Hi, friends! Welcome to Installer No. 87, your guide to the best and Verge-iest stuff in the world. (If you’re new here, welcome, happy It’s Officially Too Hot Now Week, and also you can read all the old editions at the Installer homepage.) This week, I’ve been reading about Sabrina Carpenter and Khaby Lame and intimacy coordinators, finally making a dent in Barbarians at the Gate, watching all the Ben Schwartz and Friends I can find on YouTube, planning my days with the new Finalist beta, recklessly installing all the Apple developer betas after WWDC, thoroughly enjoying Dakota Johnson’s current press tour, and trying to clear all my inboxes before I go on parental leave. It’s… going.I also have for you a much-awaited new browser, a surprise update to a great photo editor, a neat trailer for a meh-looking movie, a classic Steve Jobs speech, and much more. Slightly shorter issue this week, sorry; there’s just a lot going on, but I didn’t want to leave y’all hanging entirely. Oh, and: we’ll be off next week, for Juneteenth, vacation, and general summer chaos reasons. We’ll be back in full force after that, though! Let’s get into it.(As always, the best part of Installer is your ideas and tips. What do you want to know more about? What awesome tricks do you know that everyone else should? What app should everyone be using? Tell me everything: installer@theverge.com. And if you know someone else who might enjoy Installer, forward it to them and tell them to subscribe here.)The DropDia. I know there are a lot of Arc fans here in the Installerverse, and I know you, like me, will have a lot of feelings about the company’s new and extremely AI-focused browser. Personally, I don’t see leaving Arc anytime soon, but there are some really fascinating ideas (and nice design touches) in Dia already. Snapseed 3.0. I completely forgot Snapseed even existed, and now here’s a really nice update with a bunch of new editing tools and a nice new redesign! As straightforward photo editors go, this is one of the better ones. The new version is only on iOS right now, but I assume it’s heading to Android shortly.“I Tried To Make Something In America.” I was first turned onto the story of the Smarter Scrubber by a great Search Engine episode, and this is a great companion to the story about what it really takes to bring manufacturing back to the US. And why it’s hard to justify.. That link, and the trailer, will only do anything for you if you have a newer iPhone. But even if you don’t care about the movie, the trailer — which actually buzzes in sync with the car’s rumbles and revs — is just really, really cool. Android 16. You can’t get the cool, colorful new look just yet or the desktop mode I am extremely excited about — there’s a lot of good stuff in Android 16 but most of it is coming later. Still, Live Updates look good, and there’s some helpful accessibility stuff, as well.The Infinite Machine Olto. I am such a sucker for any kind of futuristic-looking electric scooter, and this one really hits the sweet spot. Part moped, part e-bike, all Blade Runner vibes. If it wasn’t $3,500, then I would’ve probably ordered one already.The Fujifilm X-E5. I kept wondering why Fujifilm didn’t just make, like, a hundred different great-looking cameras at every imaginable price because everyone wants a camera this cool. Well, here we are! It’s a spin on the X100VI but with interchangeable lenses and a few power-user features. All my photographer friends are going to want this.Call Her Alex. I confess I’m no Call Her Daddy diehard, but I found this two-part doc on Alex Cooper really interesting. Cooper’s story is all about understanding people, the internet, and what it means to feel connected now. It’s all very low-stakes and somehow also existential? It’s only two parts, you should watch it.“Steve Jobs - 2005 Stanford Commencement Address.” For the 20th anniversary of Jobs’ famous (and genuinely fabulous) speech, the Steve Jobs Archive put together a big package of stories, notes, and other materials around the speech. Plus, a newly high-def version of the video. This one’s always worth the 15 minutes.Dune: Awakening. Dune has ascended to the rare territory of “I will check out anything from this franchise, ever, no questions asked.” This game is big on open-world survival and ornithopters, too, so it’s even more my kind of thing. And it’s apparently punishingly difficult in spots.CrowdsourcedHere’s what the Installer community is into this week. I want to know what you’re into right now as well! Email installer@theverge.com or message me on Signal — @davidpierce.11 — with your recommendations for anything and everything, and we’ll feature some of our favorites here every week. For even more great recommendations, check out the replies to this post on Threads and this post on Bluesky.“I had tried the paper planner in the leather Paper Republic journal but since have moved onto the Remarkable Paper Pro color e-ink device which takes everything you like about paper but makes it editable and color coded. Combine this with a Remarkable planner in PDF format off of Etsy and you are golden.” — Jason“I started reading a manga series from content creator Cory Kenshin called Monsters We Make. So far, I love it. Already preordered Vol. 2.” — Rob“I recently went down the third party controller rabbit hole after my trusty adapted Xbox One controller finally kicked the bucket, and I wanted something I could use across my PC, phone, handheld, Switch, etc. I’ve been playing with the GameSir Cyclone 2 for a few weeks, and it feels really deluxe. The thumbsticks are impossibly smooth and accurate thanks to its TMR joysticks. The face buttons took a second for my brain to adjust to; the short travel distance initially registered as mushy, but once I stopped trying to pound the buttons like I was at the arcade, I found the subtle mechanical click super satisfying.” — Sam“The Apple TV Plus miniseries Long Way Home. It’s Ewan McGregor and Charley Boorman’s fourth Long Way series. This time they are touring some European countries on vintage bikes that they fixed, and it’s such a light-hearted show from two really down to earth humans. Connecting with other people in different cultures and seeing their journey is such a treat!” — Esmael“Podcast recommendation: Devil and the Deep Blue Sea by Christianity Today. A deep dive into the Satanic Panic of the 80’s and 90’s.” — Drew“Splatoon 3 (the free Switch 2 update) and the new How to Train Your Dragon.” — Aaron“I can’t put Mario Kart World down. When I get tired of the intense Knockout Tour mode I go to Free Roam and try to knock out P-Switch challenges, some of which are really tough! I’m obsessed.” — Dave“Fable, a cool app for finding books with virtual book clubs. It’s the closest to a more cozy online bookstore with more honest reviews. I just wish you could click on the author’s name to see their other books.” — Astrid“This is the Summer Games Fest week (formerly E3, RIP) and there are a TON of game demos to try out on Steam. One that has caught my attention / play time the most is Wildgate. It’s a team based spaceship shooter where ship crews battle and try to escape with a powerful artifact.” — Sean“Battlefront 2 is back for some reason. Still looks great.” — IanSigning offI have long been fascinated by weather forecasting. I recommend Andrew Blum’s book, The Weather Machine, to people all the time, as a way to understand both how we learned to predict the weather and why it’s a literally culture-changing thing to be able to do so. And if you want to make yourself so, so angry, there’s a whole chunk of Michael Lewis’s book, The Fifth Risk, about how a bunch of companies managed to basically privatize forecasts… based on government data. The weather is a huge business, an extremely powerful political force, and even more important to our way of life than we realize. And we’re really good at predicting the weather!I’ve also been hearing for years that weather forecasting is a perfect use for AI. It’s all about vast quantities of historical data, tiny fluctuations in readings, and finding patterns that often don’t want to be found. So, of course, as soon as I read my colleague Justine Calma’s story about a new Google project called Weather Lab, I spent the next hour poking through the data to see how well DeepMind managed to predict and track recent storms. It’s deeply wonky stuff, but it’s cool to see Big Tech trying to figure out Mother Nature — and almost getting it right. Almost.See you next week!See More:

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

Over the past few months, I’ve had the pleasure of testing out the reMarkable Paper Pro. You can read my full review here, but in short, it gets everything right about the note taking experience. Despite being an e-ink tablet, it does get quite pricey. However, there are certainly some fantastic parts of the experience that make it worth comparing to an iPad Air, depending on what you’re looking for in a note taking device for school, work, or whatever else. Updated June 15th to reflect reMarkable’s new post-tariff pricing. Overview Since the reMarkable Paper Pro comes in at $679 with the reMarkable Marker Plus included, it likely makes most sense to compare this against Apple’s iPad Air 11-inch. That comes in at $599 without an Apple Pencil, and adding in the Apple Pencil Pro will run you an additional $129. The equivalent iPad setup will run you $50 more than the reMarkable Paper Pro. Given the fact that iPad Air‘s regularly go on sale, it’d be fair to say they’re roughly on the same playing field. So, $679 for a reMarkable Paper Pro setup, versus $728 for a comparable iPad Air setup. Which is better for you? Obviously, the iPad Air has one key advantage: It runs iOS, has millions of apps available, can browse the web, play games, stream TV shows/movies, and much more. To some, that might end the comparison and make the iPad a clear winner, but I disagree. Yes, if you want your tablet to do all of those things for you, the iPad Air is a no brainer. At the end of the day, the iPad Air is a general purpose tablet that’ll do a lot more for you. However, if you also have a laptop to accompany your tablet, I’d argue that the iPad Air may fall into a category of slight redundance. Most things you’d want to do on the iPad can be done on a laptop, excluding any sort of touchscreen/stylus reliant features. iPads are great, and if you want that – you should pick that. However, I have an alternative argument to offer… The reMarkable Paper Pro does one thing really well: note taking. At first thought, you might think: why would I pay so much for a device that only does one thing? Well, that’s because it does that one thing really well. There’s also a second side to this argument: focus. It’s much easier to focus on what you’re doing when the device isn’t capable of anything else. If you’re taking notes while studying, you could easily see a notification or have the temptation to check notification center. Or, if you’re reading an e-book, you could easily choose to swipe up and get into another app. The best thing about the reMarkable Paper Pro is that you can’t easily get lost in the world of modern technology, while still having important technological features like cloud backup of your notes. Plus, you don’t have to worry about carrying around physical paper. One last thing – the reMarkable Paper Pro also has rubber feet on the back, so if you place it down flat on a table caseless, you don’t have to worry about scratching it up. Spec comparison Here’s a quick rundown of all of the key specs between the two devices. reMarkable Paper Pro‘s strengths definitely lie in battery, form factor, and stylus. iPad has some rather neat features with the Apple Pencil Pro, and also clears in the display category. Both devices also offer keyboards for typed notes, though only the iPad offers a trackpad. Display– 10.9-inch LCD display– Glossy glass– 2360 × 1640 at 264 ppi– 11.8-inch Color e-ink display– Paper-feeling textured glass– 2160 × 1620 at 229 ppiHardware– 6.1mm thin– Anodized aluminum coating– Weighs 461g w/o Pencil Pro– 5.1mm thin– Textured aluminum edges– Weighs 360g w/ Marker attachedStylus– Magnetically charges from device– Supports tilt/pressure sensitivity– Low latency (number unspecified)– Matte plastic build– Squeeze features, double tap gestures– Magnetically charges from device– Supports tilt/pressure sensitivity– Ultra-low latency (12ms)– Premium textured aluminum build– Built in eraser on the bottomBattery life– Up to 10 hours of web browsing– Recharges to 100% in 2-3 hrs– Up to 14 days of typical usage– Fast charges to 90% in 90 minsPrice– $599 ($529 on sale) for iPad Air– $129 ($99 on sale) for Pencil Pro– $679 bundled with Marker Plus Wrap up All in all, I’m not going to try to convince anyone that wanted to buy an iPad that they should buy a reMarkable Paper Pro. You can’t beat the fact that the iPad Air will do a lot more, for roughly the same cost. But, if you’re not buying this to be a primary computing device, I’d argue that the reMarkable Paper Pro is a worthy alternative, especially if you really just want something you can zone in on. The reMarkable Paper Pro feels a lot nicer to write on, has substantially longer battery life, and really masters a minimalist form of digital note taking. Buy M3 iPad Air on Amazon: Buy reMarkable Paper Pro on Amazon: What do you think of these two tablets? Let us know in the comments. My favorite Apple accessory recommendations: Follow Michael: X/Twitter, Bluesky, Instagram Add 9to5Mac to your Google News feed.  FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

“The best way to predict the future is to invent it,” the famed computer scientist Alan Kay once said. Uttered more out of exasperation than as inspiration, his remark has nevertheless attained gospel-like status among Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, in particular a handful of tech billionaires who fancy themselves the chief architects of humanity’s future.  Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and others may have slightly different goals and ambitions in the near term, but their grand visions for the next decade and beyond are remarkably similar. Framed less as technological objectives and more as existential imperatives, they include aligning AI with the interests of humanity; creating an artificial superintelligence that will solve all the world’s most pressing problems; merging with that superintelligence to achieve immortality (or something close to it); establishing a permanent, self-­sustaining colony on Mars; and, ultimately, spreading out across the cosmos. While there’s a sprawling patchwork of ideas and philosophies powering these visions, three features play a central role, says Adam Becker, a science writer and astrophysicist: an unshakable certainty that technology can solve any problem, a belief in the necessity of perpetual growth, and a quasi-religious obsession with transcending our physical and biological limits. In his timely new book, More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley’s Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity, Becker calls this triumvirate of beliefs the “ideology of technological salvation” and warns that tech titans are using it to steer humanity in a dangerous direction.  “In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress.” “The credence that tech billionaires give to these specific science-fictional futures validates their pursuit of more—to portray the growth of their businesses as a moral imperative, to reduce the complex problems of the world to simple questions of technology, [and] to justify nearly any action they might want to take,” he writes. Becker argues that the only way to break free of these visions is to see them for what they are: a convenient excuse to continue destroying the environment, skirt regulations, amass more power and control, and dismiss the very real problems of today to focus on the imagined ones of tomorrow.  A lot of critics, academics, and journalists have tried to define or distill the Silicon Valley ethos over the years. There was the “Californian Ideology” in the mid-’90s, the “Move fast and break things” era of the early 2000s, and more recently the “Libertarianism for me, feudalism for thee”  or “techno-­authoritarian” views. How do you see the “ideology of technological salvation” fitting in?  I’d say it’s very much of a piece with those earlier attempts to describe the Silicon Valley mindset. I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line from Max More’s principles of transhumanism in the ’90s to the Californian Ideology [a mashup of countercultural, libertarian, and neoliberal values] and through to what I call the ideology of technological salvation. The fact is, many of the ideas that define or animate Silicon Valley thinking have never been much of a ­mystery—libertarianism, an antipathy toward the government and regulation, the boundless faith in technology, the obsession with optimization.  What can be difficult is to parse where all these ideas come from and how they fit together—or if they fit together at all. I came up with the ideology of technological salvation as a way to name and give shape to a group of interrelated concepts and philosophies that can seem sprawling and ill-defined at first, but that actually sit at the center of a worldview shared by venture capitalists, executives, and other thought leaders in the tech industry.  Readers will likely be familiar with the tech billionaires featured in your book and at least some of their ambitions. I’m guessing they’ll be less familiar with the various “isms” that you argue have influenced or guided their thinking. Effective altruism, rationalism, long­termism, extropianism, effective accelerationism, futurism, singularitarianism, ­transhumanism—there are a lot of them. Is there something that they all share?  They’re definitely connected. In a sense, you could say they’re all versions or instantiations of the ideology of technological salvation, but there are also some very deep historical connections between the people in these groups and their aims and beliefs. The Extropians in the late ’80s believed in self-­transformation through technology and freedom from limitations of any kind—ideas that Ray Kurzweil eventually helped popularize and legitimize for a larger audience with the Singularity.  In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress. I should say that AI researcher Timnit Gebru and philosopher Émile Torres have also done a lot of great work linking these ideologies to one another and showing how they all have ties to racism, misogyny, and eugenics. You argue that the Singularity is the purest expression of the ideology of technological salvation. How so? Well, for one thing, it’s just this very simple, straightforward idea—the Singularity is coming and will occur when we merge our brains with the cloud and expand our intelligence a millionfold. This will then deepen our awareness and consciousness and everything will be amazing. In many ways, it’s a fantastical vision of a perfect technological utopia. We’re all going to live as long as we want in an eternal paradise, watched over by machines of loving grace, and everything will just get exponentially better forever. The end. The other isms I talk about in the book have a little more … heft isn’t the right word—they just have more stuff going on. There’s more to them, right? The rationalists and the effective altruists and the longtermists—they think that something like a singularity will happen, or could happen, but that there’s this really big danger between where we are now and that potential event. We have to address the fact that an all-powerful AI might destroy humanity—the so-called alignment problem—before any singularity can happen.  Then you’ve got the effective accelerationists, who are more like Kurzweil, but they’ve got more of a tech-bro spin on things. They’ve taken some of the older transhumanist ideas from the Singularity and updated them for startup culture. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” [from 2023] is a good example. You could argue that all of these other philosophies that have gained purchase in Silicon Valley are just twists on Kurzweil’s Singularity, each one building on top of the core ideas of transcendence, techno­-optimism, and exponential growth.  Early on in the book you take aim at that idea of exponential growth—specifically, Kurzweil’s “Law of Accelerating Returns.” Could you explain what that is and why you think it’s flawed? Kurzweil thinks there’s this immutable “Law of Accelerating Returns” at work in the affairs of the universe, especially when it comes to technology. It’s the idea that technological progress isn’t linear but exponential. Advancements in one technology fuel even more rapid advancements in the future, which in turn lead to greater complexity and greater technological power, and on and on. This is just a mistake. Kurzweil uses the Law of Accelerating Returns to explain why the Singularity is inevitable, but to be clear, he’s far from the only one who believes in this so-called law. “I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear.” My sense is that it’s an idea that comes from staring at Moore’s Law for too long. Moore’s Law is of course the famous prediction that the number of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, with a minimal increase in cost. Now, that has in fact happened for the last 50 years or so, but not because of some fundamental law in the universe. It’s because the tech industry made a choice and some very sizable investments to make it happen. Moore’s Law was ultimately this really interesting observation or projection of a historical trend, but even Gordon Moore [who first articulated it] knew that it wouldn’t and couldn’t last forever. In fact, some think it’s already over.  These ideologies take inspiration from some pretty unsavory characters. Transhumanism, you say, was first popularized by the eugenicist Julian Huxley in a speech in 1951. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” name-checks the noted fascist Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and his futurist manifesto. Did you get the sense while researching the book that the tech titans who champion these ideas understand their dangerous origins? You’re assuming in the framing of that question that there’s any rigorous thought going on here at all. As I say in the book, Andreessen’s manifesto runs almost entirely on vibes, not logic. I think someone may have told him about the futurist manifesto at some point, and he just sort of liked the general vibe, which is why he paraphrases a part of it. Maybe he learned something about Marinetti and forgot it. Maybe he didn’t care.  I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear. For many of these billionaires, the vibes of fascism, authoritarianism, and colonialism are attractive because they’re fundamentally about creating a fantasy of control.  You argue that these visions of the future are being used to hasten environmental destruction, increase authoritarianism, and exacerbate inequalities. You also admit that they appeal to lots of people who aren’t billionaires. Why do you think that is?  I think a lot of us are also attracted to these ideas for the same reasons the tech billionaires are—they offer this fantasy of knowing what the future holds, of transcending death, and a sense that someone or something out there is in control. It’s hard to overstate how comforting a simple, coherent narrative can be in an increasingly complex and fast-moving world. This is of course what religion offers for many of us, and I don’t think it’s an accident that a sizable number of people in the rationalist and effective altruist communities are actually ex-evangelicals. More than any one specific technology, it seems like the most consequential thing these billionaires have invented is a sense of inevitability—that their visions for the future are somehow predestined. How does one fight against that? It’s a difficult question. For me, the answer was to write this book. I guess I’d also say this: Silicon Valley enjoyed well over a decade with little to no pushback on anything. That’s definitely a big part of how we ended up in this mess. There was no regulation, very little critical coverage in the press, and a lot of self-mythologizing going on. Things have started to change, especially as the social and environmental damage that tech companies and industry leaders have helped facilitate has become more clear. That understanding is an essential part of deflating the power of these tech billionaires and breaking free of their visions. When we understand that these dreams of the future are actually nightmares for the rest of us, I think you’ll see that senseof inevitability vanish pretty fast.  This interview was edited for length and clarity. Bryan Gardiner is a writer based in Oakland, California. 

IntroductionHello! My name is Denys. I was born and raised in Nigeria, where I'm currently based. I began my journey into 3D art in March 2022, teaching myself through online resources, starting, of course, with the iconic donut tutorial on YouTube. Since then, I've continued to grow my skills independently, and now I'm working toward a career in 3D generalism, with a particular interest in environment art.I originally got into Blender because SketchUp wasn't free, and I could not keep up with the subscriptions. While searching for alternatives, I came across Blender. That's when I realized I had installed it once years ago, but back then, the interface completely intimidated me, and I gave up on it. This time, though, I decided to stick with it – and I'm glad I did.I started out creating simple models. One of my first big projects was modeling the entire SpongeBob crew. That led to my first animation, and eventually, the first four episodes of a short animated series (though it's still incomplete). As I grew more confident, I began participating in online 3D competitions, like cgandwe, where I focused on designing realistic environments. Those experiences have played a huge role in getting me to where I am today.Getting Started Before starting any scene, I always look for references. It might not be the most original approach, but it's what works best for me. One piece that inspired me was a beautiful artwork by Calder Moore. I bookmarked it as soon as I saw it back in 2023, and luckily, I finally found the time to bring it to life last month.BlockoutThe goal was to match the original camera angle and roughly model the main frame of the structures. It wasn't perfect, but modeling and placing the lower docks helped me get the perspective right. Then I moved on to modeling and positioning the major structures in the scene.I gave myself two weeks to complete this project. And as much as I enjoy modeling, I also enjoy not modeling, so I turned to asset kits and free models to help speed things up. I came across an awesome paid kit by Bigmediumsmall and instantly knew it would fit perfectly into my scene.I also downloaded a few models from Sketchfab, including a lamp, desk console, freighter controls, and a robotic arm, which I later took apart to add extra detail. Another incredibly helpful tool was the Random Flow add-on by BlenderGuppy, which made adding sci-fi elements much easier. Lastly, I pulled in some models from my older sci-fi and cyberpunk projects to round things out.Kitbashing Once I had the overall shape I was aiming for, I moved on to kitbashing to pack in as much detail as possible. There wasn't any strict method to the madness; I simply picked assets I liked, whether it was a set of pipes, vents, or even a random shape that just worked in the sci-fi context. I focused first on kitbashing the front structure, and used the Random Flow add-on to fill in areas where I didn't kitbash manually. Then I moved on to the other collections, following the same process.The freighter was the final piece of the puzzle, and I knew it was going to be a challenge. Part of me wanted to model it entirely from scratch, but the more practical side knew I could save a lot of time by sticking with my usual method. So I modeled the main shapes myself, then kitbashed the details to bring it to life. I also grabbed some crates from Sketchfab to fill out the scene.Texturing This part was easily my favorite, and there was no shortcut here. I had to meticulously create each material myself. Well, I did use PBR materials downloaded from CGAmbient as a base, but I spent a lot of time tweaking and editing them to get everything just right.Texturing has always been my favorite stage when building scenes like this. Many artists prefer external tools like Substance 3D Painter (which I did use for some of the models), but I've learned so much about procedural texturing, especially from RyanKingArt, that I couldn't let it go. It's such a flexible and rewarding approach, and I love pushing it as far as I can.I wanted most of the colors in the scene to be dark, but I did keep the original color of the pipes and the pillars, just to add a little bit of vibrance to the scene. I also wanted the overall texture to be very rough and grungy. One of the biggest helps in achieving this was using the Grunge Maps from Substance 3D Painter. I found a way to extract them into Blender, and it helped.A major tool during the texturing phase was Jsplacement, which I used to procedurally generate sci-fi grids and plates. This was the icing on the cake for adding intricate details. Whenever an area felt too flat, I applied bump maps with these grids and panels to bring the materials to life. For example, both the lamp pole and the entire black metal material feature these Jsplacement Maps.Lighting For this, I didn't do anything fancy. I knew the scene was in a high altitude, so I looked for HDRI with a cloudless sky, and I boosted the saturation up a little to give it that high altitude look.Post-Production The rendering phase was challenging since I was working on a low-end laptop. I couldn't render the entire scene all at once, so I broke it down by collections and rendered them as separate layers. Then, I composited the layers together in post-production. I'm not big on heavy post-work, so I kept it simple, mostly tweaking brightness and saturation on my phone. That's about it for the post-production process.Conclusion The entire project took me 10 days to complete, working at least four hours each day. Although I've expressed my love for texturing, my favorite part of this project was the detailing and kitbashing. I really enjoyed piecing all the small details together. The most challenging part was deciding which assets to use and where to place them. I had a lot of greebles to choose from, but I'm happy with the ones I selected; they felt like a perfect fit for the scene.I know kitbashing sometimes gets a negative reputation in the 3D community, but I found it incredibly relieving. Honestly, this project wouldn't have come together without it, so I fully embraced the process.I'm excited to keep making projects like this. The world of 3D art is truly an endless and vast realm, and I encourage every artist like me to keep exploring it, one project at a time.Denys Molokwu, 3D Artist

Cases News 6 Years to Make a Fan, G370A Budget Case, & Phanteks Technical Fan Discussion, ft. CTOJune 9, 2025Last Updated: 2025-06-09We cover Phanteks’ new G370A budget case, the XT M3, and the Evolv X2 MatrixThe HighlightsPhanteks’ new X2 Matrix case has 900 LEDs and is aiming to be around $200Phanteks’ G370A is a $60 case that includes 3x120mm fansThe company has a new T30-140 fan that required 6 years of engineering to makeTable of ContentsAutoTOC Grab a GN Tear-Down Toolkit to support our AD-FREE reviews and IN-DEPTH testing while also getting a high-quality, highly portable 10-piece toolkit that was custom designed for use with video cards for repasting and water block installation. Includes a portable roll bag, hook hangers for pegboards, a storage compartment, and instructional GPU disassembly cards.IntroWe visited Phanteks’ suite at Computex 2025 and the company showed off several cases along with a fan that took the company roughly 6 years to make.Editor's note: This was originally published on May 21, 2025 as a video. This content has been adapted to written format for this article and is unchanged from the original publication.CreditsHostSteve BurkeCamera, Video EditingMike GaglioneVitalii MakhnovetsWriting, Web EditingJimmy ThangPhanteks Matrix CasesWe’ve talked about Phanteks’ X2 case in the past but the company was showing off its new Matrix version, which has matrix LEDs. The X2 Matrix has 900 LEDs in a 10x90 layout. It’s supposed to be about $30 to $40 more expensive than the base X2, which means it should end up around $200.  The interesting thing about the case is that the LEDs wrap around the chassis. In terms of communication, the LEDs connect to the motherboard via USB 2.0 and use SATA for power. This allows Phanteks to bypass a WinRing 0 type situation. Another Matrix case had 600 of them in a 10x60 LED configuration and is supposed to be about $120. Phanteks also has software that allows you to reconfigure what the LEDs display. When we got to the company’s suite, it had been programmed to say, “Gamers Nexus here,” which was cool to see. We also saw that the LEDs can also be used to highlight CPU temperature. Phanteks G370A Grab a GN15 Large Anti-Static Modmat to celebrate our 15th Anniversary and for a high-quality PC building work surface. The Modmat features useful PC building diagrams and is anti-static conductive. Purchases directly fund our work! (or consider a direct donation or a Patreon contribution!)Phanteks also showed off its G370A case, which is a $60 case that includes 3x120mm fans in the front coupled with a mesh front that offers 38% hole porosity. The company tells us that manufacturing typically offers around 25% porosity.  It has a glass side panel and the back side panel of the case is just steel and has no ventilation. Taking a look at the placement of the front fans, we asked Phanteks why they weren’t higher on the case so the bottom fan could get more exposure to the bottom power supply shroud area and the answer the company gave us was simply clearance for a 360mm radiator at the top. There’s not a lot of room for the air coming into the shroud. Some of it will go through the cable pass-through if it’s empty. The back of the case features a drive mount.XTM3The company also showed off a Micro ATX case called the XTM3. It comes with 3 fans and is $70. For its front panel, it has a unique punch out for its fans. The top panel is part standard ventilation but it does have one side that provides less airflow, which covers where the PSU would exhaust out of. The side panel does have punch-outs for the PSU, however. We don’t test power supplies, though that may change in the future. Power supplies can take a lot of thermal abuse, however, so we’re not super concerned here.  The case should be shipping in the next month or so and is 39.5 liters, which includes the feet. We appreciate that as not a lot of companies will factor that in. There’s also a lot of cable management depth on the back and the case also supports BTF. In addition, there’s a panel that clamps down all of the power supply cables. T30 FanPhanteks’ T30 fan took the company 6 years to make and is a 140mm fan. The company is competing with Noctua in the high-end fan space, but is going for a grey theme instead of brown. Phanteks CTO Tenzin Rongen Interview Visit our Patreon page to contribute a few dollars toward this website's operation (or consider a direct donation or buying something from our GN Store!) Additionally, when you purchase through links to retailers on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission.Finally, we interviewed Phanteks CTO Tenzin Rongen to discuss technical details behind the company’s long-developed fans. Make sure to check it out in our video.

432 Park Avenue | © Halkin Mason Photography, Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Located in Midtown Manhattan, 432 Park Avenue is a prominent figure in the evolution of supertall residential towers. Completed in 2015, this 1,396-foot-high building by Rafael Viñoly Architects asserts a commanding presence over the city’s skyline. Its minimalist form and rigorous geometry have sparked considerable debate within the architectural community, marking it as a significant and controversial addition to New York City’s built environment. 432 Park Avenue Technical Information Architects1-8: Rafael Viñoly Architects Location: Midtown Manhattan, New York City, USA Gross Area: 38,344 m2 | 412,637 Sq. Ft. Project Years: 2011 – 2015 Photographs: © Halkin Mason Photography, Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects It’s a building designed for the enjoyment of its occupants, not for the delight of its creator. – Rafael Viñoly 432 Park Avenue Photographs © Halkin Mason Photography, Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Courtesy of Rafael Viñoly Architects Design Intent and Conceptual Framework At the heart of 432 Park Avenue’s design lies a commitment to pure geometry. The square, an elemental form, defines every aspect of the building, from its floor plate to its overall silhouette. This strict adherence to geometry speaks to Viñoly’s rationalist sensibilities and interest in stripping architecture to its fundamental components. The tower’s proportions, with its height-to-width ratio of roughly 1:15, transform this simple geometry into a monumental presence. This conceptual rigor positions the building as an object of formal clarity and a deliberate statement within the city’s varied skyline. The design’s minimalism extends beyond the building’s shape, reflecting Viñoly’s pursuit of a refined and disciplined expression. Eschewing decorative flourishes, the tower’s form directly responds to programmatic needs and structural imperatives. This disciplined approach underpins the project’s ambition to redefine the experience of vertical living, asserting that luxury in residential design can emerge from formal simplicity and a mastery of proportion. Spatial Organization and Interior Volumes The interior organization of 432 Park Avenue reveals an equally uncompromising commitment to clarity and openness. Each residential floor is free of interior columns, a testament to the structural ingenuity of the concrete exoskeleton. This column-free arrangement grants unobstructed floor plans and expansive panoramic views of the city, the rivers, and beyond. Floor-to-ceiling windows, measuring nearly 10 feet in height, accentuate the sense of openness and lightness within each residence. The tower’s slender core houses the vertical circulation and mechanical systems, ensuring the perimeter remains uninterrupted. This core placement allows for generous living spaces that maximize privacy and connection to the urban landscape. The interplay between structural precision and panoramic transparency shapes the experience of inhabiting these spaces. The result is a sequence of interiors that privilege intimacy and vastness, anchoring domestic life within an architectural expression of purity. Materiality, Structural Clarity, and Detailing Material choices in 432 Park Avenue reinforce the project’s disciplined approach. The building’s exposed concrete frame, treated as structure and façade, lends the tower a stark yet refined character. The grid of square windows, systematically repeated across the height of the building, becomes a defining feature of its visual identity. This modular repetition establishes a rhythmic order and speaks to the building’s underlying structural logic. High-strength concrete enables the tower’s slender profile and exceptional height while imparting a tactile materiality that resists the glassy anonymity typical of many contemporary towers. The restrained palette and attention to detail emphasize the tectonic clarity of the building’s assembly. By treating the structure itself as an architectural finish, Viñoly’s design elevates the material expression of concrete into a fundamental element of the building’s identity. Urban and Cultural Significance As one of the tallest residential buildings in the Western Hemisphere, 432 Park Avenue has significantly altered the Manhattan skyline. Its unwavering verticality and minimal ornamentation create a dialogue with the city’s diverse architectural heritage, juxtaposing a severe abstraction against a backdrop of historic and contemporary towers. 432 Park Avenue occupies a distinctive place in the ongoing narrative of New York City’s architectural evolution. Its reductive form, structural clarity, and spatial generosity offer a compelling study of the power of minimalism at an urban scale. 432 Park Avenue Plans Floor Plans | © Rafael Viñoly Architects Floor Plans | © Rafael Viñoly Architects Floor Plans | © Rafael Viñoly Architects Floor Plans | © Rafael Viñoly Architects 432 Park Avenue Image Gallery © Rafael Viñoly Architects About Rafael Viñoly Architects Rafael Viñoly, a Uruguayan-born architect (1944–2023), founded Rafael Viñoly Architects in New York City in 1983. After studies in Buenos Aires and early practice in Argentina, he relocated to the U.S.. He established a global firm with offices in cities including London, Palo Alto, and Abu Dhabi. Renowned for large-scale, function-driven projects such as the Tokyo International Forum, Cleveland Museum of Art expansions, and 432 Park Avenue, the firm is praised for combining structural clarity, context-sensitive design, and institutional rigor across six continents. Credits and Additional Notes Client: Macklowe Properties and CIM Group Design Team: Rafael Viñoly (Architect), Deborah Berke Partners (Interior Design of residential units), Bentel & Bentel (Amenity Spaces Design) Structural Engineer: WSP Cantor Seinuk Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Engineers: Jaros, Baum & Bolles (JB&B) Construction Manager: Lendlease Height: 1,396 feet (425.5 meters) Number of Floors: 96 stories Construction Years: 2011–2015

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

A dangerous strain of bird flu is spreading in US livestockMediaMedium/Alamy Since Donald Trump assumed office in January, the leading US public health agency has pulled back preparations for a potential bird flu pandemic. But as it steps back, another government agency is stepping up. While the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) previously held regular briefings on its efforts to prevent a wider outbreak of a deadly bird flu virus called H5N1 in people, it largely stopped once Trump took office. It has also cancelled funding for a vaccine that would have targeted the virus. In contrast, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has escalated its fight against H5N1’s spread in poultry flocks and dairy herds, including by funding the development of livestock vaccines. This particular virus – a strain of avian influenza called H5N1 – poses a significant threat to humans, having killed about half of the roughly 1000 people worldwide who tested positive for it since 2003. While the pathogen spreads rapidly in birds, it is poorly adapted to infecting humans and isn’t known to transmit between people. But that could change if it acquires mutations that allow it to spread more easily among mammals – a risk that increases with each mammalian infection. The possibility of H5N1 evolving to become more dangerous to people has grown significantly since March 2024, when the virus jumped from migratory birds to dairy cows in Texas. More than 1,070 herds across 17 states have been affected since then. H5N1 also infects poultry, placing the virus in closer proximity to people. Since 2022, nearly 175 million domestic birds have been culled in the US due to H5N1, and almost all of the 71 people who have tested positive for it had direct contact with livestock. Get the most essential health and fitness news in your inbox every Saturday. Sign up to newsletter “We need to take this seriously because when [H5N1] constantly is spreading, it’s constantly spilling over into humans,” says Seema Lakdawala at Emory University in Georgia. The virus has already killed a person in the US and a child in Mexico this year. Still, cases have declined under Trump. The last recorded human case was in February, and the number of affected poultry flocks fell 95 per cent between then and June. Outbreaks in dairy herds have also stabilised. It isn’t clear what is behind the decline. Lakdawala believes it is partly due to a lull in bird migration, which reduces opportunities for the virus to spread from wild birds to livestock. It may also reflect efforts by the USDA to contain outbreaks on farms. In February, the USDA unveiled a $1 billion plan for tackling H5N1, including strengthening farmers’ defences against the virus, such as through free biosecurity assessments. Of the 150 facilities that have undergone assessment, only one has experienced an H5N1 outbreak. Under Trump, the USDA also continued its National Milk Testing Strategy, which mandates farms provide raw milk samples for influenza testing. If a farm is positive for H5N1, it must allow the USDA to monitor livestock and implement measures to contain the virus. The USDA launched the programme in December and has since ramped up participation to 45 states. “The National Milk Testing Strategy is a fantastic system,” says Erin Sorrell at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland. Along with the USDA’s efforts to improve biosecurity measures on farms, milk testing is crucial for containing the outbreak, says Sorrell. But while the USDA has bolstered its efforts against H5N1, the HHS doesn’t appear to have followed suit. In fact, the recent drop in human cases may reflect decreased surveillance due to workforce cuts, says Sorrell. In April, the HHS laid off about 10,000 employees, including 90 per cent of staff at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, an office that helps investigate H5N1 outbreaks in farm workers. “There is an old saying that if you don’t test for something, you can’t find it,” says Sorrell. Yet a spokesperson for the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says its guidance and surveillance efforts have not changed. “State and local health departments continue to monitor for illness in persons exposed to sick animals,” they told New Scientist. “CDC remains committed to rapidly communicating information as needed about H5N1.” The USDA and HHS also diverge on vaccination. While the USDA has allocated $100 million toward developing vaccines and other solutions for preventing H5N1’s spread in livestock, the HHS cancelled $776 million in contracts for influenza vaccine development. The contracts – terminated on 28 May – were with the pharmaceutical company Moderna to develop vaccines targeting flu subtypes, including H5N1, that could cause future pandemics. The news came the same day Moderna reported nearly 98 per cent of the roughly 300 participants who received two doses of the H5 vaccine in a clinical trial had antibody levels believed to be protective against the virus. The US has about five million H5N1 vaccine doses stockpiled, but these are made using eggs and cultured cells, which take longer to produce than mRNA-based vaccines like Moderna’s. The Moderna vaccine would have modernised the stockpile and enabled the government to rapidly produce vaccines in the event of a pandemic, says Sorrell. “It seems like a very effective platform and would have positioned the US and others to be on good footing if and when we needed a vaccine for our general public,” she says. The HHS cancelled the contracts due to concerns about mRNA vaccines, which Robert F Kennedy Jr – the country’s highest-ranking public health official – has previously cast doubt on. “The reality is that mRNA technology remains under-tested, and we are not going to spend taxpayer dollars repeating the mistakes of the last administration,” said HHS communications director Andrew Nixon in a statement to New Scientist. However, mRNA technology isn’t new. It has been in development for more than half a century and numerous clinical trials have shown mRNA vaccines are safe. While they do carry the risk of side effects – the majority of which are mild – this is true of almost every medical treatment. In a press release, Moderna said it would explore alternative funding paths for the programme. “My stance is that we should not be looking to take anything off the table, and that includes any type of vaccine regimen,” says Lakdawala. “Vaccines are the most effective way to counter an infectious disease,” says Sorrell. “And so having that in your arsenal and ready to go just give you more options.” Topics:

Fewer food crops Biofuels policy has been a failure for the climate, new report claims Report: An expansion of biofuels policy under Trump would lead to more greenhouse gas emissions. Georgina Gustin, Inside Climate News – Jun 14, 2025 7:10 am | 24 An ethanol production plant on March 20, 2024 near Ravenna, Nebraska. Credit: David Madison/Getty Images An ethanol production plant on March 20, 2024 near Ravenna, Nebraska. Credit: David Madison/Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here. The American Midwest is home to some of the richest, most productive farmland in the world, enabling its transformation into a vast corn- and soy-producing machine—a conversion spurred largely by decades-long policies that support the production of biofuels. But a new report takes a big swing at the ethanol orthodoxy of American agriculture, criticizing the industry for causing economic and social imbalances across rural communities and saying that the expansion of biofuels will increase greenhouse gas emissions, despite their purported climate benefits. The report, from the World Resources Institute, which has been critical of US biofuel policy in the past, draws from 100 academic studies on biofuel impacts. It concludes that ethanol policy has been largely a failure and ought to be reconsidered, especially as the world needs more land to produce food to meet growing demand. “Multiple studies show that US biofuel policies have reshaped crop production, displacing food crops and driving up emissions from land conversion, tillage, and fertilizer use,” said the report’s lead author, Haley Leslie-Bole. “Corn-based ethanol, in particular, has contributed to nutrient runoff, degraded water quality and harmed wildlife habitat. As climate pressures grow, increasing irrigation and refining for first-gen biofuels could deepen water scarcity in already drought-prone parts of the Midwest.” The conversion of Midwestern agricultural land has been sweeping. Between 2004 and 2024, ethanol production increased by nearly 500 percent. Corn and soybeans are now grown on 92 and 86 million acres of land respectively—and roughly a third of those crops go to produce ethanol. That means about 30 million acres of land that could be used to grow food crops are instead being used to produce ethanol, despite ethanol only accounting for 6 percent of the country’s transportation fuel. The biofuels industry—which includes refiners, corn and soy growers and the influential agriculture lobby writ large—has long insisted that corn- and soy-based biofuels provide an energy-efficient alternative to fossil-based fuels. Congress and the US Department of Agriculture have agreed. The country’s primary biofuels policy, the Renewable Fuel Standard, requires that biofuels provide a greenhouse gas reduction over fossil fuels: The law says that ethanol from new plants must deliver a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline. In addition to greenhouse gas reductions, the industry and its allies in Congress have also continued to say that ethanol is a primary mainstay of the rural economy, benefiting communities across the Midwest. But a growing body of research—much of which the industry has tried to debunk and deride—suggests that ethanol actually may not provide the benefits that policies require. It may, in fact, produce more greenhouse gases than the fossil fuels it was intended to replace. Recent research says that biofuel refiners also emit significant amounts of carcinogenic and dangerous substances, including hexane and formaldehyde, in greater amounts than petroleum refineries. The new report points to research saying that increased production of biofuels from corn and soy could actually raise greenhouse gas emissions, largely from carbon emissions linked to clearing land in other countries to compensate for the use of land in the Midwest. On top of that, corn is an especially fertilizer-hungry crop requiring large amounts of nitrogen-based fertilizer, which releases huge amounts of nitrous oxide when it interacts with the soil. American farming is, by far, the largest source of domestic nitrous oxide emissions already—about 50 percent. If biofuel policies lead to expanded production, emissions of this enormously powerful greenhouse gas will likely increase, too. The new report concludes that not only will the expansion of ethanol increase greenhouse gas emissions, but it has also failed to provide the social and financial benefits to Midwestern communities that lawmakers and the industry say it has. (The report defines the Midwest as Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.) “The benefits from biofuels remain concentrated in the hands of a few,” Leslie-Bole said. “As subsidies flow, so may the trend of farmland consolidation, increasing inaccessibility of farmland in the Midwest, and locking out emerging or low-resource farmers. This means the benefits of biofuels production are flowing to fewer people, while more are left bearing the costs.” New policies being considered in state legislatures and Congress, including additional tax credits and support for biofuel-based aviation fuel, could expand production, potentially causing more land conversion and greenhouse gas emissions, widening the gap between the rural communities and rich agribusinesses at a time when food demand is climbing and, critics say, land should be used to grow food instead. President Donald Trump’s tax cut bill, passed by the House and currently being negotiated in the Senate, would not only extend tax credits for biofuels producers, it specifically excludes calculations of emissions from land conversion when determining what qualifies as a low-emission fuel. The primary biofuels industry trade groups, including Growth Energy and the Renewable Fuels Association, did not respond to Inside Climate News requests for comment or interviews. An employee with the Clean Fuels Alliance America, which represents biodiesel and sustainable aviation fuel producers, not ethanol, said the report vastly overstates the carbon emissions from crop-based fuels by comparing the farmed land to natural landscapes, which no longer exist. They also noted that the impact of soy-based fuels in 2024 was more than $42 billion, providing over 100,000 jobs. “Ten percent of the value of every bushel of soybeans is linked to biomass-based fuel,” they said. Georgina Gustin, Inside Climate News 24 Comments