward projects” and “potentially undermining the achievement of PSDS objective by restricting the opportunity for larger [and] more complex measures which may have delivered greater carbon reduction benefits”. But the consensus among stakeholders and industry representatives interviewed for the report was that the scheme was “currently key to sustaining the existing UK heat pump market” and that it was “seen as vital in enabling many public sector organisations to invest in heat decarbonisation”.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    474
    2 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • 15 riveting images from the 2025 UN World Oceans Day Photo Competition

    Big and Small Underwater Faces — 3rd Place.
    Trips to the Antarctic Peninsula always yield amazing encounters with leopard seals. Boldly approaching me and baring his teeth, this individual was keen to point out that this part of Antarctica was his territory. This picture was shot at dusk, resulting in the rather moody atmosphere.
     
    Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony/ World Ocean’s Day

    Get the Popular Science daily newsletter
    Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday.

    The striking eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl peers at the camera. Just four days later, she would be dead, hit by a speeding boat and one of the 20,000 whales killed by ship strikes each year. Photographer Rachel Moore’s captivating imageof Sweet Girl earned top honors at the 2025 United Nations World Oceans Day Photo Competition.
    Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — WinnerThis photo, taken in Mo’orea, French Polynesia in 2024, captures the eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl, just days before her tragic death. Four days after I captured this intimate moment, she was struck and killed by a fast-moving ship. Her death serves as a heartbreaking reminder of the 20,000 whales lost to ship strikes every year. We are using her story to advocate for stronger protections, petitioning for stricter speed laws around Tahiti and Mo’orea during whale season. I hope Sweet Girl’s legacy will spark real change to protect these incredible animals and prevent further senseless loss.Credit: Rachel Moore/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Now in its twelfth year, the competition coordinated in collaboration between the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, DivePhotoGuide, Oceanic Global, and  the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO. Each year, thousands of underwater photographers submit images that judges award prizes for across four categories: Big and Small Underwater Faces, Underwater Seascapes, Above Water Seascapes, and Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us.
    This year’s winning images include a curious leopard seal, a swarm of jellyfish, and a very grumpy looking Japanese warbonnet. Given our oceans’ perilous state, all competition participants were required to sign a charter of 14 commitments regarding ethics in photography.
    Underwater Seascapes — Honorable MentionWith only orcas as their natural predators, leopard seals are Antarctica’s most versatile hunters, preying on everything from fish and cephalopods to penguins and other seals. Gentoo penguins are a favored menu item, and leopard seals can be observed patrolling the waters around their colonies. For this shot, I used a split image to capture both worlds: the gentoo penguin colony in the background with the leopard seal on the hunt in the foreground.Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Above Water Seascapes – WinnerA serene lake cradled by arid dunes, where a gentle stream breathes life into the heart of Mother Earth’s creation: Captured from an airplane, this image reveals the powerful contrasts and hidden beauty where land and ocean meet, reminding us that the ocean is the source of all life and that everything in nature is deeply connected. The location is a remote stretch of coastline near Shark Bay, Western Australia.Credit: Leander Nardin/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Above Water Seascapes — 3rd PlaceParadise Harbour is one of the most beautiful places on the Antarctic Peninsula. When I visited, the sea was extremely calm, and I was lucky enough to witness a wonderfully clear reflection of the Suárez Glacierin the water. The only problem was the waves created by our speedboat, and the only way to capture the perfect reflection was to lie on the bottom of the boat while it moved towards the glacier.Credit: Andrey Nosik/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Underwater Seascapes — 3rd Place“La Rapadura” is a natural hidden treasure on the northern coast of Tenerife, in the Spanish territory of the Canary Islands. Only discovered in 1996, it is one of the most astonishing underwater landscapes in the world, consistently ranking among the planet’s best dive sites. These towering columns of basalt are the result of volcanic processes that occurred between 500,000 and a million years ago. The formation was created when a basaltic lava flow reached the ocean, where, upon cooling and solidifying, it contracted, creating natural structures often compared to the pipes of church organs. Located in a region where marine life has been impacted by once common illegal fishing practices, this stunning natural monument has both geological and ecological value, and scientists and underwater photographers are advocating for its protection.Credit: Pedro Carrillo/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Underwater Seascapes — WinnerThis year, I had the incredible opportunity to visit a jellyfish lake during a liveaboard trip around southern Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Being surrounded by millions of jellyfish, which have evolved to lose their stinging ability due to the absence of predators, was one of the most breathtaking experiences I’ve ever had.Credit: Dani Escayola/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Underwater Seascapes — 2nd PlaceThis shot captures a school of rays resting at a cleaning station in Mauritius, where strong currents once attracted them regularly. Some rays grew accustomed to divers, allowing close encounters like this. Sadly, after the severe bleaching that the reefs here suffered last year, such gatherings have become rare, and I fear I may not witness this again at the same spot.Credit: Gerald Rambert/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 3rd PlaceShot in Cuba’s Jardines de la Reina—a protected shark sanctuary—this image captures a Caribbean reef shark weaving through a group of silky sharks near the surface. Using a slow shutter and strobes as the shark pivoted sharply, the motion blurred into a wave-like arc across its head, lit by the golden hues of sunset. The abundance and behavior of sharks here is a living symbol of what protected oceans can look like.Credit: Steven Lopez/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
     Above Water Seascapes — 2nd PlaceNorthern gannetssoar above the dramatic cliffs of Scotland’s Hermaness National Nature Reserve, their sleek white bodies and black-tipped wings slicing through the Shetland winds. These seabirds, the largest in the North Atlantic, are renowned for their striking plunge-dives, reaching speeds up to 100 kphas they hunt for fish beneath the waves. The cliffs of Hermaness provide ideal nesting sites, with updrafts aiding their take-offs and landings. Each spring, thousands return to this rugged coastline, forming one of the UK’s most significant gannet colonies. It was a major challenge to take photos at the edge of these cliffs at almost 200 meterswith the winds up to 30 kph.Credit: Nur Tucker/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Above Water Seascapes — Honorable MentionA South Atlantic swell breaks on the Dungeons Reef off the Cape Peninsula, South Africa, shot while photographing a big-wave surf session in October 2017. It’s the crescendoing sounds of these breaking swells that always amazes me.Credit: Ken Findlay/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — Honorable MentionHumpback whales in their thousands migrate along the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia every year on the way to and from their calving grounds. In four seasons of swimming with them on the reef here, this is the only encounter I’ve had like this one. This pair of huge adult whales repeatedly spy-hopped alongside us, seeking to interact with and investigate us, leaving me completely breathless. The female in the foreground was much more confident than the male behind and would constantly make close approaches, whilst the male hung back a little, still interested but shy. After more than 10 years working with wildlife in the water, this was one of the best experiences of my life.Credit: Ollie Clarke/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Big and Small Underwater Faces — 2nd PlaceOn one of my many blackwater dives in Anilao, in the Philippines, my guide and I spotted something moving erratically at a depth of around 20 meters, about 10 to 15 centimeters in size. We quickly realized that it was a rare blanket octopus. As we approached, it opened up its beautiful blanket, revealing its multicolored mantle. I managed to take a few shots before it went on its way. I felt truly privileged to have captured this fascinating deep-sea cephalopod. Among its many unique characteristics, this species exhibits some of the most extreme sexual size-dimorphism in nature, with females weighing up to 40,000 times more than males.Credit: Giacomo Marchione/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Big and Small Underwater Faces – WinnerThis photo of a Japanese warbonnetwas captured in the Sea of Japan, about 50 milessouthwest of Vladivostok, Russia. I found the ornate fish at a depth of about 30 meters, under the stern of a shipwreck. This species does not appear to be afraid of divers—on the contrary, it seems to enjoy the attention—and it even tried to sit on the dome port of my camera.Credit: Andrey Nosik/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 2nd PlaceA juvenile pinnate batfishcaptured with a slow shutter speed, a snooted light, and deliberate camera panning to create a sense of motion and drama. Juvenile pinnate batfish are known for their striking black bodies outlined in vibrant orange—a coloration they lose within just a few months as they mature. I encountered this restless subject in the tropical waters of Indonesia’s Lembeh Strait. Capturing this image took patience and persistence over two dives, as these active young fish constantly dart for cover in crevices, making the shot particularly challenging.Credit: Luis Arpa/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    #riveting #images #world #oceans #dayphoto
    15 riveting images from the 2025 UN World Oceans Day Photo Competition
    Big and Small Underwater Faces — 3rd Place. Trips to the Antarctic Peninsula always yield amazing encounters with leopard seals. Boldly approaching me and baring his teeth, this individual was keen to point out that this part of Antarctica was his territory. This picture was shot at dusk, resulting in the rather moody atmosphere.   Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony/ World Ocean’s Day Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. The striking eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl peers at the camera. Just four days later, she would be dead, hit by a speeding boat and one of the 20,000 whales killed by ship strikes each year. Photographer Rachel Moore’s captivating imageof Sweet Girl earned top honors at the 2025 United Nations World Oceans Day Photo Competition. Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — WinnerThis photo, taken in Mo’orea, French Polynesia in 2024, captures the eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl, just days before her tragic death. Four days after I captured this intimate moment, she was struck and killed by a fast-moving ship. Her death serves as a heartbreaking reminder of the 20,000 whales lost to ship strikes every year. We are using her story to advocate for stronger protections, petitioning for stricter speed laws around Tahiti and Mo’orea during whale season. I hope Sweet Girl’s legacy will spark real change to protect these incredible animals and prevent further senseless loss.Credit: Rachel Moore/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Now in its twelfth year, the competition coordinated in collaboration between the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, DivePhotoGuide, Oceanic Global, and  the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO. Each year, thousands of underwater photographers submit images that judges award prizes for across four categories: Big and Small Underwater Faces, Underwater Seascapes, Above Water Seascapes, and Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us. This year’s winning images include a curious leopard seal, a swarm of jellyfish, and a very grumpy looking Japanese warbonnet. Given our oceans’ perilous state, all competition participants were required to sign a charter of 14 commitments regarding ethics in photography. Underwater Seascapes — Honorable MentionWith only orcas as their natural predators, leopard seals are Antarctica’s most versatile hunters, preying on everything from fish and cephalopods to penguins and other seals. Gentoo penguins are a favored menu item, and leopard seals can be observed patrolling the waters around their colonies. For this shot, I used a split image to capture both worlds: the gentoo penguin colony in the background with the leopard seal on the hunt in the foreground.Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes – WinnerA serene lake cradled by arid dunes, where a gentle stream breathes life into the heart of Mother Earth’s creation: Captured from an airplane, this image reveals the powerful contrasts and hidden beauty where land and ocean meet, reminding us that the ocean is the source of all life and that everything in nature is deeply connected. The location is a remote stretch of coastline near Shark Bay, Western Australia.Credit: Leander Nardin/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes — 3rd PlaceParadise Harbour is one of the most beautiful places on the Antarctic Peninsula. When I visited, the sea was extremely calm, and I was lucky enough to witness a wonderfully clear reflection of the Suárez Glacierin the water. The only problem was the waves created by our speedboat, and the only way to capture the perfect reflection was to lie on the bottom of the boat while it moved towards the glacier.Credit: Andrey Nosik/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — 3rd Place“La Rapadura” is a natural hidden treasure on the northern coast of Tenerife, in the Spanish territory of the Canary Islands. Only discovered in 1996, it is one of the most astonishing underwater landscapes in the world, consistently ranking among the planet’s best dive sites. These towering columns of basalt are the result of volcanic processes that occurred between 500,000 and a million years ago. The formation was created when a basaltic lava flow reached the ocean, where, upon cooling and solidifying, it contracted, creating natural structures often compared to the pipes of church organs. Located in a region where marine life has been impacted by once common illegal fishing practices, this stunning natural monument has both geological and ecological value, and scientists and underwater photographers are advocating for its protection.Credit: Pedro Carrillo/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — WinnerThis year, I had the incredible opportunity to visit a jellyfish lake during a liveaboard trip around southern Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Being surrounded by millions of jellyfish, which have evolved to lose their stinging ability due to the absence of predators, was one of the most breathtaking experiences I’ve ever had.Credit: Dani Escayola/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — 2nd PlaceThis shot captures a school of rays resting at a cleaning station in Mauritius, where strong currents once attracted them regularly. Some rays grew accustomed to divers, allowing close encounters like this. Sadly, after the severe bleaching that the reefs here suffered last year, such gatherings have become rare, and I fear I may not witness this again at the same spot.Credit: Gerald Rambert/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 3rd PlaceShot in Cuba’s Jardines de la Reina—a protected shark sanctuary—this image captures a Caribbean reef shark weaving through a group of silky sharks near the surface. Using a slow shutter and strobes as the shark pivoted sharply, the motion blurred into a wave-like arc across its head, lit by the golden hues of sunset. The abundance and behavior of sharks here is a living symbol of what protected oceans can look like.Credit: Steven Lopez/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org  Above Water Seascapes — 2nd PlaceNorthern gannetssoar above the dramatic cliffs of Scotland’s Hermaness National Nature Reserve, their sleek white bodies and black-tipped wings slicing through the Shetland winds. These seabirds, the largest in the North Atlantic, are renowned for their striking plunge-dives, reaching speeds up to 100 kphas they hunt for fish beneath the waves. The cliffs of Hermaness provide ideal nesting sites, with updrafts aiding their take-offs and landings. Each spring, thousands return to this rugged coastline, forming one of the UK’s most significant gannet colonies. It was a major challenge to take photos at the edge of these cliffs at almost 200 meterswith the winds up to 30 kph.Credit: Nur Tucker/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes — Honorable MentionA South Atlantic swell breaks on the Dungeons Reef off the Cape Peninsula, South Africa, shot while photographing a big-wave surf session in October 2017. It’s the crescendoing sounds of these breaking swells that always amazes me.Credit: Ken Findlay/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — Honorable MentionHumpback whales in their thousands migrate along the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia every year on the way to and from their calving grounds. In four seasons of swimming with them on the reef here, this is the only encounter I’ve had like this one. This pair of huge adult whales repeatedly spy-hopped alongside us, seeking to interact with and investigate us, leaving me completely breathless. The female in the foreground was much more confident than the male behind and would constantly make close approaches, whilst the male hung back a little, still interested but shy. After more than 10 years working with wildlife in the water, this was one of the best experiences of my life.Credit: Ollie Clarke/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Big and Small Underwater Faces — 2nd PlaceOn one of my many blackwater dives in Anilao, in the Philippines, my guide and I spotted something moving erratically at a depth of around 20 meters, about 10 to 15 centimeters in size. We quickly realized that it was a rare blanket octopus. As we approached, it opened up its beautiful blanket, revealing its multicolored mantle. I managed to take a few shots before it went on its way. I felt truly privileged to have captured this fascinating deep-sea cephalopod. Among its many unique characteristics, this species exhibits some of the most extreme sexual size-dimorphism in nature, with females weighing up to 40,000 times more than males.Credit: Giacomo Marchione/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Big and Small Underwater Faces – WinnerThis photo of a Japanese warbonnetwas captured in the Sea of Japan, about 50 milessouthwest of Vladivostok, Russia. I found the ornate fish at a depth of about 30 meters, under the stern of a shipwreck. This species does not appear to be afraid of divers—on the contrary, it seems to enjoy the attention—and it even tried to sit on the dome port of my camera.Credit: Andrey Nosik/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 2nd PlaceA juvenile pinnate batfishcaptured with a slow shutter speed, a snooted light, and deliberate camera panning to create a sense of motion and drama. Juvenile pinnate batfish are known for their striking black bodies outlined in vibrant orange—a coloration they lose within just a few months as they mature. I encountered this restless subject in the tropical waters of Indonesia’s Lembeh Strait. Capturing this image took patience and persistence over two dives, as these active young fish constantly dart for cover in crevices, making the shot particularly challenging.Credit: Luis Arpa/ United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org #riveting #images #world #oceans #dayphoto
    WWW.POPSCI.COM
    15 riveting images from the 2025 UN World Oceans Day Photo Competition
    Big and Small Underwater Faces — 3rd Place. Trips to the Antarctic Peninsula always yield amazing encounters with leopard seals (Hydrurga leptonyx). Boldly approaching me and baring his teeth, this individual was keen to point out that this part of Antarctica was his territory. This picture was shot at dusk, resulting in the rather moody atmosphere.   Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony (Germany) / World Ocean’s Day Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. The striking eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl peers at the camera. Just four days later, she would be dead, hit by a speeding boat and one of the 20,000 whales killed by ship strikes each year. Photographer Rachel Moore’s captivating image (seen below) of Sweet Girl earned top honors at the 2025 United Nations World Oceans Day Photo Competition. Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — WinnerThis photo, taken in Mo’orea, French Polynesia in 2024, captures the eye of a humpback whale named Sweet Girl, just days before her tragic death. Four days after I captured this intimate moment, she was struck and killed by a fast-moving ship. Her death serves as a heartbreaking reminder of the 20,000 whales lost to ship strikes every year. We are using her story to advocate for stronger protections, petitioning for stricter speed laws around Tahiti and Mo’orea during whale season. I hope Sweet Girl’s legacy will spark real change to protect these incredible animals and prevent further senseless loss.Credit: Rachel Moore (USA) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Now in its twelfth year, the competition coordinated in collaboration between the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, DivePhotoGuide (DPG), Oceanic Global, and  the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO. Each year, thousands of underwater photographers submit images that judges award prizes for across four categories: Big and Small Underwater Faces, Underwater Seascapes, Above Water Seascapes, and Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us. This year’s winning images include a curious leopard seal, a swarm of jellyfish, and a very grumpy looking Japanese warbonnet. Given our oceans’ perilous state, all competition participants were required to sign a charter of 14 commitments regarding ethics in photography. Underwater Seascapes — Honorable MentionWith only orcas as their natural predators, leopard seals are Antarctica’s most versatile hunters, preying on everything from fish and cephalopods to penguins and other seals. Gentoo penguins are a favored menu item, and leopard seals can be observed patrolling the waters around their colonies. For this shot, I used a split image to capture both worlds: the gentoo penguin colony in the background with the leopard seal on the hunt in the foreground.Credit: Lars von Ritter Zahony (Germany) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes – WinnerA serene lake cradled by arid dunes, where a gentle stream breathes life into the heart of Mother Earth’s creation: Captured from an airplane, this image reveals the powerful contrasts and hidden beauty where land and ocean meet, reminding us that the ocean is the source of all life and that everything in nature is deeply connected. The location is a remote stretch of coastline near Shark Bay, Western Australia.Credit: Leander Nardin (Austria) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes — 3rd PlaceParadise Harbour is one of the most beautiful places on the Antarctic Peninsula. When I visited, the sea was extremely calm, and I was lucky enough to witness a wonderfully clear reflection of the Suárez Glacier (aka Petzval Glacier) in the water. The only problem was the waves created by our speedboat, and the only way to capture the perfect reflection was to lie on the bottom of the boat while it moved towards the glacier.Credit: Andrey Nosik (Russia) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — 3rd Place“La Rapadura” is a natural hidden treasure on the northern coast of Tenerife, in the Spanish territory of the Canary Islands. Only discovered in 1996, it is one of the most astonishing underwater landscapes in the world, consistently ranking among the planet’s best dive sites. These towering columns of basalt are the result of volcanic processes that occurred between 500,000 and a million years ago. The formation was created when a basaltic lava flow reached the ocean, where, upon cooling and solidifying, it contracted, creating natural structures often compared to the pipes of church organs. Located in a region where marine life has been impacted by once common illegal fishing practices, this stunning natural monument has both geological and ecological value, and scientists and underwater photographers are advocating for its protection. (Model: Yolanda Garcia)Credit: Pedro Carrillo (Spain) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — WinnerThis year, I had the incredible opportunity to visit a jellyfish lake during a liveaboard trip around southern Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Being surrounded by millions of jellyfish, which have evolved to lose their stinging ability due to the absence of predators, was one of the most breathtaking experiences I’ve ever had.Credit: Dani Escayola (Spain) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Underwater Seascapes — 2nd PlaceThis shot captures a school of rays resting at a cleaning station in Mauritius, where strong currents once attracted them regularly. Some rays grew accustomed to divers, allowing close encounters like this. Sadly, after the severe bleaching that the reefs here suffered last year, such gatherings have become rare, and I fear I may not witness this again at the same spot.Credit: Gerald Rambert (Mauritius) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 3rd PlaceShot in Cuba’s Jardines de la Reina—a protected shark sanctuary—this image captures a Caribbean reef shark weaving through a group of silky sharks near the surface. Using a slow shutter and strobes as the shark pivoted sharply, the motion blurred into a wave-like arc across its head, lit by the golden hues of sunset. The abundance and behavior of sharks here is a living symbol of what protected oceans can look like.Credit: Steven Lopez (USA) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org  Above Water Seascapes — 2nd PlaceNorthern gannets (Morus bassanus) soar above the dramatic cliffs of Scotland’s Hermaness National Nature Reserve, their sleek white bodies and black-tipped wings slicing through the Shetland winds. These seabirds, the largest in the North Atlantic, are renowned for their striking plunge-dives, reaching speeds up to 100 kph (60 mph) as they hunt for fish beneath the waves. The cliffs of Hermaness provide ideal nesting sites, with updrafts aiding their take-offs and landings. Each spring, thousands return to this rugged coastline, forming one of the UK’s most significant gannet colonies. It was a major challenge to take photos at the edge of these cliffs at almost 200 meters (650 feet) with the winds up to 30 kph (20 mph).Credit: Nur Tucker (UK/Turkey) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Above Water Seascapes — Honorable MentionA South Atlantic swell breaks on the Dungeons Reef off the Cape Peninsula, South Africa, shot while photographing a big-wave surf session in October 2017. It’s the crescendoing sounds of these breaking swells that always amazes me.Credit: Ken Findlay (South Africa) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — Honorable MentionHumpback whales in their thousands migrate along the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia every year on the way to and from their calving grounds. In four seasons of swimming with them on the reef here, this is the only encounter I’ve had like this one. This pair of huge adult whales repeatedly spy-hopped alongside us, seeking to interact with and investigate us, leaving me completely breathless. The female in the foreground was much more confident than the male behind and would constantly make close approaches, whilst the male hung back a little, still interested but shy. After more than 10 years working with wildlife in the water, this was one of the best experiences of my life.Credit: Ollie Clarke (UK) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Big and Small Underwater Faces — 2nd PlaceOn one of my many blackwater dives in Anilao, in the Philippines, my guide and I spotted something moving erratically at a depth of around 20 meters (65 feet), about 10 to 15 centimeters in size. We quickly realized that it was a rare blanket octopus (Tremoctopus sp.). As we approached, it opened up its beautiful blanket, revealing its multicolored mantle. I managed to take a few shots before it went on its way. I felt truly privileged to have captured this fascinating deep-sea cephalopod. Among its many unique characteristics, this species exhibits some of the most extreme sexual size-dimorphism in nature, with females weighing up to 40,000 times more than males.Credit: Giacomo Marchione (Italy) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Big and Small Underwater Faces – WinnerThis photo of a Japanese warbonnet (Chirolophis japonicus) was captured in the Sea of Japan, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) southwest of Vladivostok, Russia. I found the ornate fish at a depth of about 30 meters (100 feet), under the stern of a shipwreck. This species does not appear to be afraid of divers—on the contrary, it seems to enjoy the attention—and it even tried to sit on the dome port of my camera.Credit: Andrey Nosik (Russia) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org Wonder: Sustaining What Sustains Us — 2nd PlaceA juvenile pinnate batfish (Platax pinnatus) captured with a slow shutter speed, a snooted light, and deliberate camera panning to create a sense of motion and drama. Juvenile pinnate batfish are known for their striking black bodies outlined in vibrant orange—a coloration they lose within just a few months as they mature. I encountered this restless subject in the tropical waters of Indonesia’s Lembeh Strait. Capturing this image took patience and persistence over two dives, as these active young fish constantly dart for cover in crevices, making the shot particularly challenging.Credit: Luis Arpa (Spain) / United Nations World Oceans Day www.unworldoceansday.org
    0 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • MindsEye review – a dystopian future that plays like it’s from 2012

    There’s a Sphere-alike in Redrock, MindsEye’s open-world version of Las Vegas. It’s pretty much a straight copy of the original: a huge soap bubble, half sunk into the desert floor, with its surface turned into a gigantic TV. Occasionally you’ll pull up near the Sphere while driving an electric vehicle made by Silva, the megacorp that controls this world. You’ll sometimes come to a stop just as an advert for an identical Silva EV plays out on the huge curved screen overhead. The doubling effect can be slightly vertigo-inducing.At these moments, I truly get what MindsEye is trying to do. You’re stuck in the ultimate company town, where oligarchs and other crooks run everything, and there’s no hope of escaping the ecosystem they’ve built. MindsEye gets this all across through a chance encounter, and in a way that’s both light of touch and clever. The rest of the game tends towards the heavy-handed and silly, but it’s nice to glimpse a few instances where everything clicks.With its Spheres and omnipresent EVs, MindsEye looks and sounds like the future. It’s concerned with AI and tech bros and the insidious creep of a corporate dystopia. You play as an amnesiac former-soldier who must work out the precise damage that technology has done to his humanity, while shooting people and robots and drones. And alongside the campaign itself, MindsEye also has a suite of tools for making your own game or levels and publishing them for fellow players. All of this has come from a studio founded by Leslie Benzies, whose production credits include the likes of GTA 5.AI overlords … MindsEye. Photograph: IOI PartnersWhat’s weird, then, is that MindsEye generally plays like the past. Put a finger to the air and the wind is blowing from somewhere around 2012. At heart, this is a roughly hewn cover shooter with an open world that you only really experience when you’re driving between missions. Its topical concerns mainly exist to justify double-crosses and car chases and shootouts, and to explain why you head into battle with a personal drone that can open doors for you and stun nearby enemies.It can be an uncanny experience, drifting back through the years to a time when many third-person games still featured unskippable cut-scenes and cover that could be awkward to unstick yourself from. I should add that there are plenty of reports at the moment of crashes and technical glitches and characters turning up without their faces in place. Playing on a relatively old PC, aside from one crash and a few amusing bugs, I’ve been mostly fine. I’ve just been playing a game that feels equally elderly.This is sometimes less of a criticism than it sounds. There is a definite pleasure to be had in simple run-and-gun missions where you shoot very similar looking people over and over again and pick a path between waypoints. The shooting often feels good, and while it’s a bit of a swizz to have to drive to and from each mission, the cars have a nice fishtaily looseness to them that can, at times, invoke the Valium-tinged glory of the Driver games.Driving between missions … MindsEye. Photograph: Build A Rocket Boy/IOI PartnersAnd for a game that has thought a lot about the point at which AI takes over, the in-game AI around me wasn’t in danger of taking over anything. When I handed over control of my car to the game while tailing an enemy, having been told I should try not to be spotted, the game made sure our bumpers kissed at every intersection. The streets of this particular open world are filled with amusingly unskilled AI drivers. I’d frequently arrive at traffic lights to be greeted by a recent pile-up, so delighted by the off-screen collisions that had scattered road cones and Dumpsters across my path that I almost always stopped to investigate.I even enjoyed the plot’s hokeyness, which features lines such as: “Your DNA has been altered since we last met!” Has it, though? Even so, I became increasingly aware that clever people had spent a good chunk of their working lives making this game. I don’t think they intended to cast me as what is in essence a Deliveroo bullet courier for an off-brand Elon Musk. Or to drop me into an open world that feels thin not because it lacks mission icons and fishing mini-games, but because it’s devoid of convincing human detail.I suspect the problem may actually be a thematically resonant one: a reckless kind of ambition. When I dropped into the level editor I found a tool that’s astonishingly rich and complex, but which also requires a lot of time and effort if you want to make anything really special in it. This is for the mega-fans, surely, the point-one percent. It must have taken serious time to build, and to do all that alongside a campaignis the kind of endeavour that requires a real megacorp behind it.MindsEye is an oddity. For all its failings, I rarely disliked playing it, and yet it’s also difficult to sincerely recommend. Its ideas, its moment-to-moment action and narrative are so thinly conceived that it barely exists. And yet: I’m kind of happy that it does.

    MindsEye is out now; £54.99
    #mindseye #review #dystopian #future #that
    MindsEye review – a dystopian future that plays like it’s from 2012
    There’s a Sphere-alike in Redrock, MindsEye’s open-world version of Las Vegas. It’s pretty much a straight copy of the original: a huge soap bubble, half sunk into the desert floor, with its surface turned into a gigantic TV. Occasionally you’ll pull up near the Sphere while driving an electric vehicle made by Silva, the megacorp that controls this world. You’ll sometimes come to a stop just as an advert for an identical Silva EV plays out on the huge curved screen overhead. The doubling effect can be slightly vertigo-inducing.At these moments, I truly get what MindsEye is trying to do. You’re stuck in the ultimate company town, where oligarchs and other crooks run everything, and there’s no hope of escaping the ecosystem they’ve built. MindsEye gets this all across through a chance encounter, and in a way that’s both light of touch and clever. The rest of the game tends towards the heavy-handed and silly, but it’s nice to glimpse a few instances where everything clicks.With its Spheres and omnipresent EVs, MindsEye looks and sounds like the future. It’s concerned with AI and tech bros and the insidious creep of a corporate dystopia. You play as an amnesiac former-soldier who must work out the precise damage that technology has done to his humanity, while shooting people and robots and drones. And alongside the campaign itself, MindsEye also has a suite of tools for making your own game or levels and publishing them for fellow players. All of this has come from a studio founded by Leslie Benzies, whose production credits include the likes of GTA 5.AI overlords … MindsEye. Photograph: IOI PartnersWhat’s weird, then, is that MindsEye generally plays like the past. Put a finger to the air and the wind is blowing from somewhere around 2012. At heart, this is a roughly hewn cover shooter with an open world that you only really experience when you’re driving between missions. Its topical concerns mainly exist to justify double-crosses and car chases and shootouts, and to explain why you head into battle with a personal drone that can open doors for you and stun nearby enemies.It can be an uncanny experience, drifting back through the years to a time when many third-person games still featured unskippable cut-scenes and cover that could be awkward to unstick yourself from. I should add that there are plenty of reports at the moment of crashes and technical glitches and characters turning up without their faces in place. Playing on a relatively old PC, aside from one crash and a few amusing bugs, I’ve been mostly fine. I’ve just been playing a game that feels equally elderly.This is sometimes less of a criticism than it sounds. There is a definite pleasure to be had in simple run-and-gun missions where you shoot very similar looking people over and over again and pick a path between waypoints. The shooting often feels good, and while it’s a bit of a swizz to have to drive to and from each mission, the cars have a nice fishtaily looseness to them that can, at times, invoke the Valium-tinged glory of the Driver games.Driving between missions … MindsEye. Photograph: Build A Rocket Boy/IOI PartnersAnd for a game that has thought a lot about the point at which AI takes over, the in-game AI around me wasn’t in danger of taking over anything. When I handed over control of my car to the game while tailing an enemy, having been told I should try not to be spotted, the game made sure our bumpers kissed at every intersection. The streets of this particular open world are filled with amusingly unskilled AI drivers. I’d frequently arrive at traffic lights to be greeted by a recent pile-up, so delighted by the off-screen collisions that had scattered road cones and Dumpsters across my path that I almost always stopped to investigate.I even enjoyed the plot’s hokeyness, which features lines such as: “Your DNA has been altered since we last met!” Has it, though? Even so, I became increasingly aware that clever people had spent a good chunk of their working lives making this game. I don’t think they intended to cast me as what is in essence a Deliveroo bullet courier for an off-brand Elon Musk. Or to drop me into an open world that feels thin not because it lacks mission icons and fishing mini-games, but because it’s devoid of convincing human detail.I suspect the problem may actually be a thematically resonant one: a reckless kind of ambition. When I dropped into the level editor I found a tool that’s astonishingly rich and complex, but which also requires a lot of time and effort if you want to make anything really special in it. This is for the mega-fans, surely, the point-one percent. It must have taken serious time to build, and to do all that alongside a campaignis the kind of endeavour that requires a real megacorp behind it.MindsEye is an oddity. For all its failings, I rarely disliked playing it, and yet it’s also difficult to sincerely recommend. Its ideas, its moment-to-moment action and narrative are so thinly conceived that it barely exists. And yet: I’m kind of happy that it does. MindsEye is out now; £54.99 #mindseye #review #dystopian #future #that
    WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM
    MindsEye review – a dystopian future that plays like it’s from 2012
    There’s a Sphere-alike in Redrock, MindsEye’s open-world version of Las Vegas. It’s pretty much a straight copy of the original: a huge soap bubble, half sunk into the desert floor, with its surface turned into a gigantic TV. Occasionally you’ll pull up near the Sphere while driving an electric vehicle made by Silva, the megacorp that controls this world. You’ll sometimes come to a stop just as an advert for an identical Silva EV plays out on the huge curved screen overhead. The doubling effect can be slightly vertigo-inducing.At these moments, I truly get what MindsEye is trying to do. You’re stuck in the ultimate company town, where oligarchs and other crooks run everything, and there’s no hope of escaping the ecosystem they’ve built. MindsEye gets this all across through a chance encounter, and in a way that’s both light of touch and clever. The rest of the game tends towards the heavy-handed and silly, but it’s nice to glimpse a few instances where everything clicks.With its Spheres and omnipresent EVs, MindsEye looks and sounds like the future. It’s concerned with AI and tech bros and the insidious creep of a corporate dystopia. You play as an amnesiac former-soldier who must work out the precise damage that technology has done to his humanity, while shooting people and robots and drones. And alongside the campaign itself, MindsEye also has a suite of tools for making your own game or levels and publishing them for fellow players. All of this has come from a studio founded by Leslie Benzies, whose production credits include the likes of GTA 5.AI overlords … MindsEye. Photograph: IOI PartnersWhat’s weird, then, is that MindsEye generally plays like the past. Put a finger to the air and the wind is blowing from somewhere around 2012. At heart, this is a roughly hewn cover shooter with an open world that you only really experience when you’re driving between missions. Its topical concerns mainly exist to justify double-crosses and car chases and shootouts, and to explain why you head into battle with a personal drone that can open doors for you and stun nearby enemies.It can be an uncanny experience, drifting back through the years to a time when many third-person games still featured unskippable cut-scenes and cover that could be awkward to unstick yourself from. I should add that there are plenty of reports at the moment of crashes and technical glitches and characters turning up without their faces in place. Playing on a relatively old PC, aside from one crash and a few amusing bugs, I’ve been mostly fine. I’ve just been playing a game that feels equally elderly.This is sometimes less of a criticism than it sounds. There is a definite pleasure to be had in simple run-and-gun missions where you shoot very similar looking people over and over again and pick a path between waypoints. The shooting often feels good, and while it’s a bit of a swizz to have to drive to and from each mission, the cars have a nice fishtaily looseness to them that can, at times, invoke the Valium-tinged glory of the Driver games. (The airborne craft are less fun because they have less character.)Driving between missions … MindsEye. Photograph: Build A Rocket Boy/IOI PartnersAnd for a game that has thought a lot about the point at which AI takes over, the in-game AI around me wasn’t in danger of taking over anything. When I handed over control of my car to the game while tailing an enemy, having been told I should try not to be spotted, the game made sure our bumpers kissed at every intersection. The streets of this particular open world are filled with amusingly unskilled AI drivers. I’d frequently arrive at traffic lights to be greeted by a recent pile-up, so delighted by the off-screen collisions that had scattered road cones and Dumpsters across my path that I almost always stopped to investigate.I even enjoyed the plot’s hokeyness, which features lines such as: “Your DNA has been altered since we last met!” Has it, though? Even so, I became increasingly aware that clever people had spent a good chunk of their working lives making this game. I don’t think they intended to cast me as what is in essence a Deliveroo bullet courier for an off-brand Elon Musk. Or to drop me into an open world that feels thin not because it lacks mission icons and fishing mini-games, but because it’s devoid of convincing human detail.I suspect the problem may actually be a thematically resonant one: a reckless kind of ambition. When I dropped into the level editor I found a tool that’s astonishingly rich and complex, but which also requires a lot of time and effort if you want to make anything really special in it. This is for the mega-fans, surely, the point-one percent. It must have taken serious time to build, and to do all that alongside a campaign (one that tries, at least, to vary things now and then with stealth, trailing and sniper sections) is the kind of endeavour that requires a real megacorp behind it.MindsEye is an oddity. For all its failings, I rarely disliked playing it, and yet it’s also difficult to sincerely recommend. Its ideas, its moment-to-moment action and narrative are so thinly conceived that it barely exists. And yet: I’m kind of happy that it does. MindsEye is out now; £54.99
    0 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
  • What happens to DOGE without Elon Musk?

    Elon Musk may be gone from the Trump administration — and his friendship status with President Donald Trump may be at best uncertain — but his whirlwind stint in government certainly left its imprint. The Department of Government Efficiency, his pet government-slashing project, remains entrenched in Washington. During his 130-day tenure, Musk led DOGE in eliminating about 260,000 federal employee jobs and gutting agencies supporting scientific research and humanitarian aid. But to date, DOGE claims to have saved the government billion — well short of its ambitioustarget of cutting at least trillion from the federal budget. And with Musk’s departure still fresh, there are reports that the federal government is trying to rehire federal workers who quit or were let go. For Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, DOGE’s tactics will likely end up being disastrous in the long run. “DOGE came in with these huge cuts, which were not attached to a plan,” she told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. Kamarck knows all about making government more efficient. In the 1990s, she ran the Clinton administration’s Reinventing Government program. “I was Elon Musk,” she told Today, Explained. With the benefit of that experience, she assesses Musk’s record at DOGE, and what, if anything, the billionaire’s loud efforts at cutting government spending added up to. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.
    What do you think Elon Musk’s legacy is? Well, he will not have totally, radically reshaped the federal government. Absolutely not. In fact, there’s a high probability that on January 20, 2029, when the next president takes over, the federal government is about the same size as it is now, and is probably doing the same stuff that it’s doing now. What he did manage to do was insert chaos, fear, and loathing into the federal workforce. There was reporting in the Washington Post late last week that these cuts were so ineffective that the White House is actually reaching out to various federal employees who were laid off and asking them to come back, from the FDA to the IRS to even USAID. Which cuts are sticking at this point and which ones aren’t?First of all, in a lot of cases, people went to court and the courts have reversed those earlier decisions. So the first thing that happened is, courts said, “No, no, no, you can’t do it this way. You have to bring them back.” The second thing that happened is that Cabinet officers started to get confirmed by the Senate. And remember that a lot of the most spectacular DOGE stuff was happening in February. In February, these Cabinet secretaries were preparing for their Senate hearings. They weren’t on the job. Now that their Cabinet secretary’s home, what’s happening is they’re looking at these cuts and they’re saying, “No, no, no! We can’t live with these cuts because we have a mission to do.”As the government tries to hire back the people they fired, they’re going to have a tough time, and they’re going to have a tough time for two reasons. First of all, they treated them like dirt, and they’ve said a lot of insulting things. Second, most of the people who work for the federal government are highly skilled. They’re not paper pushers. We have computers to push our paper, right? They’re scientists. They’re engineers. They’re people with high skills, and guess what? They can get jobs outside the government. So there’s going to be real lasting damage to the government from the way they did this. And it’s analogous to the lasting damage that they’re causing at universities, where we now have top scientists who used to invent great cures for cancer and things like that, deciding to go find jobs in Europe because this culture has gotten so bad.What happens to this agency now? Who’s in charge of it?Well, what they’ve done is DOGE employees have been embedded in each of the organizations in the government, okay? And they basically — and the president himself has said this — they basically report to the Cabinet secretaries. So if you are in the Transportation Department, you have to make sure that Sean Duffy, who’s the secretary of transportation, agrees with you on what you want to do. And Sean Duffy has already had a fight during a Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk. You know that he has not been thrilled with the advice he’s gotten from DOGE. So from now on, DOGE is going to have to work hand in hand with Donald Trump’s appointed leaders.And just to bring this around to what we’re here talking about now, they’re in this huge fight over wasteful spending with the so-called big, beautiful bill. Does this just look like the government as usual, ultimately?It’s actually worse than normal. Because the deficit impacts are bigger than normal. It’s adding more to the deficit than previous bills have done. And the second reason it’s worse than normal is that everybody is still living in a fantasy world. And the fantasy world says that somehow we can deal with our deficits by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. That is pure nonsense. Let me say it: pure nonsense.Where does most of the government money go? Does it go to some bureaucrats sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? It goes to us. It goes to your grandmother and her Social Security and her Medicare. It goes to veterans in veterans benefits. It goes to Americans. That’s why it’s so hard to cut it. It’s so hard to cut it because it’s us. And people are living on it. Now, there’s a whole other topic that nobody talks about, and it’s called entitlement reform, right? Could we reform Social Security? Could we make the retirement age go from 67 to 68? That would save a lot of money. Could we change the cost of living? Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about that. And that’s because we are in this crazy, polarized environment where we can no longer have serious conversations about serious issues. See More:
    #what #happens #doge #without #elon
    What happens to DOGE without Elon Musk?
    Elon Musk may be gone from the Trump administration — and his friendship status with President Donald Trump may be at best uncertain — but his whirlwind stint in government certainly left its imprint. The Department of Government Efficiency, his pet government-slashing project, remains entrenched in Washington. During his 130-day tenure, Musk led DOGE in eliminating about 260,000 federal employee jobs and gutting agencies supporting scientific research and humanitarian aid. But to date, DOGE claims to have saved the government billion — well short of its ambitioustarget of cutting at least trillion from the federal budget. And with Musk’s departure still fresh, there are reports that the federal government is trying to rehire federal workers who quit or were let go. For Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, DOGE’s tactics will likely end up being disastrous in the long run. “DOGE came in with these huge cuts, which were not attached to a plan,” she told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. Kamarck knows all about making government more efficient. In the 1990s, she ran the Clinton administration’s Reinventing Government program. “I was Elon Musk,” she told Today, Explained. With the benefit of that experience, she assesses Musk’s record at DOGE, and what, if anything, the billionaire’s loud efforts at cutting government spending added up to. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. What do you think Elon Musk’s legacy is? Well, he will not have totally, radically reshaped the federal government. Absolutely not. In fact, there’s a high probability that on January 20, 2029, when the next president takes over, the federal government is about the same size as it is now, and is probably doing the same stuff that it’s doing now. What he did manage to do was insert chaos, fear, and loathing into the federal workforce. There was reporting in the Washington Post late last week that these cuts were so ineffective that the White House is actually reaching out to various federal employees who were laid off and asking them to come back, from the FDA to the IRS to even USAID. Which cuts are sticking at this point and which ones aren’t?First of all, in a lot of cases, people went to court and the courts have reversed those earlier decisions. So the first thing that happened is, courts said, “No, no, no, you can’t do it this way. You have to bring them back.” The second thing that happened is that Cabinet officers started to get confirmed by the Senate. And remember that a lot of the most spectacular DOGE stuff was happening in February. In February, these Cabinet secretaries were preparing for their Senate hearings. They weren’t on the job. Now that their Cabinet secretary’s home, what’s happening is they’re looking at these cuts and they’re saying, “No, no, no! We can’t live with these cuts because we have a mission to do.”As the government tries to hire back the people they fired, they’re going to have a tough time, and they’re going to have a tough time for two reasons. First of all, they treated them like dirt, and they’ve said a lot of insulting things. Second, most of the people who work for the federal government are highly skilled. They’re not paper pushers. We have computers to push our paper, right? They’re scientists. They’re engineers. They’re people with high skills, and guess what? They can get jobs outside the government. So there’s going to be real lasting damage to the government from the way they did this. And it’s analogous to the lasting damage that they’re causing at universities, where we now have top scientists who used to invent great cures for cancer and things like that, deciding to go find jobs in Europe because this culture has gotten so bad.What happens to this agency now? Who’s in charge of it?Well, what they’ve done is DOGE employees have been embedded in each of the organizations in the government, okay? And they basically — and the president himself has said this — they basically report to the Cabinet secretaries. So if you are in the Transportation Department, you have to make sure that Sean Duffy, who’s the secretary of transportation, agrees with you on what you want to do. And Sean Duffy has already had a fight during a Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk. You know that he has not been thrilled with the advice he’s gotten from DOGE. So from now on, DOGE is going to have to work hand in hand with Donald Trump’s appointed leaders.And just to bring this around to what we’re here talking about now, they’re in this huge fight over wasteful spending with the so-called big, beautiful bill. Does this just look like the government as usual, ultimately?It’s actually worse than normal. Because the deficit impacts are bigger than normal. It’s adding more to the deficit than previous bills have done. And the second reason it’s worse than normal is that everybody is still living in a fantasy world. And the fantasy world says that somehow we can deal with our deficits by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. That is pure nonsense. Let me say it: pure nonsense.Where does most of the government money go? Does it go to some bureaucrats sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? It goes to us. It goes to your grandmother and her Social Security and her Medicare. It goes to veterans in veterans benefits. It goes to Americans. That’s why it’s so hard to cut it. It’s so hard to cut it because it’s us. And people are living on it. Now, there’s a whole other topic that nobody talks about, and it’s called entitlement reform, right? Could we reform Social Security? Could we make the retirement age go from 67 to 68? That would save a lot of money. Could we change the cost of living? Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about that. And that’s because we are in this crazy, polarized environment where we can no longer have serious conversations about serious issues. See More: #what #happens #doge #without #elon
    WWW.VOX.COM
    What happens to DOGE without Elon Musk?
    Elon Musk may be gone from the Trump administration — and his friendship status with President Donald Trump may be at best uncertain — but his whirlwind stint in government certainly left its imprint. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), his pet government-slashing project, remains entrenched in Washington. During his 130-day tenure, Musk led DOGE in eliminating about 260,000 federal employee jobs and gutting agencies supporting scientific research and humanitarian aid. But to date, DOGE claims to have saved the government $180 billion — well short of its ambitious (and frankly never realistic) target of cutting at least $2 trillion from the federal budget. And with Musk’s departure still fresh, there are reports that the federal government is trying to rehire federal workers who quit or were let go. For Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, DOGE’s tactics will likely end up being disastrous in the long run. “DOGE came in with these huge cuts, which were not attached to a plan,” she told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. Kamarck knows all about making government more efficient. In the 1990s, she ran the Clinton administration’s Reinventing Government program. “I was Elon Musk,” she told Today, Explained. With the benefit of that experience, she assesses Musk’s record at DOGE, and what, if anything, the billionaire’s loud efforts at cutting government spending added up to. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. What do you think Elon Musk’s legacy is? Well, he will not have totally, radically reshaped the federal government. Absolutely not. In fact, there’s a high probability that on January 20, 2029, when the next president takes over, the federal government is about the same size as it is now, and is probably doing the same stuff that it’s doing now. What he did manage to do was insert chaos, fear, and loathing into the federal workforce. There was reporting in the Washington Post late last week that these cuts were so ineffective that the White House is actually reaching out to various federal employees who were laid off and asking them to come back, from the FDA to the IRS to even USAID. Which cuts are sticking at this point and which ones aren’t?First of all, in a lot of cases, people went to court and the courts have reversed those earlier decisions. So the first thing that happened is, courts said, “No, no, no, you can’t do it this way. You have to bring them back.” The second thing that happened is that Cabinet officers started to get confirmed by the Senate. And remember that a lot of the most spectacular DOGE stuff was happening in February. In February, these Cabinet secretaries were preparing for their Senate hearings. They weren’t on the job. Now that their Cabinet secretary’s home, what’s happening is they’re looking at these cuts and they’re saying, “No, no, no! We can’t live with these cuts because we have a mission to do.”As the government tries to hire back the people they fired, they’re going to have a tough time, and they’re going to have a tough time for two reasons. First of all, they treated them like dirt, and they’ve said a lot of insulting things. Second, most of the people who work for the federal government are highly skilled. They’re not paper pushers. We have computers to push our paper, right? They’re scientists. They’re engineers. They’re people with high skills, and guess what? They can get jobs outside the government. So there’s going to be real lasting damage to the government from the way they did this. And it’s analogous to the lasting damage that they’re causing at universities, where we now have top scientists who used to invent great cures for cancer and things like that, deciding to go find jobs in Europe because this culture has gotten so bad.What happens to this agency now? Who’s in charge of it?Well, what they’ve done is DOGE employees have been embedded in each of the organizations in the government, okay? And they basically — and the president himself has said this — they basically report to the Cabinet secretaries. So if you are in the Transportation Department, you have to make sure that Sean Duffy, who’s the secretary of transportation, agrees with you on what you want to do. And Sean Duffy has already had a fight during a Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk. You know that he has not been thrilled with the advice he’s gotten from DOGE. So from now on, DOGE is going to have to work hand in hand with Donald Trump’s appointed leaders.And just to bring this around to what we’re here talking about now, they’re in this huge fight over wasteful spending with the so-called big, beautiful bill. Does this just look like the government as usual, ultimately?It’s actually worse than normal. Because the deficit impacts are bigger than normal. It’s adding more to the deficit than previous bills have done. And the second reason it’s worse than normal is that everybody is still living in a fantasy world. And the fantasy world says that somehow we can deal with our deficits by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. That is pure nonsense. Let me say it: pure nonsense.Where does most of the government money go? Does it go to some bureaucrats sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? It goes to us. It goes to your grandmother and her Social Security and her Medicare. It goes to veterans in veterans benefits. It goes to Americans. That’s why it’s so hard to cut it. It’s so hard to cut it because it’s us. And people are living on it. Now, there’s a whole other topic that nobody talks about, and it’s called entitlement reform, right? Could we reform Social Security? Could we make the retirement age go from 67 to 68? That would save a lot of money. Could we change the cost of living? Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about that. And that’s because we are in this crazy, polarized environment where we can no longer have serious conversations about serious issues. See More:
    0 Комментарии 0 Поделились 0 предпросмотр
Расширенные страницы
CGShares https://cgshares.com