alternative_right shares a report from Phys.Org: Using conventional propulsion and low-energy trajectories, it takes six to nine months for crewed spacecraft to reach Mars. These durations complicate mission design and technology requirements and raise health and safety concerns since crews will be exposed to extended periods in microgravity and heightened exposure to cosmic radiation. Traditionally, mission designers have recommended nuclear-electric or nuclear-thermal propulsion, which could shorten trips to just 3 months. In a recent study, a UCSB physics researcher identified two trajectories that could reduce transits to Mars using the Starship to between 90 and 104 days. The study was authored by Jack Kingdon, a graduate student researcher in the Physics Department at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is also a member of the UCSB Weld Lab, an experimental ultracold atomic physics group that uses quantum degenerate gases to explore quantum mechanical phenomena.As outlined on its website, conference presentations, and user manual, the SpaceX mission architecture consists of six Starships traveling to Mars. Four of these spacecraft will haul 400 metric tonsof cargo while two will transport 200 passengers. Based on the Block 2 design, which has a 1,500 metric tonpropellant capacity, the crewed Starships will require 15 tankers to fully refuel in low Earth orbit. The cargo ships would require only four, since they would be sent on longer low-energy trajectories. Once the flotilla arrives at Mars, the Starships will refuel using propellant created in situ using local carbon dioxide and water ice. When the return window approaches, one of the crew ships and 3-4 cargo ships will refuel and then launch into a low Mars orbit. The cargo ships will then transfer the majority of their propellant to the crew ship and return to the surface of Mars. The crew ship would then depart for Earth, and the process could be repeated for the other crew ship. Kingdon calculated multiple trajectories using a Lambert Solver, which produces the shortest elliptical arc in two-body problem equations. The first would depart Earth on April 30th, 2033, taking advantage of the 26-month periodic alignment between Earth and Mars. The transit would last 90 days, with the crew returning to Earth after another 90-day transit by July 2nd, 2035. The second would depart Earth on July 15th, 2035, and return to Earth after a 104-day transit on December 5th, 2037. As Kingdon explained, the former trajectory is the most likely to succeed: "The optimal trajectory is the 2033 trajectory -- it has the lowest fuel requirements for the fastest transit time. A note that may not be obvious to the layreader is that Starship can very easily reach Mars in ~3 months -- in fact, it can in any launch window, over a fairly wide range of trajectories. However, Starship may impact the Martian atmosphere too fast. The trajectories discussed are ones that I am confident Starship will survive." The paper describing the work has been published in the journal Scientific Reports. of this story at Slashdot. #missions #mars #with #starship #could

For the past two years, it’s been a ghost in the machine of American tech. Between 2022 and today, a little-noticed tweak to the U.S. tax code has quietly rewired the financial logic of how American companies invest in research and development. Outside of CFO and accounting circles, almost no one knew it existed. “I work on these tax write-offs and still hadn’t heard about this,” a chief operating officer at a private-equity-backed tech company told Quartz. “It’s just been so weirdly silent.”AdvertisementStill, the delayed change to a decades-old tax provision — buried deep in the 2017 tax law — has contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of high-paying, white-collar jobs. That’s the picture that emerges from a review of corporate filings, public financial data, analysis of timelines, and interviews with industry insiders. One accountant, working in-house at a tech company, described it as a “niche issue with broad impact,” echoing sentiments from venture capital investors also interviewed for this article. Some spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive political matters.Since the start of 2023, more than half-a-million tech workers have been laid off, according to industry tallies. Headlines have blamed over-hiring during the pandemic and, more recently, AI. But beneath the surface was a hidden accelerant: a change to what’s known as Section 174 that helped gut in-house software and product development teams everywhere from tech giants such as Microsoftand Metato much smaller, private, direct-to-consumer and other internet-first companies.Now, as a bipartisan effort to repeal the Section 174 change moves through Congress, bigger questions are surfacing: How did a single line in the tax code help trigger a tsunami of mass layoffs? And why did no one see it coming? For almost 70 years, American companies could deduct 100% of qualified research and development spending in the year they incurred the costs. Salaries, software, contractor payments — if it contributed to creating or improving a product, it came off the top of a firm’s taxable income.AdvertisementThe deduction was guaranteed by Section 174 of the IRS Code of 1954, and under the provision, R&D flourished in the U.S.Microsoft was founded in 1975. Applelaunched its first computer in 1976. Googleincorporated in 1998. Facebook opened to the general public in 2006. All these companies, now among the most valuable in the world, developed their earliest products — programming tools, hardware, search engines — under a tax system that rewarded building now, not later.The subsequent rise of smartphones, cloud computing, and mobile apps also happened in an America where companies could immediately write off their investments in engineering, infrastructure, and experimentation. It was a baseline assumption — innovation and risk-taking subsidized by the tax code — that shaped how founders operated and how investors made decisions.In turn, tech companies largely built their products in the U.S. AdvertisementMicrosoft’s operating systems were coded in Washington state. Apple’s early hardware and software teams were in California. Google’s search engine was born at Stanford and scaled from Mountain View. Facebook’s entire social architecture was developed in Menlo Park. The deduction directly incentivized keeping R&D close to home, rewarding companies for investing in American workers, engineers, and infrastructure.That’s what makes the politics of Section 174 so revealing. For all the rhetoric about bringing jobs back and making things in America, the first Trump administration’s major tax bill arguably helped accomplish the opposite.When Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the signature legislative achievement of President Donald Trump’s first term, it slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% — a massive revenue loss on paper for the federal government.To make the 2017 bill comply with Senate budget rules, lawmakers needed to offset the cost. So they added future tax hikes that wouldn’t kick in right away, wouldn’t provoke immediate backlash from businesses, and could, in theory, be quietly repealed later.AdvertisementThe delayed change to Section 174 — from immediate expensing of R&D to mandatory amortization, meaning that companies must spread the deduction out in smaller chunks over five or even 15-year periods — was that kind of provision. It didn’t start affecting the budget until 2022, but it helped the TCJA appear “deficit neutral” over the 10-year window used for legislative scoring.The delay wasn’t a technical necessity. It was a political tactic. Such moves are common in tax legislation. Phase-ins and delayed provisions let lawmakers game how the Congressional Budget Office— Congress’ nonpartisan analyst of how bills impact budgets and deficits — scores legislation, pushing costs or revenue losses outside official forecasting windows.And so, on schedule in 2022, the change to Section 174 went into effect. Companies filed their 2022 tax returns under the new rules in early 2023. And suddenly, R&D wasn’t a full, immediate write-off anymore. The tax benefits of salaries for engineers, product and project managers, data scientists, and even some user experience and marketing staff — all of which had previously reduced taxable income in year one — now had to be spread out over five- or 15-year periods. To understand the impact, imagine a personal tax code change that allowed you to deduct 100% of your biggest source of expenses, and that becoming a 20% deduction. For cash-strapped companies, especially those not yet profitable, the result was a painful tax bill just as venture funding dried up and interest rates soared.AdvertisementSalesforce office buildings in San Francisco.Photo: Jason Henry/BloombergIt’s no coincidence that Meta announced its “Year of Efficiency” immediately after the Section 174 change took effect. Ditto Microsoft laying off 10,000 employees in January 2023 despite strong earnings, or Google parent Alphabet cutting 12,000 jobs around the same time.Amazonalso laid off almost 30,000 people, with cuts focused not just on logistics but on Alexa and internal cloud tools — precisely the kinds of projects that would have once qualified as immediately deductible R&D. Salesforceeliminated 10% of its staff, or 8,000 people, including entire product teams.In public, companies blamed bloat and AI. But inside boardrooms, spreadsheets were telling a quieter story. And MD&A notes — management’s notes on the numbers — buried deep in 10-K filings recorded the change, too. R&D had become more expensive to carry. Headcount, the leading R&D expense across the tech industry, was the easiest thing to cut.AdvertisementIn its 2023 annual report, Meta described salaries as its single biggest R&D expense. Between the first and second years that the Section 174 change began affecting tax returns, Meta cut its total workforce by almost 25%. Over the same period, Microsoft reduced its global headcount by about 7%, with cuts concentrated in product-facing, engineering-heavy roles.Smaller companies without the fortress-like balance sheets of Big Tech have arguably been hit even harder. Twilioslashed 22% of its workforce in 2023 alone. Shopifycut almost 30% of staff in 2022 and 2023. Coinbasereduced headcount by 36% across a pair of brutal restructuring waves.Since going into effect, the provision has hit at the very heart of America’s economic growth engine: the tech sector.By market cap, tech giants dominate the S&P 500, with the “Magnificent 7” alone accounting for more than a third of the index’s total value. Workforce numbers tell a similar story, with tech employing millions of Americans directly and supporting the employment of tens of millions more. As measured by GDP, capital-T tech contributes about 10% of national output.AdvertisementIt’s not just that tech layoffs were large, it’s that they were massively disproportionate. Across the broader U.S. economy, job cuts hovered around in low single digits across most sectors. But in tech, entire divisions vanished, with a whopping 60% jump in layoffs between 2022 and 2023. Some cuts reflected real inefficiencies — a response to over-hiring during the zero-interest rate boom. At the same time, many of the roles eliminated were in R&D, product, and engineering, precisely the kind of functions that had once benefitted from generous tax treatment under Section 174.Throughout the 2010s, a broad swath of startups, direct-to-consumer brands, and internet-first firms — basically every company you recognize from Instagram or Facebook ads — built their growth models around a kind of engineered break-even.The tax code allowed them to spend aggressively on product and engineering, then write it all off as R&D, keeping their taxable income close to zero by design. It worked because taxable income and actual cash flow were often notGAAP accounting practices. Basically, as long as spending counted as R&D, companies could report losses to investors while owing almost nothing to the IRS.But the Section 174 change broke that model. Once those same expenses had to be spread out, or amortized, over multiple years, the tax shield vanished. Companies that were still burning cash suddenly looked profitable on paper, triggering real tax bills on imaginary gains.AdvertisementThe logic that once fueled a generation of digital-first growth collapsed overnight.So it wasn’t just tech experiencing effects. From 1954 until 2022, the U.S. tax code had encouraged businesses of all stripes to behave like tech companies. From retail to logistics, healthcare to media, if firms built internal tools, customized a software stack, or invested in business intelligence and data-driven product development, they could expense those costs. The write-off incentivized in-house builds and fast growth well outside the capital-T tech sector. This lines up with OECD research showing that immediate deductions foster innovation more than spread-out ones.And American companies ran with that logic. According to government data, U.S. businesses reported about billion in R&D expenditures in 2019 alone, and almost half of that came from industries outside traditional tech. The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that this sector, the broader digital economy, accounts for another 10% of GDP.Add that to core tech’s contribution, and the Section 174 shift has likely touched at least 20% of the U.S. economy.AdvertisementThe result? A tax policy aimed at raising short-term revenue effectively hid a time bomb inside the growth engines of thousands of companies. And when it detonated, it kneecapped the incentive for hiring American engineers or investing in American-made tech and digital products.It made building tech companies in America look irrational on a spreadsheet.A bipartisan group of lawmakers is pushing to repeal the Section 174 change, with business groups, CFOs, crypto executives, and venture capitalists lobbying hard for retroactive relief. But the politics are messy. Fixing 174 would mean handing a tax break to the same companies many voters in both parties see as symbols of corporate excess. Any repeal would also come too late for the hundreds of thousands of workers already laid off.And of course, the losses don’t stop at Meta’s or Google’s campus gates. They ripple out. When high-paid tech workers disappear, so do the lunch orders. The house tours. The contract gigs. The spending habits that sustain entire urban economies and thousands of other jobs. Sandwich artists. Rideshare drivers. Realtors. Personal trainers. House cleaners. In tech-heavy cities, the fallout runs deep — and it’s still unfolding.AdvertisementWashington is now poised to pass a second Trump tax bill — one packed with more obscure provisions, more delayed impacts, more quiet redistribution. And it comes as analysts are only just beginning to understand the real-world effects of the last round.The Section 174 change “significantly increased the tax burden on companies investing in innovation, potentially stifling economic growth and reducing the United States’ competitiveness on the global stage,” according to the tax consulting firm KBKG. Whether the U.S. will reverse course — or simply adapt to a new normal — remains to be seen. #hidden #time #bomb #tax #code

It has long been said that an organisation’s greatest asset is its people. Employees are the driving force behind innovation, customer engagement, revenue growth, and company culture. In an era where political, social, and economic climates are in constant flux, particularly with ongoing debates surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion, it is more critical than ever for organisations to recognise the value of an inclusive workforce. There is a well-known saying: “When America sneezes, the rest of Europe catches a cold.”. It rings particularly true today, as shifts in political and social climates challenge the notion of diversity programmes. This is evident in the recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex. However, history has shown that political regimes and societal norms can change rapidly. Regardless of where one stands on these issues, the reality remains that for an organisation to thrive, its people must feel valued, supported, and included. Despite the growing focus on DEI programmes since 2020, many past initiatives have not been as effective as hoped. To move forward, the DEI industry and DEI professionals must conduct a rigorous retrospective analysis: What has worked? What hasn’t been effective? How can we improve? Without tangible metrics and data-driven insights, it becomes difficult to measure the success and impact of these initiatives, and this lack of clear outcomes may have contributed to what some define as the “backlash against DEI.” A common challenge has been the prioritisation of diversity over inclusion, leaving organisations ill-prepared to integrate diverse talent effectively. This has often resulted in short-term disruption - what change management refers to as the "storming" phase of team development - which in turn has led to team friction, a lack of belonging, and ultimately higher turnover rates among underrepresented employees. Organisations have not allowed enough time for teams to progress to the "norming" and "performing" periods in the face of high pressure to deliver results. To counter this, organisations must shift their mindset to focus on inclusion and belonging first. When a workplace fosters an inclusive culture, diverse talent is naturally welcomed, supported, and empowered to succeed. Rather than viewing differences as an obstacle, businesses must embrace them as strengths that drive innovation and growth. I often advocate for culture “add” rather than culture “fit”. As a former project and programme manager who transitioned into HR, I have witnessed firsthand the value of applying change management principles to DEI efforts. A successful change programme requires clearly defined goals, strong leadership buy-in, stakeholder engagement, a structured delivery methodology, and measurable outcomes. When these elements are absent, initiatives tend to falter. By adopting a structured, results-oriented, and data-driven approach, organisations can embed true inclusion into their core business strategy rather than treating it as a secondary initiative or a “nice to have”. It’s also important to regularly assess and reflect on what has worked, what hasn’t, and adapt and improve accordingly. In agile methodology, we call these retrospectives. Inclusion is key to successful DEI initiatives. In the past, these efforts may have created exclusion by failing to involve those who do not identify with the Equality Act's nine protected characteristics. This has led to defensiveness and fear instead of an understanding of historical inequity. When you are accustomed to privilege, equality can feel like oppression or exclusion and so we need to focus on how we can reframe inclusion work as being beneficial to all rather than to a few. Using storytelling, education, and relatability helps onboard more allies, understanding that equity is crucial to achieve equality. Inclusion means widening opportunities for everyone rather than limiting them to a select few. A wealth of research underscores the positive impact of inclusivity on business success. According to CIPD, 70% of employees report that a strong DEI culture positively impacts their job satisfaction. Forbes also discovered that 88% of consumers are more likely to be loyal to a company that supports social and environmental causes. Additionally, employees working in inclusive environments are 50% more likely to stay with their current employer for more than three years. Just over half of UK consumers say a brand's diversity and inclusion efforts, influence their purchase decisions. In fact, brands failing to act on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion risk losing out on £102bn annual spend from marginalised groups. Boston Consulting Group’s research demonstrates that organizations with diverse leadership see 19% higher innovation revenues. Beyond traditional meritocratic arguments, one principle is clear: inclusivity must be at the heart of every business strategy. Organisations where employees feel seen, heard, and valued naturally attract a broader, more diverse talent pool. Such employees tend to be more engaged, loyal, and productive, further strengthening the organisation's overall success and their bottom line. The UK tech industry is poised for continued growth and innovation, with a focus on emerging technologies like AI and quantum computing, however there is also a need to address challenges like talent shortages and international competition to maintain its position as a global leader.  Almost 95% of employers looking for tech talent have encountered a skills shortage in 2022, according to HR and recruitment firm Hays. In today’s job market, competitive salaries alone are not enough to attract and retain top talent. Employees now prioritise benefits, flexible working arrangements, career growth opportunities, and a sense of belonging. Organisations that prioritise inclusion, equal opportunities, and adaptability will be better positioned to navigate the evolving talent landscape and sustain long-term success. Ultimately, fostering an inclusive workplace is not merely a moral obligation; it is a business imperative. Companies that prioritise inclusion are more likely to attract top diverse talent, enhance employee engagement, and drive sustainable growth. Companies that fail to create inclusive environments are setting themselves up for failure. We are seeing more and more cases of sexual harassment, bullying and discrimination cases with high price tags. So, whether through loss of business, bad publicity or legal consequences, the price tag on exclusion can be staggering. Inclusion should not be seen as a separate HR initiative but as an integral part of an organisation’s DNA with all leaders owning an inclusion goal as part of their performance management. What gets measured, gets done! However, this can only happen if leaders and managers understand what inclusion truly means and they recognise that a diversity of voices, experiences and opinions will benefit their teams rather than hinder them. The future of work is about more than just employment—it is about providing opportunities for people to live, support their families, and achieve personal and professional growth. A poll, conducted by Ipsos for PA Mediapoint, indicates widespread support among the British public for key workplace DEI drives, including flexible working, gender pay gap reporting, and inclusivity training. People care about wellbeing, inclusion and culture, which is why it is so important that organisations create workplaces where everyone is valued, empowered, and given the chance to succeed. True prosperity comes from ensuring that every individual, regardless of background and differences, can flourish. So, Inclusion does matter, particularly if you value creating a positive work environment that benefits employees, impacts the bottom line, and ensures everyone feels included rather than excluded. about DEI in tech A lack of work-life balance and discrimination are among the biggest challenges for women in tech, finds Lorien When asked their opinions on the growing use of AI, girls expressed concerns about possible biases it will perpetuate, while boys were worried about cyber security #diversity #think #tank #inclusion #matters

Location: RemoteCompany: Fusing Marketing / Fusing Education – U.S.-based branding & design agency specializing in K–12 educationJob Type: Full-timeCompensation: Competitive salary in USD or COP🎯 About the RoleWe’re hiring a Creative Project Manager to join our international team and help bring school campuses to life through powerful visual branding. In this role, you'll lead the client relationship, gather branding input, and guide our Colombia-based design team as they create large-format graphics like wall wraps, door decals, and murals for U.S. schools.You’ll act as the bridge between U.S. clients and our internal team — ensuring ideas are captured clearly, timelines are met, and all files are delivered ready for print.This is a remote position ideal for a native English speaker currently living in Colombia, especially someone with strong communication skills, a creative mindset, and the ability to manage multiple fast-paced projects at once.💼 ResponsibilitiesLead client onboarding and branding discovery conversationsCapture the client’s creative vision and translate it into clear direction for the Colombia-based graphic design teamManage project timelines using TrelloCoordinate feedback, revisions, and approvals across multiple projectsOffer professional communication via email, video calls, and written follow-upsEnsure final designs are production-ready for printing and installationUse Google Workspacefor day-to-day communication and file sharingOversee 10–12 active client projects per month, particularly during high-volume periods✅ Ideal QualificationsNative English speakerCurrently living in Colombia1–4 years of experience in project coordination, account management, or creative productionStrong organizational and multitasking skillsFamiliar with basic design conceptsComfortable using Trello and Google WorkspaceSpanish proficiency is a plus🌎 Why Work With Us?Collaborate with a tight-knit team across the U.S. and ColombiaHelp beautify and inspire schools through meaningful visual storytellingGain experience with large-format printing and branding for real-world environmentsFlexible remote work aligned with U.S. time zonesPotential for long-term growth into strategy, operations, or creative leadership📩 How to ApplyPlease send the following to:Resume or LinkedIn profileA brief noteabout why you’re a strong fit and where you’re located in ColombiaAny samples of past creative or client-focused work #fusing #marketing #creative #project #manager

After detailing the VFX work on The Last of Us Season 1 in 2023, Alex Wang returns to reflect on how the scope and complexity have evolved in Season 2. With close to 30 years of experience in the visual effects industry, Fiona Campbell Westgate has contributed to major productions such as Ghost in the Shell, Avatar: The Way of Water, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, and Nyad. Her work on Nyad earned her a VES Award for Outstanding Supporting Visual Effects in a Photoreal Feature. Collaboration with Craig Mazin and Neil Druckmann is key to shaping the visual universe of The Last of Us. Can you share with us how you work with them and how they influence the visual direction of the series? Alex Wang // Craig visualizes the shot or scene before putting words on the page. His writing is always exceptionally detailed and descriptive, ultimately helping us to imagine the shot. Of course, no one understands The Last of Us better than Neil, who knows all aspects of the lore very well. He’s done much research and design work with the Naughty Dog team, so he gives us good guidance regarding creature and environment designs. I always try to begin with concept art to get the ball rolling with Craig and Neil’s ideas. This season, we collaborated with Chromatic Studios for concept art. They also contributed to the games, so I felt that continuity was beneficial for our show. Fiona Campbell Westgate // From the outset, it was clear that collaborating with Craig would be an exceptional experience. Early meetings revealed just how personable and invested Craig is. He works closely with every department to ensure that each episode is done to the highest level. Craig places unwavering trust in our VFX Supervisor, Alex Wang. They have an understanding between them that lends to an exceptional partnership. As the VFX Producer, I know how vital the dynamic between the Showrunner and VFX Supervisor is; working with these two has made for one of the best professional experiences of my career.  Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO How has your collaboration with Craig evolved between the first and second seasons? Were there any adjustments in the visual approach or narrative techniques you made this season? Alex Wang // Since everything was new in Season 1, we dedicated a lot of time and effort to exploring the show’s visual language, and we all learned a great deal about what worked and what didn’t for the show. In my initial conversations with Craig about Season 2, it was clear that he wanted to expand the show’s scope by utilizing what we established and learned in Season 1. He felt significantly more at ease fully committing to using VFX to help tell the story this season. The first season involved multiple VFX studios to handle the complexity of the effects. How did you divide the work among different studios for the second season? Alex Wang // Most of the vendors this season were also in Season 1, so we already had a shorthand. The VFX Producer, Fiona Campbell Westgate, and I work closely together to decide how to divide the work among our vendors. The type of work needs to be well-suited for the vendor and fit into our budget and schedule. We were extremely fortunate to have the vendors we did this season. I want to take this opportunity to thank Weta FX, DNEG, RISE, Distillery VFX, Storm Studios, Important Looking Pirates, Blackbird, Wylie Co., RVX, and VDK. We also had ILM for concept art and Digital Domain for previs. Fiona Campbell Westgate // Alex Wang and I were very aware of the tight delivery schedule, which added to the challenge of distributing the workload. We planned the work based on the individual studio’s capabilities, and tried not to burden them with back to back episodes wherever possible. Fortunately, there was shorthand with vendors from Season One, who were well-acquainted with the process and the quality of work the show required. The town of Jackson is a key location in The Last of Us. Could you explain how you approached creating and expanding this environment for the second season? Alex Wang // Since Season 1, this show has created incredible sets. However, the Jackson town set build is by far the most impressive in terms of scope. They constructed an 822 ft x 400 ft set in Minaty Bay that resembled a real town! I had early discussions with Production Designer Don MacAulay and his team about where they should concentrate their efforts and where VFX would make the most sense to take over. They focused on developing the town’s main street, where we believed most scenes would occur. There is a big reveal of Jackson in the first episode after Ellie comes out of the barn. Distillery VFX was responsible for the town’s extension, which appears seamless because the team took great pride in researching and ensuring the architecture aligned with the set while staying true to the tone of Jackson, Wyoming. Fiona Campbell Westgate // An impressive set was constructed in Minaty Bay, which served as the foundation for VFX to build upon. There is a beautiful establishing shot of Jackson in Episode 1 that was completed by Distillery, showing a safe and almost normal setting as Season Two starts. Across the episodes, Jackson set extensions were completed by our partners at RISE and Weta. Each had a different phase of Jackson to create, from almost idyllic to a town immersed in Battle.  What challenges did you face filming Jackson on both real and virtual sets? Was there a particular fusion between visual effects and live-action shots to make it feel realistic? Alex Wang // I always advocate for building exterior sets outdoors to take advantage of natural light. However, the drawback is that we cannot control the weather and lighting when filming over several days across two units. In Episode 2, there’s supposed to be a winter storm in Jackson, so maintaining consistency within the episode was essential. On sunny and rainy days, we used cranes to lift large 30x60ft screens to block the sun or rain. It was impossible to shield the entire set from the rain or sun, so we prioritized protecting the actors from sunlight or rain. Thus, you can imagine there was extensive weather cleanup for the episode to ensure consistency within the sequences. Fiona Campbell Westgate // We were fortunate that production built a large scale Jackson set. It provided a base for the full CG Jackson aerial shots and CG Set Extensions. The weather conditions at Minaty Bay presented a challenge during the filming of the end of the Battle sequence in Episode 2. While there were periods of bright sunshine, rainfall occurred during the filming of the end of the Battle sequence in Episode 2. In addition to the obvious visual effects work, it became necessary to replace the ground cover. Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO The attack on Jackson by the horde of infected in season 2 is a very intense moment. How did you approach the visual effects for this sequence? What techniques did you use to make the scale of the attack feel as impressive as it did? Alex Wang // We knew this would be a very complex sequence to shoot, and for it to be successful, we needed to start planning with the HODs from the very beginning. We began previs during prep with Weta FX and the episode’s director, Mark Mylod. The previs helped us understand Mark and the showrunner’s vision. This then served as a blueprint for all departments to follow, and in many instances, we filmed the previs. Fiona Campbell Westgate // The sheer size of the CG Infected Horde sets the tone for the scale of the Battle. It’s an intimidating moment when they are revealed through the blowing snow. The addition of CG explosions and atmospheric effects contributed in adding scale to the sequence.  Can you give us an insight into the technical challenges of capturing the infected horde? How much of the effect was done using CGI, and how much was achieved with practical effects? Alex Wang // Starting with a detailed previs that Mark and Craig approved was essential for planning the horde. We understood that we would never have enough stunt performers to fill a horde, nor could they carry out some stunts that would be too dangerous. I reviewed the previs with Stunt Coordinator Marny Eng numerous times to decide the best placements for her team’s stunt performers. We also collaborated with Barrie Gower from the Prosthetics team to determine the most effective allocation of his team’s efforts. Stunt performers positioned closest to the camera would receive the full prosthetic treatment, which can take hours. Weta FX was responsible for the incredible CG Infected horde work in the Jackson Battle. They have been a creative partner with HBO’s The Last of Us since Season 1, so they were brought on early for Season 2. I began discussions with Weta’s VFX supervisor, Nick Epstein, about how we could tackle these complex horde shots very early during the shoot. Typically, repetition in CG crowd scenes can be acceptable, such as armies with soldiers dressed in the same uniform or armour. However, for our Infected horde, Craig wanted to convey that the Infected didn’t come off an assembly line or all shop at the same clothing department store. Any repetition would feel artificial. These Infected were once civilians with families, or they were groups of raiders. We needed complex variations in height, body size, age, clothing, and hair. We built our base library of Infected, and then Nick and the Weta FX team developed a “mix and match” system, allowing the Infected to wear any costume and hair groom. A procedural texturing system was also developed for costumes, providing even greater variation. The most crucial aspect of the Infected horde was their motion. We had numerous shots cutting back-to-back with practical Infected, as well as shots where our CG Infected ran right alongside a stunt horde. It was incredibly unforgiving! Weta FX’s animation supervisor from Season 1, Dennis Yoo, returned for Season 2 to meet the challenge. Having been part of the first season, Dennis understood the expectations of Craig and Neil. Similar to issues of model repetition within a horde, it was relatively easy to perceive repetition, especially if they were running toward the same target. It was essential to enhance the details of their performances with nuances such as tripping and falling, getting back up, and trampling over each other. There also needed to be a difference in the Infected’s running speed. To ensure we had enough complexity within the horde, Dennis motion-captured almost 600 unique motion cycles. We had over a hundred shots in episode 2 that required CG Infected horde. Fiona Campbell Westgate // Nick Epstein, Weta VFX Supervisor, and Dennis Yoo, Weta Animation Supervisor, were faced with having to add hero, close-up Horde that had to integrate with practical Stunt performers. They achieved this through over 60 motion capture sessions and running it through a deformation system they developed. Every detail was applied to allow for a seamless blend with our practical Stunt performances. The Weta team created a custom costume and hair system that provided individual looks to the CG Infected Horde. We were able to avoid the repetitive look of a CG crowd due to these efforts. The movement of the infected horde is crucial for the intensity of the scene. How did you manage the animation and simulation of the infected to ensure smooth and realistic interaction with the environment? Fiona Campbell Westgate // We worked closely with the Stunt department to plan out positioning and where VFX would be adding the CG Horde. Craig Mazin wanted the Infected Horde to move in a way that humans cannot. The deformation system kept the body shape anatomically correct and allowed us to push the limits from how a human physically moves.  The Bloater makes a terrifying return this season. What were the key challenges in designing and animating this creature? How did you work on the Bloater’s interaction with the environment and other characters? Alex Wang // In Season 1, the Kansas City cul-de-sac sequence featured only a handful of Bloater shots. This season, however, nearly forty shots showcase the Bloater in broad daylight during the Battle of Jackson. We needed to redesign the Bloater asset to ensure it looked good in close-up shots from head to toe. Weta FX designed the Bloater for Season 1 and revamped the design for this season. Starting with the Bloater’s silhouette, it had to appear large, intimidating, and menacing. We explored enlarging the cordyceps head shape to make it feel almost like a crown, enhancing the Bloater’s impressive and strong presence. During filming, a stunt double stood in for the Bloater. This was mainly for scale reference and composition. It also helped the Infected stunt performers understand the Bloater’s spatial position, allowing them to avoid running through his space. Once we had an edit, Dennis mocapped the Bloater’s performances with his team. It is always challenging to get the motion right for a creature that weighs 600 pounds. We don’t want the mocap to be overly exaggerated, but it does break the character if the Bloater feels too “light.” The brilliant animation team at Weta FX brought the Bloater character to life and nailed it! When Tommy goes head-to-head with the Bloater, Craig was quite specific during the prep days about how the Bloater would bubble, melt, and burn as Tommy torches him with the flamethrower. Important Looking Pirates took on the “Burning Bloater” sequence, led by VFX Supervisor Philip Engstrom. They began with extensive R&D to ensure the Bloater’s skin would start to bubble and burn. ILP took the final Bloater asset from Weta FX and had to resculpt and texture the asset for the Bloater’s final burn state. Craig felt it was important for the Bloater to appear maimed at the end. The layers of FX were so complex that the R&D continued almost to the end of the delivery schedule. Fiona Campbell Westgate // This season the Bloater had to be bigger, more intimidating. The CG Asset was recreated to withstand the scrutiny of close ups and in daylight. Both Craig Mazin and Neil Druckmann worked closely with us during the process of the build. We referenced the game and applied elements of that version with ours. You’ll notice that his head is in the shape of crown, this is to convey he’s a powerful force.  During the Burning Bloater sequence in Episode 2, we brainstormed with Philip Engström, ILP VFX Supervisor, on how this creature would react to the flamethrower and how it would affect the ground as it burns. When the Bloater finally falls to the ground and dies, the extraordinary detail of the embers burning, fluid draining and melting the surrounding snow really sells that the CG creature was in the terrain.  Given the Bloater’s imposing size, how did you approach its integration into scenes with the actors? What techniques did you use to create such a realistic and menacing appearance? Fiona Campbell Westgate // For the Bloater, a stunt performer wearing a motion capture suit was filmed on set. This provided interaction with the actors and the environment. VFX enhanced the intensity of his movements, incorporating simulations to the CG Bloater’s skin and muscles that would reflect the weight and force as this terrifying creature moves.  Seattle in The Last of Us is a completely devastated city. Can you talk about how you recreated this destruction? What were the most difficult visual aspects to realize for this post-apocalyptic city? Fiona Campbell Westgate // We were meticulous in blending the CG destruction with the practical environment. The flora’s ability to overtake the environment had to be believable, and we adhered to the principle of form follows function. Due to the vastness of the CG devastation it was crucial to avoid repetitive effects. Consequently, our vendors were tasked with creating bespoke designs that evoked a sense of awe and beauty. Was Seattle’s architecture a key element in how you designed the visual effects? How did you adapt the city’s real-life urban landscape to meet the needs of the story while maintaining a coherent aesthetic? Alex Wang // It’s always important to Craig and Neil that we remain true to the cities our characters are in. DNEG was one of our primary vendors for Boston in Season 1, so it was natural for them to return for Season 2, this time focusing on Seattle. DNEG’s VFX Supervisor, Stephen James, who played a crucial role in developing the visual language of Boston for Season 1, also returns for this season. Stephen and Melaina Maceled a team to Seattle to shoot plates and perform lidar scans of parts of the city. We identified the buildings unique to Seattle that would have existed in 2003, so we ensured these buildings were always included in our establishing shots. Overgrowth and destruction have significantly influenced the environments in The Last of Us. The environment functions almost as a character in both Season 1 and Season 2. In the last season, the building destruction in Boston was primarily caused by military bombings. During this season, destruction mainly arises from dilapidation. Living in the Pacific Northwest, I understand how damp it can get for most of the year. I imagined that, over 20 years, the integrity of the buildings would be compromised by natural forces. This abundant moisture creates an exceptionally lush and vibrant landscape for much of the year. Therefore, when designing Seattle, we ensured that the destruction and overgrowth appeared intentional and aesthetically distinct from those of Boston. Fiona Campbell Westgate // Led by Stephen James, DNEG VFX Supervisor, and Melaina Mace, DNEG DFX Supervisor, the team captured photography, drone footage and the Clear Angle team captured LiDAR data over a three-day period in Seattle. It was crucial to include recognizable Seattle landmarks that would resonate with people familiar with the game.  The devastated city almost becomes a character in itself this season. What aspects of the visual effects did you have to enhance to increase the immersion of the viewer into this hostile and deteriorated environment? Fiona Campbell Westgate // It is indeed a character. Craig wanted it to be deteriorated but to have moments where it’s also beautiful in its devastation. For instance, in the Music Store in Episode 4 where Ellie is playing guitar for Dina, the deteriorated interior provides a beautiful backdrop to this intimate moment. The Set Decorating team dressed a specific section of the set, while VFX extended the destruction and overgrowth to encompass the entire environment, immersing the viewer in strange yet familiar surroundings. Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO The sequence where Ellie navigates a boat through a violent storm is stunning. What were the key challenges in creating this scene, especially with water simulation and the storm’s effects? Alex Wang // In the concluding episode of Season 2, Ellie is deep in Seattle, searching for Abby. The episode draws us closer to the Aquarium, where this area of Seattle is heavily flooded. Naturally, this brings challenges with CG water. In the scene where Ellie encounters Isaac and the W.L.F soldiers by the dock, we had a complex shoot involving multiple locations, including a water tank and a boat gimbal. There were also several full CG shots. For Isaac’s riverine boat, which was in a stormy ocean, I felt it was essential that the boat and the actors were given the appropriate motion. Weta FX assisted with tech-vis for all the boat gimbal work. We began with different ocean wave sizes caused by the storm, and once the filmmakers selected one, the boat’s motion in the tech-vis fed the special FX gimbal. When Ellie gets into the Jon boat, I didn’t want it on the same gimbal because I felt it would be too mechanical. Ellie’s weight needed to affect the boat as she got in, and that wouldn’t have happened with a mechanical gimbal. So, we opted to have her boat in a water tank for this scene. Special FX had wave makers that provided the boat with the appropriate movement. Instead of guessing what the ocean sim for the riverine boat should be, the tech- vis data enabled DNEG to get a head start on the water simulations in post-production. Craig wanted this sequence to appear convincingly dark, much like it looks out on the ocean at night. This allowed us to create dramatic visuals, using lightning strikes at moments to reveal depth. Were there any memorable moments or scenes from the series that you found particularly rewarding or challenging to work on from a visual effects standpoint? Alex Wang // The Last of Us tells the story of our characters’ journey. If you look at how season 2 begins in Jackson, it differs significantly from how we conclude the season in Seattle. We seldom return to the exact location in each episode, meaning every episode presents a unique challenge. The scope of work this season has been incredibly rewarding. We burned a Bloater, and we also introduced spores this season! Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO Looking back on the project, what aspects of the visual effects are you most proud of? Alex Wang // The Jackson Battle was incredibly complex, involving a grueling and lengthy shoot in quite challenging conditions, along with over 600 VFX shots in episode 2. It was truly inspiring to witness the determination of every department and vendor to give their all and create something remarkable. Fiona Campbell Westgate // I am immensely proud of the exceptional work accomplished by all of our vendors. During the VFX reviews, I found myself clapping with delight when the final shots were displayed; it was exciting to see remarkable results of the artists’ efforts come to light.  How long have you worked on this show? Alex Wang // I’ve been on this season for nearly two years. Fiona Campbell Westgate // A little over one year; I joined the show in April 2024. What’s the VFX shots count? Alex Wang // We had just over 2,500 shots this Season. Fiona Campbell Westgate // In Season 2, there were a total of 2656 visual effects shots. What is your next project? Fiona Campbell Westgate // Stay tuned… A big thanks for your time. WANT TO KNOW MORE?Blackbird: Dedicated page about The Last of Us – Season 2 website.DNEG: Dedicated page about The Last of Us – Season 2 on DNEG website.Important Looking Pirates: Dedicated page about The Last of Us – Season 2 website.RISE: Dedicated page about The Last of Us – Season 2 website.Weta FX: Dedicated page about The Last of Us – Season 2 website. © Vincent Frei – The Art of VFX – 2025 #last #season #alex #wang #production

The relationship between strategists and designers is key to creating effective work that meets clients’ needs. But strategists can feel misunderstood, and even undervalued, in their attempts to set a project’s direction through clear and meaningful thinking. We spoke with a range of in-house and independent strategists about what they wish designers knew about their work. Is the role of strategists changing, like so many design industry roles right now? If so, how? “The lightning speed turnaround” of creative work is creating new pressures, says Gardiner Richardson’s associate director and strategic lead, Matt Forster. Partly this is down to the rise of AI, which is front-of-mind according to independent strategist Manfred Abraham, who has held senior roles at Interbrand and Wolff Olins. The two big shifts, he says, are AI’s potential to bring efficiency to the process – using information gathering and analytics to inform insights – and the dramatic changes that AI will bring to the consumer landscape. “Imagine a world where your personal AI agent makes your life much easier,” he says. “What are consumers going to do with their extra time? Strategists will have to work in close collaboration with creatives to be able to imagine the future for our clients.” Beyond AI, consumers’ withering attention spans, coupled with the proliferating demands on their time, creates a big challenge. “Brands are looking for strategists to show them high interest areas of culture where they have a credible role to play, making it easier for them to reach their audience,” says Matt Boffey, chief strategy officer, UK & Europe, at Design Bridge and Partners. As the world becomes more complex, there is a renewed appetite for clarity, says Polly Clark, a strategy consultant for agencies like Buddy Creative in Cornwall. “I’m seeing that simplicity is even more important than ever,” she says. “Overly complex or convoluted thinking isn’t helpful for anyone, and just slows everything down.” And some strategists have noticed a bit of mission creep. “Increasingly, clients are expecting strategists to contribute at a broader business level not purely brand strategy, design or comms,” says Louise Kennedy, who recently joined Into The Light as head of strategy. What don’t designers understand about your role? “Strategy is not a threat or a limit to designers’ creativity,” says Gardiner Richardson’s Matt Forster. “It’s a springboard to a controlled creative leap.” Into the Light’s Louise Kennedy points out that “designers, on the whole, are visual and often want to get to the ‘creative ask’ very quickly so they can start doing what they do best. “But many of us strategists enjoy taking people on the journey of how we got there by unpacking context and patterns. What designers might see as wordy, we see as fascinating storytelling, but perhaps we tell them more than they need to know, to protect our own egos.” There seems to be a recurring tension between the idea of strategists as left brain thinkers – rigorous, analytical, and logical – against designers as right-brain thinkers – more creative and emotional. But Manfred Abraham points out this is a false – if persistent – way of looking at strategy. “Some designers have missed that there might be a strong right brain there as well!” he says. What don’t clients understand about your role? “Unless clients have experienced it before, they aren’t immediately going to understand the value of strategy,” Gardiner Richardson’s Matt Forster says. “They may have worked with agencies who underpin their creative approaches on little substance. “Once we’ve explained our strategic process, why we follow it and the value it will create for all their creative communications and wider business, it’s a no brainer.” Nor does every client understand the commercial power of great design. “In the brand consulting and growth space specifically, clients often think that strategy is communication strategy,” says Manfred Abraham. “The strategies we develop go much further than that – communications is a part of it.” And adding all this value takes time – more than some clients realise. “I think for clients, it is understanding the need to protect the time and space to do a proper job at this stage and the benefit that will bring,” says Into The Light’s Louise Kennedy. “We might even need to commission new insight work if we feel there are big gaps in knowledge,” she adds. How do you balance multiple client meetings with getting the deep thinking done? This, most strategists agree, is a precarious juggling act. “It sometimes feels like ‘manager time’ has won out over ‘maker time,’” says Design Bridge and Partners’ Matt Boffey. “Days are apportioned into slots, from 30 minutes to an hour, which is perfect for meetings but inadequate for building momentum on substantial projects. The goal, he insists, isn’t to eliminate meetings. “Collaboration remains essential. Rather, it’s to create conditions where both discussion and deep work can thrive. We must be careful that ‘talking’ doesn’t completely squeeze out ‘doing’.” He encourages his team to block time between meetings to mentally stretch, as you might after a gym session. “And I’m a strong advocate for reserving longer periods, either half days or full days, for the ‘deep work’ required when writing a discovery debrief or developing brand strategy.” Although Louise Kennedy blocks out time in this way, she finds it doesn’t always work for her. “Often in those moments I can get brainfreeze as I feel under pressure to produce something smart,” she says. “So I like to read everything on a project then leave it for at least a day so my brain can digest it fully and start working behind the scenes.” External consultants can work the schedule that suits them. On most days, Manfred Abraham gets up at 5.30am because that’s when his brain is at its best. It’s also a time of day free of client meetings, “so it’s great thinking time,” he says. Polly Clark, on the other hand, embraces this juggling act. “It’s always something I’ve needed to do, and actually helps sharpen my thinking. Switching focus means I can come back to things fresher, and stops me getting caught up in the weeds.” What’s the worst thing a designer can say to a strategist? Matt Forster – “That they still don’t get it – which means I haven’t involved them enough, explained it well enough or done a good enough job.” Louise Kennedy – “’I’m confused’ or worse, ‘I’m confused and bored’.” Matt Boffey – ‘“Great, the client’s bought the strategy, now we can really start the work.” “This sounds like strategy has become a hurdle to clear before creativity begins, where it should be the foundation that makes creativity powerful and purposeful. The best work happens when strategists and designers see their contributions as interconnected parts of a unified process, rather than unrelated elements.” Polly Clark – “In the past I’ve heard designers question what strategy brings. That’s been when the strategy hasn’t made sense of the challenge, or is overly convoluted – which is sure to make everyone switch off.” Manfred Abraham – “That great design doesn’t need strategic thinking. It’s simply not true. We are great individually but we are brilliant together.” #strategy #not #threat #what #strategists

Version 1.0.0 By Robert Jan van PeltThe largest artifact in the touring exhibition Auschwitz. Not Long Ago. Not Far Away., currently on display at the ROM in Toronto, is a wooden barracks building. It’s from the Auschwitz-Monowitz camp, a satellite to Auschwitz created to provide slave labour to the IG Farben corporation for the construction of a synthetic rubber factory.  The discovery of a sister building, back in 2012, led exhibition chief curator and architectural historian Robert Jan van Pelt, University Professor at the Waterloo School of Architecture, on a research journey to write a comprehensive history of the barracks—temporary buildings that have not only housed prisoners, but also provided shelter for military servicemen and women, refugees, and natural disaster survivors. “Many people have experienced, for shorter or longer time periods, life in a barrack, and for all of them it represented life on the edge, for better or worse,” writes Van Pelt. Worm’s eye axonometric of Renkioi Hospital Barrack, a prefabricated hospital designed by Ismabard Kingdom Brunel for a site in Turkey, 1857. Van Pelt’s book criss-crosses with ease through architectural history, military history, and the history of medicine—all of which played crucial roles in the evolving development of this seemingly simple building type. The book is arranged in a dozen episodes, with the barrack at the centre of each, serving as an anchor point for unfolding the rich intellectual and historical context shaping the way these structures were developed and deployed. The book is richly illustrated with archival materials—a feat in itself, given that the documentation for temporary buildings, particularly before 1900, is scarce. These drawings, photos, and paintings are supplemented with 20 worm’s eye views of key buildings, carefully composed by a team of Waterloo architecture school students and alumni.  Thomas Thomaszoon, View of the headquarters of the Spanish in the Huis tea Kleef during the siege of Haarlem, 1572-73. Collection of Noord-Hollands Archief, Haarlem; courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt Like many vernacular buildings, temporary structures larger than a tent, designed to house soldiers in the field, have existed at least since Ancient Rome. One of the first visual accounts of barracks came centuries later, in the winter of 1572, when the Spanish laid siege to the Dutch city of Haarlem, and cartographer Thomas Thomaszoon sketched the position of dozens of Spain’s wood-and-straw structures outside the city. The siege was successful, but only a few years later, the Dutch Republic gained the upper hand. As part of the creation of a standing army, they began to develop more precise instructions for the layout of camps, including the construction of temporary barracks. Antoine-François Omet des Foucaux, Barrack constructed in Hendaye, France, 1793. From Jean-Charles Krafft, Plans, coupes et élévations de diverses productions de l’art de la charpente, 1805. Collection of Bilbliothèque Nationale de France, Paris. Courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt The Napoleonic army made use of barracks in both military camps and training camps; by the mid-1800s, the construction of various barrack types was detailed in field construction manuals issued to officers in many European armies. During the Crimean War, over 3,500 prefabricated barracks were manufactured in a Gloucester factory, as a solution to the appalling conditions at the front. But when the structures arrived at port, British forces were not able to unload and erect them—the materials for a single building weighed more than two tons, and each would require 60 horsesto transport to camp on the muddy roads.  The USArmy’s Lincoln Hospital, Washington, DC, 1865. Collection of Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Courtesy Robert Jan van Pelt Prefabrication was also used, with somewhat more success, towards the end of the conflict to erect field hospitals designed by British engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel with a priority on cross-ventilation to limit the spread of disease. Low mortality rates from similar structures led to a continued preference for “barrack hospitals” based on groupings of low-slung, well-ventilated pavilions, rather than conceived as single grand structures. The model was further refined with the addition of primitive underfloor heating and ridge ventilation by former surgeon William A. Hammond for the Union Army during the American Civil War.  Barrack hospitals were constructed for civilian use, as well. Following the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian war, such designs were built to house patients with infectious diseases in Berlin and proposed as a means to bring professional medical care to Germany’s rural areas. A barracks-inspired hospital was built in Saint Petersburg, Russia, in 1889, and continues to be operational.  If the barrack as an accommodation for the sick is a progressive tale, the 19th-century history of the barrack is equally checkered by the building type’s use for prisoner accommodation, including in the penal colonies of Australia and French Guiana. In North America, barracks were used in an internment camp for Native American Dakotas, and Civil War-era Union barracks at Camp Douglas were used to house Confederate prisoners. The oldest preserved barrack in the world may be in Canada, at Grosse Isle national park. Here, barrack-style quarantine sheds were used to detain thousands of Irish immigrant families during the typhoid fever epidemic of 1846-47, and their damp, fetid conditions contributed to many deaths—an episode Van Pelt describes as a “blot on the national consciousness of Canada.” A single Doecker Hut contains an operation room, pharmacy and hospital management office. The prefabricated, portable hospitals were developed in 1885, and used around the world, including in the First World War. In America, they were marketed for managing epidemics in the wake of the 1892 typhus fever outbreak in New York. Courtesy Berlin State Library and Robert Jan van Pelt   At the turn of the 19th century, the prefabricated portable barrack came to the fore with the manufacturing of the Doecker barracks, by Christoph & Unmack, a firm based in Copenhagen and Germany. Developed by a former military officer-turned-tentmaker, the technically sophisticated model used large rectangular frames that could be clipped together, and covered with “felt-cardboard”—dense felt pressed onto canvas and impregnated with linseed oil. The self-supporting structures proved easy to set up, dismount, and transport, making them suitable for both military applications—and, with little modification, for humanitarian aid. The Red Cross deployed Doecker barracks for use as field hospitals in Manchuria and Yokohama during the Russo-Japanese War.  The Barrack, 1572-1914 wraps up in in the early 20th century, but with the note that in the ensuing decades until 1945, millions of barracks were produced by many of the world’s major nations—and that most of these were erected in barbed-wire-ringed compounds. “This is the period in which tens if not hundreds of millions of people, many of whom were civilians, were forced to live in barracks, as refugees, as expellees, as civilian internees, as forced laborers, as prisoners or war, as concentration camp prisoners, and as people made homeless by the destruction wrought by war,” writes Van Pelt. Up until 1914, he notes, this building type largely carried a sense of achievement—an image that would change sharply with the Age of the Camps. But although a WWII barrack was responsible for instigating Van Pelt’s initial investigation, that time period will need to await a second volume on this simple building type with a rich, complex, and complicated history.   As appeared in the June 2025 issue of Canadian Architect magazine  The post Book Review: The Barrack, 1572-1914—Chapters in the History of Emergency Architecture appeared first on Canadian Architect. #book #review #barrack #15721914chapters #history

Thrustmaster T598 + Hypercar Wheel review: a great value PC/PS5 sim racing wheel and pedals built on novel tech Direct axial drive impresses, despite limited software and a firmly mid stock wheel. Image credit: Digital Foundry Review by Will Judd Deputy Editor, Digital Foundry Published on June 1, 2025 We've seen an explosion in the number of affordable direct driveracing wheels over the past couple of years, with Fanatec and Moza offering increasingly inexpensive options that still deliver the precise, quick and long-lasting force feedback that cheaper gear- or belt-driven wheels can't match. Now, Thrustmaster is intruding on that territory with the T598, a PlayStation/PC direct drive wheel, wheel base and pedals that costs just £449/That's on a similar level to the PC-only £459/Moza R5 bundle and the €399/Fanatec CSL DD bundle, so how does the newcomer compare? And what's changed from the more expensive T818 we reviewed before? We've been testing the T598 - and the fancy upgraded HyperCar wheel that's available as an upgrade option - for weeks to find out. Our full review follows, so read on - or check out the quick links below to jump to what you're most interested in. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. Thrustmaster T598 wheel base review: direct axial drive vs traditional direct drive Interestingly, the T598 arguably comes with a more advanced DD motor than the more expensive T818 does. It uses a "direct axial drive" versus the standard "direct radial drive", where the magnets are aligned parallel to the wheel shaft rather than perpendicular. This ought to allow for more efficient torque generation, producing less waste heat, minimising precision-sapping magnetic interference and requiring less copper to produce. It also means the T598 can "overshoot" to deliver more than its rated 5nm of constant torque for short periods. However, this design also requires a physically taller yet slimmer enclosure, potentially blocking the view forward and requiring a different bolt pattern to attach the base to your desk or sim racing cockpit - both of which are slight annoyances with the T598.Interestingly, you can also feel a slight vibration and hear a quiet crackling noise emanating from the T598 base while idle - something I haven't heard or felt with other direct drive motors and is reportedly inherent to this design. There's a lot going on inside this wheel base - including some genuine innovation. | Image credit: Thrustmaster/Digital Foundry Thrustmaster has written a pair of white papers to explain why their take on direct driveis better than what came before. Image credit: Thrustmaster In terms of the force feedback itself, Thrustmaster have achieved something quite special here. In some titles with a good force feedback implementation - Assetto Corsa, Assetto Corsa Evo and F1 23 stood out to me here - the wheel feels great, with strong force feedback and plenty of detail. If you run up on a kerb or start to lose traction, you know about it right away and can take corrective action. I also appreciated the way that turning the wheel feels perfectly smooth when turning, without any cogging - the slightly jerky sensation common to low-end and mid-range direct drive motors that corresponds to slight attraction as you pass each magnet. However, balancing this, the wheel's force feedback feels a little less consistent than others I've tested from the likes of Fanatec or Moza at a similar price point, with some games like Project Cars 3 and Forza Motorsport feeling almost bereft of force feedback by comparison. You also have that slight vibration when the wheel is stationary, which is potentially more noticeable than the cogging sensation in traditional DD designs. The overshoot is also a mixed bag - as the sudden jump in torque can feel a little artificial in some scenarios, eg when you're warming your tyres by weaving in F1 before a safety car restart. I'd say that these positives and negatives largely cancel each other out, and you're left with force feedback that is good, way better than non-DD wheels, but not noticeably better than more common radial direct drive designs. Depending on the games you play, either DD style could be preferable. It'll be interesting to see if Thrustmaster are able to tune out some of these negative characteristics through firmware updates - or simply in later products using the same technology. 1 of 7 Caption Attribution Here's how the T598 looks IRL - from the wheel base itself to the default rim, the upgraded Hypercar wheel and the included dual pedals. Click to enlarge. Apart from the novel motor, the rest of the wheel base is fairly standard - there's a smalldisplay on the top for adjusting your settings and seeing in-game info like a rev counter, four large circular buttons buttons, the usual Thrustmaster quick release lock for securing your wheel rim and a small button on the back to turn the wheel base on and off. There are connection options for power, USB and connecting other components like pedals or shifters on the back too. Weirdly, there's no ability to change settings in the PC Thrustmaster Panel app - it just says this functionality is "coming soon!" - so right now you can only use it for updating firmware, testing buttons and changing between profiles. "Coming soon!" starts to become a little less believable six months after the first reviews hit. | Image credit: Digital Foundry Instead, you'll be using the built-in screen for making changes, which works well enough but doesn't provide any allowance for extra information - so you'll be sticking to the four basic pre-made profiles, referring to the manual or checking suggested setups online rather than reading built-in tool tips. You still get access to the full whack of settings here, and of course this works well for PS5/PS4 users who wouldn't expect a software experience anyway, but PC users may be disappointed to learn that there's no intuitive software interface here. I found the Boosted Media YT review of the wheelbase to offer some good insight into what settings you're likely to want to change from their default values. Thrustmaster T598 Sportcar wheel review: a workable default option The Sportcar wheel rim looks good - but a plastic construction and relatively spartan controls make it "OK" at best. The "Sportcar" wheel provided in the bundle is a little less impressive-looking than the base itself, with a plasticky feel throughout and fairly mushy buttons - though the paddles are snappy enough and feel good to use. The usual PS-style face buttons are split into two clumps up top with L2 and R2, which is a bit odd, with four individual directional buttons in the lower left, start/select/PS in the lower middle and four configuration buttons in the lower right. Those configuration buttons require extra explanation, so here we go: the P button at the top swaps between four different pages, indicated with a different colour LED, allowing the remaining three physical buttons to activate up to 12 different functions.There are no rotary encoders or other additional controls here, so PC players that prefer more complicated racing sims may feel a bit underserved by this clunky, cost-saving solution. The 815g wheel is at least sized reasonably, with 300mm circular shape that particularly suits drifting, rally and trucking - though all forms of driving and racing are of course possible. The rubber grips under your hands are reasonably comfortable, but you can still feel seams in various places. Overall, the wheel is possibly the weakest part of the package, but perfectly usable and acceptable for the price point. Thrustmaster Hypercar Wheel Add-On review: true luxury An incredible wheel with premium materials, excellent controls and a more specialised shape. Thrustmaster also sent over the £339/Hypercar wheel rim for testing, which is an upgrade option that uses significantly better materials - leather, alcantara, aluminium and carbon - and offers a huge number of extra controls. Its oval shape feels a bit more responsive for faster vehiclesthat require a quick change of direction, but drifting and rally doesn't feel natural. It supports the same PS4, PS5 and PC platforms as the stock option, but there are no legends printed on the buttons to help you. The difference in quality here is immediately apparent, with much better tactile feedback from the buttons and a huge number of additional controls for adjusting stuff like ERS deployment or brake bias. Each control feels well-placed, even if the T-shaped layout for the face buttons is slightly unnatural at first, and the paddles for shifting and the clutch are particularly well engineered. I also found holding the wheel a bit more comfortable thanks to that flattened out shape, the more premium materials and the absence of bumps or seams anywhere you're likely to hold. It's a huge upgrade in terms of feel and features then, as you'd hope for a wheel rim that costs nearly as much as the entire T598 kit and caboodle. As an upgrade option, I do rate it, though it perhaps makes slightly more sense for T818 owners that have already invested a bit more in the Thrusmaster ecosystem. Regardless, it was this rim that I used for the majority of my time with the T598, and the wheel base feels significantly better with the upgrade. Thrustmaster T598 Raceline pedals review: great feedback, but no clutch and no load cell upgrade offered at present Surprisingly good for two add-in pedals, in terms of feedback and flexibility. The pedals that come with the T598 are surprisingly good, with an accelerator, a brake pedaland no clutch pedal. Each pedal's spring assembly can be pushed into one of three positions to change the amount of pre-load - ie make it a bit softer or harder to press and the pedal plates can be shifted up and down. The narrow dimensions of the metal wheel plate meant that it was impossible to mount directly in the centre of the Playseat Trophy I used for testing, but the slightly off-centre installation I ended up with still worked just fine. They connect using a non-USB connection, so you can't use the pedals with other wheel bases. Using the middle distance setting and the firmer of the two springs for the brake, I found the T598 produced good results, on par or perhaps even a tad better than other metal-construction Hall Effect position sensorpedals I've tested such as the Moza SR-P Lite and Fanatec CSL. Braking is the critical point here, as you want to be able to feel when the brake has mechanically reached its threshold and then modulate your inputs from there, and the T598 pedals do allow for this quite easily. They're also not so hard to actuate that you end up having to hard-mount them to a sim rig for good results, and the included carpet spikes are reasonably effective in keeping the pedals in place. Presumably, it ought to be possible to add on a load cell brake pedal down the line to upgrade to a properthree pedal setup. For the F1 style driving that I prefer, the clutch pedal isn't used anyway, so it wasn't a massive issue for me - and we frequently see companies like Moza and Fanatec drop the clutch pedal on these aggessively priced bundles so Thrustmaster aren't losing ground by following suit. Thrustmaster T598 final verdict: a competitive £450 package with potential For PlayStation owners, this is an incredible value pickup that ranks among the cheapest DD options - and PC owners ought to consider it too. For £449/the Thrustmaster T598 is an excellent value direct drive wheel and pedal bundle for PlayStation and PC with some relatively minor quirks. The wheel base is powerful, detailed and responsive in most games, with some advantages over traditional DD designs but also some disadvantages - notably the taller shape and a slight hum/vibration while stationary. Traditional DD designs from the likes of Fanatec and Moza can offer more reliable force feedback that works over a wider range of games, cars and tracks, while also benefitting from better PC software, but there's certainly potential for Thrustmaster to improve here. The included wheel feels a bit cheap, with a predominantly plastic design, spongey buttons and a slightly odd layout, but the full circle shape and full PS5/PS4 compatibility is most welcome. Upgrading to the HyperCar wheel provides a huge uptick in materials, tactile feedback and number of controls, though this does come at a fairly steep price of £339/If you plan to use the T598 for years and have the budget for it, this is a super upgrade to aim for. The included Raceline LTE pedals are the most surprising element for me. These consist of only an accelerator and a brake with only moderate adjustability and a narrow base plate, but they feel great to use, are made from durable metal with HE sensors, and only really lose out to significantly more expensive load cell options. For an add-in for a relatively cheap DD bundle, they're a solid inclusion, and I hope Thrustmaster release a load cell brake pedal for users to upgrade to a better three-pedal setup later. Overall, it's an competitive first outing for Thrustmaster with the T598 and direct axial drive, and I'm curious to see where the company - and the tech - goes from here. With Fanatec still on the rebuild after being acquired by Corsair and Moza's offerings being hard to order online in some regions, Thrustmaster has a golden opportunity to seize a share of the mid-range and entry-level sim racing market, and the T598 is a positive start. #thrustmaster #t598 #hypercar #wheel #review

Let’s get this out of the way: We constantly live in uncertain times. Periods of tranquility are actually an aberration, if not an illusion. The relationship between marketing budgets and economic volatility has always been complex. What we’re witnessing isn’t just the usual ebb and flow of consumer confidence or standard market corrections. It’s an unprecedented convergence of tariff confusion, inflationary pressures, supply chain disruptions, and debt refinancing challenges. As I talk to CMOs and marketing leaders across industries, one word keeps surfacing: paralysis. Decision makers find themselves frozen, unsure whether to commit to long-term advertising contracts, unable to accurately forecast costs, and struggling to craft messaging that resonates in a consumer landscape where spending power is increasingly unpredictable. The historical perspective: Who thrives in downturns? When I look back at previous economic contractions—particularly 2008 and 2020—a clear pattern emerges that separates survivors from thrivers. In 2008, as financial markets collapsed, brands like Amazon, Netflix, and Hyundai didn’t retreat. They advanced. Netflix invested heavily in its streaming service during the financial crisis, laying the groundwork for its eventual dominance. Hyundai introduced its ground-breaking “Assurance Program,” allowing customers to return newly purchased vehicles if they lost their jobs—a true masterstroke that increased Hyundai’s market share while competitors were seeing double-digit sales declines. The 2020 pandemic presented similar divergent paths. While many brands slashed marketing budgets in panic, companies like Zoom and DoorDash significantly increased their marketing investments, recognizing the unique moment to capture market share when consumers were rapidly forming new habits. The common thread? These companies didn’t view marketing as a discretionary expense to be cut during uncertainty. They saw it as a strategic lever, one that should be pulled harder during hard times. 4 strategic approaches for the uncertainty-conscious marketer Here’s what the most forward-thinking marketers are doing now to navigate the choppy waters ahead: They’re embracing flexibility in all media contracts. The days of rigid, long-term commitments are giving way to more agile arrangements that allow for budget reallocation as economic conditions shift. This means negotiating pause clauses, shorter commitment windows, and performance-based terms that protect all contracted parties. Budgets are shifting toward measurable, adaptable channels. While social media and traditional media face the deepest anticipated cuts, digital advertising continues to gain market share despite economic concerns. Digital is projected to encompass up to 79% of total ad spend by 2030, up from its current 67%. Message content is being entirely rethought. In the face of economic anxiety, brands need messaging that acknowledges reality while providing genuine value. We’re seeing this play out in automotive advertising, where some manufacturers are emphasizing their American manufacturing credentials. Ford’s “From America, For America” campaign represents a strategic positioning that resonates in an era of tariff concerns. As Hyundai, in 2008, these advertisers are using the moment to emphasize their particular brand’s appeal. AI is being leveraged not just for cost cutting but for scenario planning. The most sophisticated marketing teams are using AI to model multiple economic outcomes and prepare messaging, budget allocations, and channel strategies for each scenario. The creative reset: How agencies have already adapted It’s worth noting that the industry isn’t starting from scratch in facing these challenges. Client behavior on creative development has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past several years. The best independent agencies have already restructured their operations in response. Gone are the days of lengthy creative development cycles and rigid campaign frameworks. Anticipating these changes years ago, independent shops have largely embraced agile methodologies that align perfectly with today’s economic realities. In many ways, the independent agency sector has already prepared for exactly this kind of destabilizing environment. They’ve built their businesses around speed and adaptability rather than scale and standardization. As such, they’re uniquely positioned to help steer brands through bumps ahead without sacrificing creative impact or market presence. Brand versus performance in uncertain times Perhaps the most critical strategic question facing marketers is how to balance brand building against performance marketing when budgets contract. Historical data consistently shows that brands maintaining or increasing their share of voice during downturns emerge in stronger positions when markets recover. Yet short-term revenue pressures make performance marketing irresistibly tempting when every dollar must be justified. The smart play here isn’t choosing one over the other but reimagining how all of these factors work together. Performance marketing can be designed to build brand equity simultaneously. Brand marketing can incorporate more direct response elements. The artificial wall between these disciplines must come down to survive economic headwinds. Opportunity within adversity The brands that will emerge strongest from this period of uncertainty won’t be those with the largest budgets, but those with the clearest strategic vision, the most agile execution, and the courage to maintain presence when competitors retreat. Economic uncertainty doesn’t change the fundamental truth that share of voice leads to share of market. It simply raises the stakes and rewards those who can maintain their voice when others fall silent. Looking at the latter half of 2025, the marketing leaders who view this period not as a time to hide but as a rare opportunity to stand out will be the ones writing the success stories we’ll be studying for years to come. Tim Ringel is global CEO of Meet The People. #marketing #age #economic #uncertainty

Ever dreamt of wandering through the vast collections of a major museum in its rawest presentation — the storage warehouse? London's new V&A East Storehouse destination attempts to offer visitors an akin experience when it officially opens this Saturday, May 31st. Photo: Hufton+Crow, courtesy V&ADesigned by Diller Scofidio + Renfro, the facility is both a working store and public attraction, built to house over 250,000 objects, 350,000 books, and 1,000 archives in a four-story building that spans over 173,000 square feet. Photo: Hufton+Crow, courtesy V&AThe collection includes works from an eclectic range of disciplines and time periods, from ancient Egyptian footwear through medieval art to Mid-Century furniture and contemporary avant-garde fashion items.  Photo: Hufton+Crow, courtesy V&ASix large-scale objects will be on display for the first time after spending decades in the hidden kind of storage, such as Frank Lloyd Wright's unique 1930s Kaufmann Office interior, a full-scale... #photos #first #look #inside #dsr039s