Donald Trump’s military parade in Washington this weekend — a show of force in the capital that just happens to take place on the president’s birthday — smacks of authoritarian Dear Leader-style politics (even though Trump actually got the idea after attending the 2017 Bastille Day parade in Paris).Yet as disconcerting as the imagery of tanks rolling down Constitution Avenue will be, it’s not even close to Trump’s most insidious assault on the US military’s historic and democratically essential nonpartisan ethos.In fact, it’s not even the most worrying thing he’s done this week.On Tuesday, the president gave a speech at Fort Bragg, an Army base home to Special Operations Command. While presidential speeches to soldiers are not uncommon — rows of uniformed troops make a great backdrop for a foreign policy speech — they generally avoid overt partisan attacks and campaign-style rhetoric. The soldiers, for their part, are expected to be studiously neutral, laughing at jokes and such, but remaining fully impassive during any policy conversation.That’s not what happened at Fort Bragg. Trump’s speech was a partisan tirade that targeted “radical left” opponents ranging from Joe Biden to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. He celebrated his deployment of Marines to Los Angeles, proposed jailing people for burning the American flag, and called on soldiers to be “aggressive” toward the protesters they encountered.The soldiers, for their part, cheered Trump and booed his enemies — as they were seemingly expected to. Reporters at Military.com, a military news service, uncovered internal communications from 82nd Airborne leadership suggesting that the crowd was screened for their political opinions.“If soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration and they don’t want to be in the audience then they need to speak with their leadership and get swapped out,” one note read.To call this unusual is an understatement. I spoke with four different experts on civil-military relations, two of whom teach at the Naval War College, about the speech and its implications. To a person, they said it was a step towards politicizing the military with no real precedent in modern American history.“That is, I think, a really big red flag because it means the military’s professional ethic is breaking down internally,” says Risa Brooks, a professor at Marquette University. “Its capacity to maintain that firewall against civilian politicization may be faltering.”This may sound alarmist — like an overreading of a one-off incident — but it’s part of a bigger pattern. The totality of Trump administration policies, ranging from the parade in Washington to the LA troop deployment to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s firing of high-ranking women and officers of color, suggests a concerted effort to erode the military’s professional ethos and turn it into an institution subservient to the Trump administration’s whims. This is a signal policy aim of would-be dictators, who wish to head off the risk of a coup and ensure the armed forces’ political reliability if they are needed to repress dissent in a crisis.Steve Saideman, a professor at Carleton University, put together a list of eight different signs that a military is being politicized in this fashion. The Trump administration has exhibited six out of the eight.“The biggest theme is that we are seeing a number of checks on the executive fail at the same time — and that’s what’s making individual events seem more alarming than they might otherwise,” says Jessica Blankshain, a professor at the Naval War College (speaking not for the military but in a personal capacity).That Trump is trying to politicize the military does not mean he has succeeded. There are several signs, including Trump’s handpicked chair of the Joint Chiefs repudiating the president’s claims of a migrant invasion during congressional testimony, that the US military is resisting Trump’s politicization.But the events in Fort Bragg and Washington suggest that we are in the midst of a quiet crisis in civil-military relations in the United States — one whose implications for American democracy’s future could well be profound.The Trump crisis in civil-military relations, explainedA military is, by sheer fact of its existence, a threat to any civilian government. If you have an institution that controls the overwhelming bulk of weaponry in a society, it always has the physical capacity to seize control of the government at gunpoint. A key question for any government is how to convince the armed forces that they cannot or should not take power for themselves.Democracies typically do this through a process called “professionalization.” Soldiers are rigorously taught to think of themselves as a class of public servants, people trained to perform a specific job within defined parameters. Their ultimate loyalty is not to their generals or even individual presidents, but rather to the people and the constitutional order.Samuel Huntington, the late Harvard political scientist, is the canonical theorist of a professional military. In his book The Soldier and the State, he described optimal professionalization as a system of “objective control”: one in which the military retains autonomy in how they fight and plan for wars while deferring to politicians on whether and why to fight in the first place. In effect, they stay out of the politicians’ affairs while the politicians stay out of theirs.The idea of such a system is to emphasize to the military that they are professionals: Their responsibility isn’t deciding when to use force, but only to conduct operations as effectively as possible once ordered to engage in them. There is thus a strict firewall between military affairs, on the one hand, and policy-political affairs on the other.Typically, the chief worry is that the military breaches this bargain: that, for example, a general starts speaking out against elected officials’ policies in ways that undermine civilian control. This is not a hypothetical fear in the United States, with the most famous such example being Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s insubordination during the Korean War. Thankfully, not even MacArthur attempted the worst-case version of military overstep — a coup.But in backsliding democracies like the modern United States, where the chief executive is attempting an anti-democratic power grab, the military poses a very different kind of threat to democracy — in fact, something akin to the exact opposite of the typical scenario.In such cases, the issue isn’t the military inserting itself into politics but rather the civilians dragging them into it in ways that upset the democratic political order. The worst-case scenario is that the military acts on presidential directives to use force against domestic dissenters, destroying democracy not by ignoring civilian orders, but by following them.There are two ways to arrive at such a worst-case scenario, both of which are in evidence in the early days of Trump 2.0.First is politicization: an intentional attack on the constraints against partisan activity inside the professional ranks.Many of Pete Hegseth’s major moves as secretary of defense fit this bill, including his decisions to fire nonwhite and female generals seen as politically unreliable and his effort to undermine the independence of the military’s lawyers. The breaches in protocol at Fort Bragg are both consequences and causes of politicization: They could only happen in an environment of loosened constraint, and they might encourage more overt political action if gone unpunished.The second pathway to breakdown is the weaponization of professionalism against itself. Here, Trump exploits the military’s deference to politicians by ordering it to engage in undemocratic (and even questionably legal) activities. In practice, this looks a lot like the LA deployments, and, more specifically, the lack of any visible military pushback. While the military readily agreeing to deployments is normally a good sign — that civilian control is holding — these aren’t normal times. And this isn’t a normal deployment, but rather one that comes uncomfortably close to the military being ordered to assist in repressing overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrations against executive abuses of power.“It’s really been pretty uncommon to use the military for law enforcement,” says David Burbach, another Naval War College professor (also speaking personally). “This is really bringing the military into frontline law enforcement when. … these are really not huge disturbances.”This, then, is the crisis: an incremental and slow-rolling effort by the Trump administration to erode the norms and procedures designed to prevent the military from being used as a tool of domestic repression. Is it time to panic?Among the experts I spoke with, there was consensus that the military’s professional and nonpartisan ethos was weakening. This isn’t just because of Trump, but his terms — the first to a degree, and now the second acutely — are major stressors.Yet there was no consensus on just how much military nonpartisanship has eroded — that is, how close we are to a moment when the US military might be willing to follow obviously authoritarian orders.For all its faults, the US military’s professional ethos is a really important part of its identity and self-conception. While few soldiers may actually read Sam Huntington or similar scholars, the general idea that they serve the people and the republic is a bedrock principle among the ranks. There is a reason why the United States has never, in over 250 years of governance, experienced a military coup — or even come particularly close to one.In theory, this ethos should also galvanize resistance to Trump’s efforts at politicization. Soldiers are not unthinking automatons: While they are trained to follow commands, they are explicitly obligated to refuse illegal orders, even coming from the president. The more aggressive Trump’s efforts to use the military as a tool of repression gets, the more likely there is to be resistance.Or, at least theoretically.The truth is that we don’t really know how the US military will respond to a situation like this. Like so many of Trump’s second-term policies, their efforts to bend the military to their will are unprecedented — actions with no real parallel in the modern history of the American military. Experts can only make informed guesses, based on their sense of US military culture as well as comparisons to historical and foreign cases.For this reason, there are probably only two things we can say with confidence.First, what we’ve seen so far is not yet sufficient evidence to declare that the military is in Trump’s thrall. The signs of decay are too limited to ground any conclusions that the longstanding professional norm is entirely gone.“We have seen a few things that are potentially alarming about erosion of the military’s non-partisan norm. But not in a way that’s definitive at this point,” Blankshain says.Second, the stressors on this tradition are going to keep piling on. Trump’s record makes it exceptionally clear that he wants the military to serve him personally — and that he, and Hegseth, will keep working to make it so. This means we really are in the midst of a quiet crisis, and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future.“The fact that he’s getting the troops to cheer for booing Democratic leaders at a time when there’s actually [a deployment to] a blue city and a blue state…he is ordering the troops to take a side,” Saideman says. “There may not be a coherent plan behind this. But there are a lot of things going on that are all in the same direction.”See More: Politics

Casa Morena | © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG In the coastal enclave of Lagos, Portugal, Mário Martins Atelier has crafted Casa Morena. This residence quietly asserts itself as an ode to the dialogue between architecture and its natural setting. Completed in 2024, this project demonstrates a considered response to its environment, where the interplay of light, material, and landscape defines a sense of place rather than architectural imposition. Casa Morena Technical Information Architects1-5: Mário Martins Atelier Location: Lagos, Portugal Project Years: 2024 Photographs: © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG A simple house, one that wishes to be discreet and to be influenced by its location, to become a house that is pleasant with thoughtful landscaping. – Mário Martins Atelier Casa Morena Photographs © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG © Fernando Guerra / FG+SG A Contextual Response to Landscape and Light The design of Casa Morena finds its genesis in the site itself, a pine-scented plot overlooking the expanse of a bay. The pine trees, longstanding witnesses to the landscape’s evolution, provide the project’s visual anchor and spatial logic. In a move that both respects and celebrates these natural elements, Mário Martins Atelier structured the house’s reticulated plan to echo the presence of the trees, creating a composition that unfolds as a series of volumes harmonizing with the vertical rhythm of the trunks. The solid base of the house, built from locally sourced schist, emerges directly from the terrain. These robust walls establish a tactile continuity with the ground, their rough textures anchoring the architecture within the landscape. In contrast, the upper volumes of the house adopt a distinctly lighter expression: horizontal planes rendered in white plaster, their smooth surfaces catching and refracting the region’s luminous sun. This duality, earthbound solidity, and aerial lightness establish an architectural narrative rooted in the elemental. Casa Morena Experiential Flow Casa Morena’s spatial arrangement articulates a clear hierarchy of public and private domains. On the ground floor, the house embraces openness and transparency. An expansive entrance hall blurs the threshold inside and out, guiding inhabitants and visitors into a luminous social heart. The lounge, kitchen, and office flow seamlessly into the garden, unified by a continuous glazed façade that invites the outside in. This deliberate porosity extends to a covered terrace, an intermediary space that dissolves the boundary between shelter and exposure. The terrace, framed by the garden’s green canopy and the swimming pool’s long line, becomes a place of repose and contemplation. The pool itself demarcates the transition from a cultivated garden to the looser, more rugged landscape beyond, its linear form echoing the horizon’s expanse. Ascending to the upper floor, the architectural language shifts towards intimacy. The bedrooms, each with direct access to terraces and patios, create secluded zones that still maintain a fluid relationship with the outdoors. A discreet rooftop terrace, accessible from these private quarters, offers a hidden sanctuary where the interplay of views and light remains uninterrupted. Material Tectonics and Environmental Strategy Casa Morena’s material palette is rooted in regional specificity and tactile sensibility. Schist, extracted from the site, is not merely a structural element but a narrative thread linking the building to its geological past. Its earthy warmth and rugged surface provide a counterpoint to the luminous white of the upper volumes, an articulation of contrast that enlivens the building’s silhouette. White, the chromatic signature of the Algarve region, is employed with restraint and nuance. Its reflective qualities intensify the play of shadow and light, a dynamic that shifts with the passing of the day. In this interplay, architecture becomes an instrument for registering the ephemeral, and the environment itself becomes a participant in the spatial drama. Environmental stewardship is also woven into the project’s DNA. Discreetly integrated systems on the roof harness solar energy and manage water resources, extending the house’s commitment to a sustainable coexistence with its setting. Casa Morena Plans Basement | © Mario Martins Atelier Ground Level | © Mario Martins Atelier Upper Level | © Mario Martins Atelier Roof Plan | © Mario Martins Atelier Elevations | © Mario Martins Atelier Casa Morena Image Gallery About Mário Martins Atelier Mário Martins Atelier is an architectural studio based in Lagos and Lisbon, Portugal, led by Mário Martins. The practice is known for its context-sensitive approach, crafting contemporary projects seamlessly integrating with their surroundings while prioritizing regional materials and environmental considerations. Credits and Additional Notes Lead Architect: Mário Martins, arq. Project Team: Nuno Colaço, Sónia Fialho, Susana Jóia, Mariana Franco, Ana Graça Engineering: Nuno Grave Engenharia Landscape: HB-Hipolito Bettencourt – Arquitectura Paisagista, Lda. Building Contractor: Marques Antunes Engenharia Lda.

The murder of John Forde was the culmination to years of political, social, and criminal intrigue.   Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. Researchers have uncovered handwritten letters, court documents, and a coroner’s report related to the nearly 700-year-old cold case murder of a medieval priest. Published on June 5 in the journal Criminal Law Forum, the investigation draws on direct archival evidence from Cambridge University that is helping fill in the gaps to a high-profile true crime scandal that would make headlines even today. But despite a mountain of firsthand accounts, the murder’s masterminds never saw justice. The ‘planned and cold-blooded’ crime On Friday, May 3, 1337, Anglican priest John Forde began a walk along downtown London’s Cheapside street after vespers (evening prayers) shortly before sunset. At one point, a clergyman familiar to Forde by the name of Hasculph Neville approached him to begin a “pleasant conversation.” As the pair neared St. Paul’s Cathedral, four men ambushed the priest. One of the attackers then proceeded to slit Forde’s throat using a 12-inch dagger as two other assailants stabbed him in the stomach in front of onlookers. The vicious crime wasn’t a brazen robbery or politically motivated attack. It was likely a premeditated murder orchestrated by Ela Fitzpayne, a noblewoman, London crime syndicate leader—and potentially Forde’s lover. “We are looking at a murder commissioned by a leading figure of the English aristocracy. It is planned and cold-blooded, with a family member and close associates carrying it out, all of which suggests a revenge motive,” Cambridge University criminology professor Manuel Eisner explained in a statement. The location of the murder of John Forde on May 3, 1337. Credit: Medieval Murder Maps / University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology / Historic Towns Trust. A longstanding feud To understand how such a brutal killing could take place in daylight on a busy London street, it’s necessary to backtrack at least five years. In January 1332, the Archbishop of Canterbury sent a letter to the Bishop of Winchester that included a number of reputation-ruining claims surrounding Fitzpayne. In particular, Archbishop Simon Mepham described sexual relationships involving “knights and others, single and married, and even with clerics in holy orders.” The wide-ranging punishments for such sinful behavior could include a prohibition on wearing gold and other precious jewelry, as well as large tithes to monastic orders and the poor. But the most humiliating atonement often came in the form of a public walk of shame. The act of contrition involved walking barefoot across Salisbury Cathedral—England’s longest nave—in order to deliver a handcarried, four-pound wax candle to the church altar. What’s more, Archbishop Mepham commanded that Fitzpayne must repeat this penance every autumn for seven years. Fitzpayne was having none of it. According to Mepham’s message, the noblewoman chose to continue listening to a “spirit of pride” (and the devil), and refused to abide by the judgment. A second letter sent by the Archbishop that April also alleged that she had since absconded from her husband, Sir Robert Fitzpayne, and was hiding in London’s Rotherhithe district along the Thames River. Due to this, Archbishop Mepham reported that Ela Fitzpayne had been excommunicated from the church. Image of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s letters to the Bishop of Winchester on the subject of Ela Fitzpayne, from the register of John de Stratford. Credit: Hampshire Archives and Hampshire County Council. Raids and rats But who tipped the clergy off to her indiscretions? According to Eisner’s review of original documents as part of the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology’s Medieval Murder Maps project, it was almost certainly her ex-lover, the soon-to-be-murdered John Forde. He was the only alleged lover named in Archbishop Mepham’s letters, and served as a church rector in a village located on the Fitzpayne family’s estate at the time of the suspected affair.  “The archbishop imposed heavy, shameful public penance on Ela, which she seems not to have complied with, but may have sparked a thirst for vengeance,” Eisner said. “Not least as John Forde appears to have escaped punishment by the church.” But Forde’s relationship with the Fitzpaynes seems to have extended even more illicit activities. In another record reviewed by Eisner, both Ela Fitzpayne and John Forde had been indicted by a Royal Commission in 1322. The crime–assisting in the raid of a Benedictine priory alongside Sir Fitzpayne. They and others reportedly assaulted the priory a year earlier, making off with around 18 oxen, 30 pigs, and 200 sheep. The monastery coincidentally served as a French abbey’s outpost amid increasing tensions between France and England in the years leading up to the Hundred Years’ War. Archbishop Mepham was almost certainly displeased after hearing about the indictment of one of his own clergy. A strict administrator himself, Mepham “was keen to enforce moral discipline among the gentry and nobility,” added Eisner. He theorizes that Forde copped to the affair after getting leaned on by superiors, which subsequently led to the campaign to shame Ela Fitzpayne as a means to reassert the Church’s authority over English nobility. Forde, unfortunately, was caught between the two sides. “John Forde may have had split loyalties,” argued Eisner. “One to the Fitzpayne family, who were likely patrons of his church and granted him the position. And the other to the bishops who had authority over him as a clergy member.” Archbishop Mepham ultimately wouldn’t live to see the scandal’s full consequences. Fitzpayne never accepted her walk of shame, and the church elder died a year after sending the incriminating letters. Eisner believes the Fitzpaynes greenlit their hit job on Forde only after the dust had seemingly settled. It doesn’t help their case three bystanders said the man who slit the rector’s throat was none other than Ela Fitzpayne’s own brother, Hugh Lovell. They also named two family servants as Forde’s other assailants. Archbishop Mepham died four years before Forde’s murder. Credit: ampshire Archives and Hampshire County Council Turning a blind eye Anyone waiting for justice in this medieval saga will likely be disappointed. “Despite naming the killers and clear knowledge of the instigator, when it comes to pursuing the perpetrators, the jury turn[ed] a blind eye,” Eisner said. Eisner explained the circumstances surrounding an initial lack of convictions were simply “implausible.” No one supposedly could locate the accused to bring to trial, despite the men belonging to one of England’s highest nobility houses. Meanwhile, the court claimed Hugh Lovell had no belongings available to confiscate. “This was typical of the class-based justice of the day,” said Eisner. In the end, the only charge that ever stuck in the murder case was an indictment against one of the family’s former servants. Five years after the first trial in 1342, Hugh Colne was convicted of being one of the men to stab Forde in the stomach and sentenced to the notorious Newgate Prison. As dark and sordid as the multiyear medieval drama was, it apparently didn’t change much between Ela Fitzpayne and her husband, Sir Robert. She and the baron remained married until his death in 1354—when she subsequently inherited all his property. “Where rule of law is weak, we see killings committed by the highest ranks in society, who will take power into their own hands, whether it’s today or seven centuries ago,” said Eisner. That said, the criminology professor couldn’t help but concede that Ela Fitzpayne was an “extraordinary” individual, regardless of the era. “A woman in 14th century England who raided priories, openly defied the Archbishop of Canterbury, and planned the assassination of a priest,” he said. “Ela Fitzpayne appears to have been many things.”

Architizer is thrilled to welcome Lyndon Neri, Hon. FAIA, co-founder of 2023 Firm of the Year Neri&Hu Design and Research Office, to the jury for the 2025 Vision Awards. As one of the most respected voices in contemporary architecture and design, Neri brings a deeply interdisciplinary perspective that aligns powerfully with the program’s celebration of conceptual rigor and visual innovation. To have your work seen by Neri and secure a place in the running for global publication this year, Architizer cordially invites you to submit your best architectural concepts, images and ideas to this year’s Vision Awards: Share My Vision Based in Shanghai and working globally, Architizer’s 2023 Firm of the Year Neri&Hu is known for its boundary-defying approach to design — where architecture, interiors and product design are all treated as part of a singular, research-driven narrative. With a stunning portfolio of richly layered cultural projects, Neri&Hu’s work expresses a commitment to contextual storytelling and material exploration at every scale. The firm’s projects are recognized not just for their aesthetic sensitivity, but for the conceptual clarity that underpins each spatial gesture. Educated at the University of California, Berkeley and the Harvard Graduate School of Design, Neri is equally celebrated as an educator and theorist. In recent years, he has held prominent teaching positions at Harvard, Yale, Berkeley and Princeton, where he was appointed as Visiting Faculty in 2024. His editorial and written contributions — including Persistence of Vision: Shanghai Architects in Dialogue and Neri&Hu’s monograph Thresholds: Space, Time and Practice — have helped frame an emergent dialogue around contemporary Asian architecture and its role in global discourse. Neri’s presence on the 2025 Vision Awards Jury is particularly exciting given the program’s expansive exploration of architectural ideation across every medium. Categories for architectural drawings, models, renderings and conceptual designs all speak directly to Neri’s longstanding interest in the process and craft of architecture, from concept to construction. His insights will undoubtedly help shape a new generation of design thinking through this year’s program. Sketch for Aranya Art Center by Neri&Hu Design and Research Office, Qinhuangdao, China. Neri joins a stellar judging panel that includes fellow architectural luminaries such as Daniel Libeskind, Steven Holl, Winka Dubbeldam and Suchi Reddy — all united in the search for the most inspiring architectural ideas and visual work from around the world. Entries for the 2025 Vision Awards are open, with a Main Entry Deadline of June 6th, 2025. Winners will be featured in Architizer’s Visionary 100, a definitive guide to the architecture industry’s most innovative creators, and see their work published on Architizer’s new book How to Visualize Architecture. Think you belong among them? Take part in the Vision Awards and show the world your boldest architectural visions! Click the button below to get started: Enter the Vision Awards Featured image: The Walled – Tsingpu Yangzhou Retreat by Neri&Hu Design and Research Office, Yangzhou, China The post Master of Architectural Research Lyndon Neri Joins the 2025 Vision Awards Jury appeared first on Journal.

More and more details are starting to surface regarding the upcoming Battlefield 6, with its widespread and ambitious playtesting program giving some fascinating early glimpses of the project. With it being possible that the game could release as soon as 2025, some fans are gearing up for the possibility of a major head-to-head between Battlefield 6 and 2025's Call of Duty entry, with these two titles potentially marking an important showdown in the longstanding rivalries between the two FPS giants.

What just happened? The Department of Energy has announced plans for a new supercomputer designed to significantly accelerate research across a wide range of scientific fields. The initiative highlights the growing convergence between commercial AI development and the computational demands of cutting-edge scientific discovery. The advanced system, to be housed at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and scheduled to become operational in 2026, will be named "Doudna" in honor of Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna, whose groundbreaking work on CRISPR gene editing has revolutionized molecular biology. Dell Technologies has been selected to deliver the Doudna supercomputer, marking a significant shift in the landscape of government-funded high-performance computing. While companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise have traditionally dominated this space, Dell's successful bid signals a new chapter. "A big win for Dell," said Addison Snell, CEO of Intersect360 Research, in an interview with The New York Times, noting the company's historically limited presence in this domain. Dell executives explained that the Doudna project enabled them to move beyond the longstanding practice of building custom systems for individual laboratories. Instead, they focused on developing a flexible platform capable of serving a broad array of users. "This market had shifted into some form of autopilot. What we did was disengage the autopilot," said Paul Perez, senior vice president and technology fellow at Dell. The Perlmutter supercomputer at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. A defining feature of Doudna will be its use of Nvidia's Vera Rubin platform, engineered to combine the strengths of traditional scientific simulations with the power of modern AI. Unlike previous Department of Energy supercomputers, which relied on processors from Intel or AMD, Doudna will incorporate a general-purpose Arm-based CPU from Nvidia, paired with the company's Rubin AI chips designed specifically for artificial intelligence and simulation workloads. // Related Stories The architecture aims to meet the needs of the laboratory's 11,000 users, who increasingly depend on both high-precision modeling and rapid AI-driven data analysis. Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of Nvidia, described the new system with enthusiasm. "Doudna is a time machine for science – compressing years of discovery into days," he said, adding that it will let "scientists delve deeper and think bigger to seek the fundamental truths of the universe." In terms of performance, Doudna is expected to be over 10 times faster than the lab's current flagship system, making it the Department of Energy's most powerful resource for training AI models and conducting advanced simulations. Jonathan Carter, associate lab director for computing sciences at Berkeley Lab, said the system's architecture was shaped by the evolving needs of researchers – many of whom are now using AI to augment simulations in areas like geothermal energy and quantum computing. Doudna's design reflects a broader shift in supercomputing. Traditional systems have prioritized 64-bit calculations for maximum numerical accuracy, but modern AI workloads often benefit from lower-precision operations (such as 16-bit or 8-bit) that enable faster processing speeds. Dion Harris, Nvidia's head of data center product marketing, noted that the flexibility to combine different levels of precision opens new frontiers for scientific research. The supercomputer will also be tightly integrated with the Energy Sciences Network, allowing researchers nationwide to stream data directly into Doudna for real-time analysis. Sudip Dosanjh, director of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, described the new system as "designed to accelerate a broad set of scientific workflows."