In 1989 a computer scientist argued that more functionality in software actually lowers usability and practicality — leading to the counterintuitive proposition that "worse is better". But is that still true? Python's original creator Guido van Rossum addressed the question last month in a lightning talk at the annual Python Language Summit 2025. Guido started by recounting earlier periods of Python development from 35 years ago, where he used UNIX "almost exclusively" and thus "Python was greatly influenced by UNIX's 'worse is better' philosophy"... "The fact thatwasn't perfect encouraged many people to start contributing. All of the code was straightforward, there were no thoughts of optimization... These early contributors also now had a stake in the language;was also their baby"... Guido contrasted early development to how Python is developed now: "features that take years to produce from teams of software developers paid by big tech companies. The static type system requires an academic-level understanding of esoteric type system features." And this isn't just Python the language, "third-party projects like numpy are maintained by folks who are paid full-time to do so.... Now we have a huge community, but very few people, relatively speaking, are contributing meaningfully." Guido asked whether the expectation for Python contributors going forward would be that "you had to write a perfect PEP or create a perfect prototype that can be turned into production-ready code?" Guido pined for the "old days" where feature development could skip performance or feature-completion to get something into the hands of the community to "start kicking the tires". "Do we have to abandon 'worse is better' as a philosophy and try to make everything as perfect as possible?" Guido thought doing so "would be a shame", but that he "wasn't sure how to change it", acknowledging that core developers wouldn't want to create features and then break users with future releases. Guido referenced David Hewitt's PyO3 talk about Rust and Python, and that development "was using worse is better," where there is a core feature set that works, and plenty of work to be done and open questions. "That sounds a lot more fun than working on core CPython", Guido paused, "...not that I'd ever personally learn Rust. Maybe I should give it a try after," which garnered laughter from core developers. "Maybe we should do more of that: allowing contributors in the community to have a stake and care". of this story at Slashdot. #python #creator #guido #van #rossum

DoorsChristian Marclay Institute of Contemporary Art Boston Through September 1, 2025Brooklyn Museum Through April 12, 2026On the screen, a movie clip plays of a character entering through a door to leave out another. It cuts to another clip of someone else doing the same thing over and over, all sourced from a panoply of Western cinema. The audience, sitting for an unknown amount of time, watches this shape-shifting protagonist from different cultural periods come and go, as the film endlessly loops. So goes Christian Marclay’s latest single-channel film, Doors, currently exhibited for the first time in the United States at the Institute of Contemporary Art Boston.. Assembled over ten years, the film is a dizzying feat, a carefully crafted montage of film clips revolving around the simple premise of someone entering through a door and then leaving out a door. In the exhibition, Marclay writes, “Doors are fascinating objects, rich with symbolism.” Here, he shows hundreds of them, examining through film how the simple act of moving through a threshold multiplied endlessly creates a profoundly new reading of what said threshold signifies. On paper, this may sound like an extremely jarring experience. But Marclay—a visual artist, composer, and DJ whose previous works such as The Clockinvolved similar mega-montages of disparate film clips—has a sensitive touch. The sequences feel incredibly smooth, the montage carefully constructed to mimic continuity as closely as possible. This is even more impressive when one imagines the constraints that a door’s movement offers; it must open and close a certain direction, with particular types of hinges or means of swinging. It makes the seamlessness of the film all the more fascinating to dissect. When a tiny wooden doorframe cuts to a large double steel door, my brain had no issue at all registering a sense of continued motion through the frame—a form of cinematic magic. Christian Marclay, Doors, 2022. Single-channel video projection. Watching the clips, there seemed to be no discernible meta narrative—simply movement through doors. Nevertheless, Marclay is a master of controlling tone. Though the relentlessness of watching the loops does create an overall feeling of tension that the film is clearly playing on, there are often moments of levity that interrupt, giving visitors a chance to breathe. The pacing too, swings from a person rushing in and out, to a slow stroll between doors in a corridor. It leaves one musing on just how ubiquitous this simple action is, and how mutable these simple acts of pulling a door and stepping inside can be. Sometimes mundane, sometimes thrilling, sometimes in anticipation, sometimes in search—Doors invites us to reflect on our own interaction with these objects, and with the very act of stepping through a doorframe. Much of the experience rests on the soundscape and music, which is equally—if not more heavily—important in creating the transition across clips. Marclay’s previous work leaned heavily on his interest in aural media; this added dimension only enriches Doors and elevates it beyond a formal visual study of clips that match each other. The film bleeds music from one scene to another, sometimes prematurely, to make believable the movement of one character across multiple movies. This overlap of sounds is essentially an echo of the space we left behind and are entering into. We as the audience almost believe—even if just for a second—that the transition is real. The effect is powerful and calls to mind several references. No doubt Doors owes some degree of inspiration to the lineage of surrealist art, perhaps in the work of Magritte or Duchamp. For those steeped in architecture, one may think of Bernard Tschumi’s Manhattan Transcripts, where his transcriptions of events, spaces, and movements similarly both shatter and call to attention simple spatial sequences. One may also be reminded of the work of Situationist International, particularly the psychogeography of Guy Debord. I confess that my first thought was theequally famous door-chase scene in Monsters, Inc. But regardless of what corollaries one may conjure, Doors has a wholly unique feel. It is simplistic and singular in constructing its webbed world. Installation view, Christian Marclay: Doors, the Institute of Contemporary Art/Boston, 2025.But what exactly are we to take away from this world? In an interview with Artforum, Marclay declares, “I’m building in people’s minds an architecture in which to get lost.” The clip evokes a certain act of labyrinthian mapping—or perhaps a mode of perpetual resetting. I began to imagine this almost as a non-Euclidean enfilade of sorts where each room invites you to quickly grasp a new environment and then very quickly anticipate what may be in the next. With the understanding that you can’t backtrack, and the unpredictability of the next door taking you anywhere, the film holds you in total suspense. The production of new spaces and new architecture is activated all at once in the moment someone steps into a new doorway. All of this is without even mentioning the chosen films themselves. There is a degree to which the pop-culture element of Marclay’s work makes certain moments click—I can’t help but laugh as I watch Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love exit a door and emerge as Bette Davis in All About Eve. But to a degree, I also see the references being secondary, and certainly unneeded to understand the visceral experience Marclay crafts. It helps that, aside from a couple of jarring character movements or one-off spoken jokes, the movement is repetitive and universal. Doors runs on a continuous loop. I sat watching for just under an hour before convincing myself that I would never find any appropriate or correct time to leave. Instead, I could sit endlessly and reflect on each character movement, each new reveal of a room. Is the door the most important architectural element in creating space? Marclay makes a strong case for it with this piece. Harish Krishnamoorthy is an architectural and urban designer based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Bangalore, India. He is an editor at PAIRS. #christian #marclay #explores #universe #thresholds

Best of Summer Game Fest 2025 trailers – Mortal Shell 2, Game Of Thrones and more GameCentral Published June 7, 2025 3:33am Updated June 7, 2025 7:01am The Resident Evil and friends showWatch all the most interesting trailers from the biggest summer preview event of the year, including Sonic Racing: CrossWorlds, Code Vein 2, and Wu-Tang: Rise Of The Deceiver. You never know what you’re going to get with Summer Game Fest, the would-be replacement for E3 hosted by The Games Awards creator Geoff Keighley. Some years there’s tons of big name reveals and some years it’s mostly just AA and indie titles. This is one of those years. That doesn’t mean there was nothing of interest, but the mic drop reveal at the end of the two hour long show was Resident Evil Requiem, and it was by far the biggest game to be featured. Despite being only a day after the Nintendo Switch 2 launch, and Nintendo registered as a partner, the only time the console was even mentioned was a brief ad for Cyberpunk 2077: Ultimate Edition. Although that does probably increase the chances of a Nintendo Direct later in the month. There were a few notable trends for the games at this year’s Summer Game Fest: a lot of Soulslike titles with dark grey visuals, a lot of anime games, and plenty of live service titles still trying their luck at hitting the big time. So, if the thought of that doesn’t appeal you may find the pickings relatively thin. Although there’s also Jurassic World Evolution 3 and the Deadpool VR game if you fancy something different. Mortal Shell 2 Expert, exclusive gaming analysis Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning. The first annoucement was Mortal Shell 2, a sequel to the 2020 Dark Souls clone that is still one of our favourite Soulslikes not made by FromSoftware. Developed by a mere 30-man teamthe sequel seems to be going for a more overt horror atmosphere, while there was a lot more gun combat than usual for the genre. It’s out sometime in 2026. Death Stranding 2: On The Beach It’s never a surprise to see Hideo Kojima at a Geoff Keighley event but the cut scene he decided to show for Death Stranding 2 was not exactly the most enthralling. It featured Luca Marinelli as Neil and his real-life wife Alyssa Jung as therapist Lucy, arguing about the fact that he’s forgotten who she is. Neil is apparently the villain of the piece, and the one dressed up in Solid Snake cosplay in some of the previous images. The game itself is out in just a few weeks, on June 26. Sonic Racing: CrossWorlds Sega had a strange little dig at Mario Kart World during their reveal of Sonic’s latest kart racer, pointing out that it has cross-play… even though Mario Kart is obviously only on Nintendo formats. The game looked good, but the focus of the demonstration was crossover characters from other games, including Hatsune Miku, Ichiban Kasuga from Like A Dragon, Joker from Persona 5, and Steve from Minecraft. The game will be released on September 25 for every format imaginable. Code Vein 2 We’re really not sure the art style in this unexpected sequel to the 2019 Soulslike works very well, with its anime characters and realistic backdrops, but at least it’s something a bit different. The original didn’t seem quite successful enough to justify a follow-up, but the action looks good and at least it’s one Soulslike that’s not copying FromSoftware’s visuals as well as its gameplay. It’ll be released for Xbox Series X, PlayStation 5, and PC sometime next year. Game Of Thrones: War For Westeros It does seem madness that there’s never been a console action game based on Game Of Thrones. There still isn’t, but at least this real-time strategy game isn’t just some seedy mobile title. Unfortunately, the pre-rendered trailer never showed a hint of any gameplay, so there’s no clue as to what it’s actually like, but apparently it involves ‘ruthless free-for-all battles where trust is fleeting and power is everything’. It’s out next year and seems to be PC-only, which is a shame as it could have worked as a spiritual sequel to EA’s old Lord Of The Rings real-time strategies. Onimusha: Way Of The Sword It’s been a very busy week for Capcom this week, with Pragmata re-unveiled at the State of Play on Wednesday and Resident Evil Requiem being the big reveal at the end of Summer Game Fest. But we also got a new gameplay trailer for the reboot of Onimusha, which looks extremely pretty and continued the series’ tradition of not even trying to have anyone sound like they’re actually from Japan. There’s no release date yet, but it’s out next year on Xbox Series X/S, PlayStation 5, and PC. Felt That: Boxing One of the strangest reveals of the show was what seems to be a Muppet version of Punch-Out!!, with the potty-mouthed puppets taking part in what also probably counts as a homage to Rocky. The gameplay does seem almost identical to Nintendo’s old boxing game but hopefully there’s a bit more to it than that. The game doesn’t have a release date and is currently scheduled only for PC. ARC Raiders Expected to be the next big thing in online shooters, the only thing ARC Raiders has been missing is a release date, but it finally got that at Summer Game Fest. It’ll be out on October 30 for Xbox Series X/S, PlayStation 5, and PC, which is interesting because that’s right around the time you’d expect this year’s Call Of Duty to come out – and the new Battlefield, if EA launches it this year. ARC Raiders’ strong word of mouth gives it a head start though, which could make for an interesting autumn shootout. Out Of Words When we interviewed Jospeh Fares about Split Fiction, we asked him why he thought no one had ever tried to copy his games, despite their huge success. He didn’t know but finally another developer seems to have wondered the same thing and Out Of Words does look very reminiscent of It Takes Two in particular. The hand-crafted, stop motion visuals are neat though and it’s definitely one to watch, even if it doesn’t have a release date yet. Lego Voyagers Another game taking inspiration from Split Fiction, at least in the sense that it has a friend pass that means only one person has to own a copy of the game to play online co-op. It’s by the creators of the very good Lego Builder’s Journey and rather than being based on Lego licensed sets, or any other established toy line, it’s all about solving puzzles by building Lego structures. If it’s as good as Lego Builder’s Journey it’ll be doing very well indeed, although there’s no release date yet. Mixtape Between South Of Midnight and The Midnight Walk, and Out Of Words, stop motion animation Is suddenly very popular for video games. The art style in this new game from Annapurna was notably different though, and while we’re not entirely sure what’s going on in terms of the gameplay the 80s soundtrack sounds like it’ll be the best thing since GTA: Vice City. Acts Of Blood Made by just nine people in Indonesia, this very bloody looking beat ‘em-up looked extremely impressive, and also very reminiscent of the violence in Oldboy. We didn’t quite gather what was going on in terms of the story but we’re sure revenge has something to do with it, as you beat down hordes of goons and get a Mortal Kombat style view of an opponent’s skeleton, when you manage to put a big enough dent in it. It’ll be out on PC next summer. Scott Pilgrim EX We can’t say we’ve ever been fans of Scott Pilgrim, either the comics or the film, but the 2D graphics for this new scrolling beat ‘em-up look gorgeous. It’s clearly intended as follow-up to Ubisoft’s film tie-in from 2010, which was well received by many, and is by the same team behind Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Shredder’s Revenge and Marvel Cosmic Invasion. It’ll be out on current and last gen consoles and PC next year. Hitman: World of Assassination Although 007 First Light did get a quick name check on stage, developer and publisher IO Interactive instead spent their time talking about Agent 47 in MindsEye and Mads Mikkelsen in Hitman: World of Assassination. He’ll be reprising the role of Le Chiffre as the latest elusive target in the game – a special character, usually played by a famous actor, that is only available to assassinate for 30 days, starting from today. That’s neat but it’s also interesting that it implied IO has a considerable amount of leeway with the Bond licence and what they can do with it. Lego Party! The other Lego game to be unveiled was an outrageously obvious clone of Mario Party, only with 300 different minifigures instead of the Mushroom Kingdom crew. These can be rearranged in trillions of different combinations, in order to compete for stars golden bricks and play 60 different mini-games. We’re big fans of Mario Partyso if this manages to be as fun as Nintendo’s games then we’re all for it. It’ll be release for both consoles and PC this year. Blighted A new game from Drinkbox Studios, makers of Guacamelee! and Nobody Saves The World is immediately of interest but this Diablo-esque role-player looks a bit more serious and horror tinged than their previous games. It also seems to be channelling Hades creator Supergiant Games, none of which is a bad thing. Whether it’s a Metroidvania or not isn’t clear but at certainly points in the trailer it definitely seems to have co-op. It’s not certain which formats it’s coming to but it’s out on PC next year. Infinitesimals A lot of people are probably going to compare this to online survival game Grounded, but the plot makes it sound like a more serious version of Pikmin, with aliens visiting Earth and battling with both insects and some sort of mechanical robot menace, as you search for your lost crew. It’s out for consoles and PC next year and while there’s very little concrete information on the gameplay the visuals certainly look impressive. Wu-Tang: Rise Of The Deceiver Whether you care about the Wu-Tang Clan or not this had some of the nicest visuals of any game at the show. They seemed fairly obviously influenced by the Into The Spider-Verse movies, but that’s no bad thing, and we’re only surprised that hasn’t happened before. The idea of a Wu-Tan action role-playing game was leaked quite a while ago, where it was described as Diablo meets Hi-Fi Rush, which does seem to fit with what you see in the trailer. There’s no release date so far. Into The Unwell There were a lot of great looking games at the show, but this might have been our favourite, with its 40s style animation reminiscent of a 3D Cuphead. It’s a bit hard to tell exactly what’s going on with the story but you seem to be playing an alcohol abusing cartoon character who’s been tricked by the Devil into… taking part in a third person action roguelite, that also has three-player co-op. There’s no release date but if it looks as good as it plays it’ll be doing very well indeed. Stranger than Heaven The final reveal before Resident Evil Requiem was what was previously codenamed Project Century and while it looks like a Yakuza spin-off it’s not actually part of the franchise, even though it’s by the same developer. Sega didn’t explain much, but when the game was first introduced it was set in Japan in 1915 and yet this trailer is set in 1943. More Trending Given the codename that probably implies you’re playing in multiple time periods across the whole century. There was no mention of formats or a release date though, so it’s probably still quite a while away from release. Resident Evil Requiem was the biggest news of the nightEmail gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter. To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here. For more stories like this, check our Gaming page. GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy #best #summer #game #fest #trailers

When Russian troops invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022, Russia’s datacentre sector was one of the fastest-growing segments of the country’s IT industry, with annual growth rates in the region of 10-12%. However, with the conflict resulting in the imposition of Western sanctions against Russia and an outflow of US-based tech companies from the country, including Apple and Microsoft, optimism about the sector’s potential for further growth soon disappeared. In early March 2025, it was reported that Google had disconnected from traffic exchange points and datacentres in Russia, leading to concerns about how this could negatively affect the speed of access to some Google services for Russian users. Initially, there was hope that domestic technology and datacentre providers might be able to plug the gaps left by the exodus of the US tech giants, but it seems they could not keep up with the hosting demands of Russia’s increasingly digital economy. Oleg Kim, director of the hardware systems department at Russian IT company Axoft, says the departure of foreign cloud providers and equipment manufacturers has led to a serious shortage of compute capacity in Russia. This is because the situation resulted in a sharp, initial increase in demand for domestic datacentres, but Russian providers simply did not have time to expand their capacities on the required scale, continues Kim. According to the estimates of Key Point, one of Russia’s largest datacentre networks, meeting Russia’s demand for datacentres will require facilities with a total capacity of 30,000 racks to be built each year over the next five years. On top of this, it has also become more costly to build datacentres in Russia. Estimates suggest that prior to 2022, the cost of a datacentre rack totalled 100,000 rubles, but now exceeds 150,000 rubles. And analysts at Forbes Russia expect these figures will continue to grow, due to rising logistics costs and the impact the war is having on the availability of skilled labour in the construction sector. The impact of these challenges is being keenly felt by users, with several of the country’s large banks experiencing serious problems when finding suitable locations for their datacentres. Sberbank is among the firms affected, with its chairperson, German Gref, speaking out previously about how the bank is in need of a datacentre with at least 200MW of capacity, but would ideally need 300-400MW to address its compute requirements. Stanislav Bliznyuk, chairperson of T-Bank, says trying to build even two 50MW datacentres to meet its needs is proving problematic. “Finding locations where such capacity and adequate tariffs are available is a difficult task,” he said. about datacentre developments North Lincolnshire Council has received a planning permission application for another large-scale datacentre development, in support of its bid to become an AI Growth Zone A proposal to build one of the biggest datacentres in Europe has been submitted to Hertsmere Borough Council, and already has the support of the technology secretary and local councillors. The UK government has unveiled its 50-point AI action plan, which commits to building sovereign artificial intelligence capabilities and accelerating AI datacentre developments – but questions remain about the viability of the plans. Despite this, T-Bank is establishing its own network of data processing centres – the first of which should open in early 2027, he confirmed in November 2024. Kirill Solyev, head of the engineering infrastructure department of the Softline Group of Companies, who specialise in IT, says many large Russian companies are resorting to building their own datacentres – because compute capacity is in such short supply. The situation is, however, complicated by the lack of suitable locations for datacentres in the largest cities of Russia – Moscow and St Petersburg. “For example, to build a datacentre with a capacity of 60MW, finding a suitable site can take up to three years,” says Solyev. “In Moscow, according to preliminary estimates, there are about 50MW of free capacity left, which is equivalent to 2-4 large commercial datacentres. “The capacity deficit only in the southern part of the Moscow region is predicted at 564MW by 2030, and up to 3.15GW by 2042.” As a result, datacentre operators and investors are now looking for suitable locations outside of Moscow and St Petersburg, and seeking to co-locate new datacentres in close proximity to renewable energy sources. And this will be important as demand for datacentre capacity in Russia is expected to increase, as it is in most of the rest of the world, due to the growing use of artificial intelligencetools and services. The energy-intensive nature of AI workloads will put further pressure on operators that are already struggling to meet the compute capacity demands of their customers. Speaking at the recent Ural Forum on cyber security in finance, Alexander Kraynov, director of AI technology development at Yandex, says solving the energy consumption issue of AI datacentres will not be easy. “The world is running out of electricity, including for AI, while the same situation is observed in Russia,” he said. “In order to ensure a stable energy supply of a newly built large datacentre, we will need up to one year.” According to a recent report of the Russian Vedomosti business paper, as of April 2024, Russian datacentres have used about 2.6GW, which is equivalent to about 1% of the installed capacity of the Unified Energy System of Russia. Accommodating AI workloads will also mean operators will need to purchase additional equipment, including expensive accelerators based on graphic processing units and higher-performing data storage systems. The implementation of these plans and the viability of these purchases is likely to be seriously complicated by the current sanctions regime against Russia. That said, Russia’s prime minister, Mikhail Mishustin, claims this part of the datacentre supply equation is being partially solved by an uptick in the domestic production of datacentre kit. According to the Mishustin, more than half of the server equipment and industrial storage and information processing systems needed for datacentres are already being produced in Russia – and these figures will continue to grow. The government also plans to provide additional financial support to the industry, as – to date – building datacentres in Russia has been prevented by relatively long payback periods, of up to 10 years in some cases, of such projects. One of the possible support measures on offer could include the subsidisation of at least part of the interest rates on loans to datacentre developers and operators. At the same time, though, the government’s actions in other areas have made it harder for operators to build new facilities. For example, in March 2025, the Russian government significantly tightened the existing norms for the establishment of new datacentres in the form of new rules for the design of data processing centres, which came into force after the approval by the Russian Ministry of Construction. According to Nikita Tsaplin, CEO of Russian hosting provider RUVDS, the rules led to additional bureaucracy in the sector. And, according to his predictions, that situation can extend the construction cycle of a datacentre from around five years to seven years. The government’s intervention here was to prevent the installation of servers in residential areas, such as garages, but it looks set to complicate an already complex situation – prompting questions about whether Russia’s datacentre market will ever reach its full potential. #conflict #putting #russias #datacentre #market

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