Temporary local copies can be shared with Nintendo through manual user reporting.

European tech leaders are pushing back against high-profile VCs urging founders to work seven days a week — slamming the grindset mentality as everything from “toxic” to “childish.”  “Calling on founders to work insane hours nonstop is just bad advice,” Suranga Chandratillake, general partner at Balderton Capital and former CEO of video search engine Blinkx, told TNW. “Even sprinters don’t sprint all the time — rest and reflection is just as important as putting in the work.” His comments follow a LinkedIn post on Saturday by Harry Stebbings, podcast host and 28-year-old founder of London-based venture firm 20VC. “What European founders need to realise [is that] 7 days a week is the required velocity to win right now,” he wrote, implying that they need to match the infamous grind culture of Silicon Valley.       Martin Mignot, a partner at New York-based Index Ventures, rallied behind Stebbings. In a LinkedIn post of his own, he applauded the 9am-9pm, six days a week (illegal) work culture adopted by some tech firms in China. “Forget 9 to 5, 996 is the new startup standard,” he said.  The 💜 of EU techThe latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol' founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It's free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!While some echoed their views, many European tech founders and investors weren’t happy with the rhetoric. Amelia Miller, co-founder of return-to-work platform Ivee, called Stebbings’ post “unbelievably toxic.” “Only bad founders work 7 days non-stop,” she wrote. “It’s poor time management and a fast track to burnout.” Miller also said she thinks that working such long hours unfairly discriminates against parents and those with responsibilities outside the office.   Chandratillake also warned against taking advice from VCs without experience of starting and running a company. “If you’re a CEO, don’t listen to a jumped-up finance bro in a hoodie who has never done your job telling you how to do it!” he said.  The lively debate comes amid a broader conversation in European tech over whether workplace culture is holding the region back compared to the US or China.  In a podcast interview in March, Revolut boss Nik Storonsky criticised European startup entrepreneurs, saying they weren’t working hard enough and valued work-life balance too highly. Those comments followed another lively social media debate earlier this year about whether French founders lacked the “grindset” to succeed.   However, a recent survey of 128 European founders by early-stage VC firm Antler found that three-quarters of them work more than 60 hours weekly. Almost 20% of them exceeded 80 hours, challenging the notion that European founders don’t hustle.  Chandratillake said he believes that scrutinising work hours overlooks some of the real challenges founders face in Europe, such as access to late-stage financing. That said, the investor thinks there is a time and a place for the grind. “Sometimes founders have to work extremely hard and long hours, but that’s not sustainable all the time,” he said. “Building a successful company is a marathon, it takes endurance.”  European startup founders are the lifeblood of TNW Conference — and we want you there too. The tech festival takes place on June 19-20 in Amsterdam. Use the code TNWXMEDIA2025 at the ticket checkout to get 30% off. Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with

Ahead of the TechEx North America event on June 4-5, we’ve been lucky enough to speak to Kieran Norton, Deloitte’s US Cyber AI & Automation leader, who will be one of the speakers at the conference on June 4th. Kieran’s 25+ years in the sector mean that as well as speaking authoritatively on all matters cybersecurity, his most recent roles include advising Deloitte clients on many issues around cybersecurity when using AI in business applications.The majority of organisations have in place at least the bare minimum of cybersecurity, and thankfully, in most cases, operate a decently comprehensive raft of cybersecurity measures that cover off communications, data storage, and perimeter defences.However, in the last couple of years, AI has changed the picture, both in terms of how companies can leverage the technology internally, and in how AI is used in cybersecurity – in advanced detection, and in the new ways the tech is used by bad actors.As a Considered a relatively new area, AI, smart automation, data governance and security all inhabit a niche at present. But given the growing presence of AI in the enterprise, those niches are set to become mainstream issues: problems, solutions, and advice that will need to be observed in every organisation, sooner rather than later.Governance and riskIntegrating AI into business processes isn’t solely about the technology and methods for its deployment. Internal processes will need to change to make best use of AI, and to better protect the business that’s using AI daily. Kieran draws a parallel to earlier changes made necessary by new technologies: “I would correlate [AI] with cloud adoption where it was a fairly significant shift. People understood the advantages of it and were moving in that direction, although sometimes it took them more time than others to get there.”Those changes mean casting the net wide, to encompass the update of governance frameworks, establishing secure architectures, even leveraging a new generation of specialists to ensure AI and the data associated with it are used safely and responsibly. Companies actively using AI have to detect and correct bias, test for hallucinations, impose guardrails, manage where, and by whom AI is used, and more. As Kieran puts it: “You probably weren’t doing a lot of testing for hallucination, bias, toxicity, data poisoning, model vulnerabilities, etc. That now has to be part of your process.”These are big subjects, and for the fuller picture, we advocate that readers attend the two talks at TechEx North America that Kieran’s to give. He’ll be exploring both sides of the AI coin – issues around AI deployment for the business, and the methods that companies can implement to deter and detect the new breed of AI-powered malware and attack vectors.The right use-casesKieran advocates that companies start with smaller, lower-risk AI implementations. While some of the first sightings of AI ‘in the wild’ have been chatbots, he was quick to differentiate between a chatbot that can intelligently answer questions from customers, and agents, which can take action by means of triggering interactions with the apps and services the business operates. “So there’s a delineation […] chatbots have been one of the primary starting places […] As we get into agents and agentic, that changes the picture. It also changes the complexity and risk profile.”Customer-facing agentic AI instances are indubitably higher risk, as a misstep can have  significant effects on a brand. “That’s a higher risk scenario. Particularly if the agent is executing financial transactions or making determinations based on healthcare coverage […] that’s not the first use case you want to try.”“If you plug 5, 6, 10, 50, a hundred agents together, you’re getting into a network of agency […] the interactions become quite complex and present different issues,” he said.In some ways, the issues around automation and system-to-system interfaces have been around for close on a decade. Data silos and RPA (robotic process automation) challenges are the hurdles enterprises have been trying to jump for several years. “You still have to know where your data is, know what data you have, have access to it […] The fundamentals are still true.”In the AI era, fundamental questions about infrastructure, data visibility, security, and sovereignty are arguably more relevant. Any discussions about AI tend to circle around the same issues, which throws into relief Kieran’s statements that a conversation about AI in the enterprise has to be wide-reaching and concern many of the operational and infrastructural underpinnings of the enterprise.Kieran therefore emphasises the importance of practicality, and a grounded assessment of need and ability as needing careful examination before AI can gain a foothold. “If you understand the use case […] you should have a pretty good idea of the ROI […] and therefore whether or not it’s worth the pain and suffering to go through building it.”At Deloitte, AI is being put to use where there is a clear use case with a measurable return: in the initial triage-ing of SOC tickets. Here the AI acts as a Level I incident analysis engine. “We know how many tickets get generated a day […] if we can take 60 to 80% of the time out of the triage process, then that has a significant impact.” Given the technology’s nascence, demarcating a specific area of operations where AI can be used acts as both prototype and proof of effectiveness. The AI is not customer-facing, and there are highly-qualified experts in their fields who can check and oversee the AI’s deliberations.ConclusionKieran’s message for business professionals investigating AI uses for their organisations was not to build an AI risk assessment and management programme from scratch. Instead, companies should evolve existing systems, have a clear understanding of each use-case, and avoid the trap of building for theoretical value.“You shouldn’t create another programme just for AI security on top of what you’re already doing […] you should be modernising your programme to address the nuances associated with AI workloads.” Success in AI starts with clear, realistic goals built on solid foundations.You can read more about TechEx North America here and sign up to attend. Visit the Deloitte team at booth #153 and drop in on its sessions on June 4: ‘Securing the AI Stack’ on the AI & Big Data stage from 9:20am-9:50am, and ‘Leveraging AI in Cybersecurity for business transformation’ on the Cybersecurity stage, 10:20am – 10:50am.Learn more about Deloitte’s solutions and service offerings for AI in business and cybersecurity or email the team at uscyberai@deloitte.com.(Image source: “Symposium Cisco Ecole Polytechnique 9-10 April 2018 Artificial Intelligence & Cybersecurity” by Ecole polytechnique / Paris / France is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.)

Drones Set To Deliver Benefits for Labor-Intensive Industries: Forrester By John P. Mello Jr. June 3, 2025 5:00 AM PT ADVERTISEMENT Quality Leads That Turn Into Deals Full-service marketing programs from TechNewsWorld deliver sales-ready leads. Segment by geography, industry, company size, job title, and more. Get Started Now. Aerial drones are rapidly assuming a key role in the physical automation of business operations, according to a new report by Forrester Research. Aerial drones power airborne physical automation by addressing operational challenges in labor-intensive industries, delivering efficiency, intelligence, and experience, explained the report written by Principal Analyst Charlie Dai with Frederic Giron, Merritt Maxim, Arjun Kalra, and Bill Nagel. Some industries, like the public sector, are already reaping benefits, it continued. The report predicted that drones will deliver benefits within the next two years as technologies and regulations mature. It noted that drones can help organizations grapple with operational challenges that exacerbate risks and inefficiencies, such as overreliance on outdated, manual processes, fragmented data collection, geographic barriers, and insufficient infrastructure. Overreliance on outdated manual processes worsens inefficiencies in resource allocation and amplifies safety risks in dangerous work environments, increasing operational costs and liability, the report maintained. “Drones can do things more safely, at least from the standpoint of human risk, than humans,” said Rob Enderle, president and principal analyst at the Enderle Group, an advisory services firm, in Bend, Ore. “They can enter dangerous, exposed, very high-risk and even toxic environments without putting their operators at risk,” he told TechNewsWorld. “They can be made very small to go into areas where people can’t physically go. And a single operator can operate several AI-driven drones operating autonomously, keeping staffing levels down.” Sensor Magic “The magic of the drone is really in the sensor, while the drone itself is just the vehicle that holds the sensor wherever it needs to be,” explained DaCoda Bartels, senior vice president of operations with FlyGuys, a drone services provider, in Lafayette, La. “In doing so, it removes all human risk exposure because the pilot is somewhere safe on the ground, sending this sensor, which is, in most cases, more high-resolution than even a human eye,” he told TechNewsWorld. “In essence, it’s a better data collection tool than if you used 100 people. Instead, you deploy one drone around in all these different areas, which is safer, faster, and higher resolution.” Akash Kadam, a mechanical engineer with Caterpillar, maker of construction and mining equipment, based in Decatur, Ill., explained that drones have evolved into highly functional tools that directly respond to key inefficiencies and threats to labor-intensive industries. “Within the manufacturing and supply chains, drones are central to optimizing resource allocation and reducing the exposure of humans to high-risk duties,” he told TechNewsWorld. “Drones can be used in factory environments to automatically inspect overhead cranes, rooftops, and tight spaces — spaces previously requiring scaffolding or shutdowns, which carry both safety and cost risks,” he said. “A reduction in downtime, along with no requirement for manual intervention in hazardous areas, is provided through this aerial inspection by drones.” “In terms of resource usage, drones mounted with thermal cameras and tools for acquiring real-time data can spot bottlenecks, equipment failure, or energy leakage on the production floor,” he continued. “This can facilitate predictive maintenance processes and [optimal] usage of energy, which are an integral part of lean manufacturing principles.” Kadam added that drones provide accurate field mapping and multispectral imaging in agriculture, enabling the monitoring of crop health, soil quality, and irrigation distribution. “Besides the reduction in manual scouting, it ensures more effective input management, which leads to more yield while saving resources,” he observed. Better Data Collection The Forrester report also noted that drones can address problems with fragmented data collection and outdated monitoring systems. “Drones use cameras and sensors to get clear, up-to-date info,” said Daniel Kagan, quality manager at Rogers-O’Brien Construction, a general contractor in Dallas. “Some drones even make 3D maps or heat maps,” he told TechNewsWorld. “This helps farmers see where crops need more water, stores check roof damage after a storm, and builders track progress and find delays.” “The drone collects all this data in one flight, and it’s ready to view in minutes and not days,” he added. Dean Bezlov, global head of business development at MYX Robotics, a visualization technology company headquartered in Sofia, Bulgaria, added that drones are the most cost and time-efficient way to collect large amounts of visual data. “We are talking about two to three images per second with precision and speed unmatched by human-held cameras,” he told TechNewsWorld. “As such, drones are an excellent tool for ‘digital twins’ — timestamps of the real world with high accuracy which is useful in industries with physical assets such as roads, rail, oil and gas, telecom, renewables and agriculture, where the drone provides a far superior way of looking at the assets as a whole,” he said. Drone Adoption Faces Regulatory Hurdles While drones have great potential for many organizations, they will need to overcome some challenges and barriers. For example, Forrester pointed out that insurers deploy drones to evaluate asset risks but face evolving privacy regulations and gaps in data standardization. Media firms use drones to take cost-effective, cinematic aerial footage, but face strict regulations, it added, while in urban use cases like drone taxis and cargo transport remain experimental due to certification delays and airspace management complexities. “Regulatory frameworks, particularly in the U.S., remain complex, bureaucratic, and fragmented,” said Mark N. Vena, president and principal analyst with SmartTech Research in Las Vegas. “The FAA’s rules around drone operations — especially for flying beyond visual line of sight [BVLOS] — are evolving but still limit many high-value use cases.” “Privacy concerns also persist, especially in urban areas and sectors handling sensitive data,” he told TechNewsWorld. “For almost 20 years, we’ve been able to fly drones from a shipping container in one country, in a whole other country, halfway across the world,” said FlyGuys’ Bartels. “What’s limiting the technology from being adopted on a large scale is regulatory hurdles over everything.” Enderle added that innovation could also be a hangup for organizations. “This technology is advancing very quickly, making buying something that isn’t instantly obsolete very difficult,” he said. “In addition, there are a lot of drone choices, raising the risk you’ll pick one that isn’t ideal for your use case.” “We are still at the beginning of this trend,” he noted. “Robotic autonomous drones are starting to come to market, which will reduce dramatically the need for drone pilots. I expect that within 10 years, we’ll have drones doing many, if not most, of the dangerous jobs currently being done by humans, as robotics, in general, will displace much of the labor force.” John P. Mello Jr. has been an ECT News Network reporter since 2003. His areas of focus include cybersecurity, IT issues, privacy, e-commerce, social media, artificial intelligence, big data and consumer electronics. He has written and edited for numerous publications, including the Boston Business Journal, the Boston Phoenix, Megapixel.Net and Government Security News. Email John. Leave a Comment Click here to cancel reply. Please sign in to post or reply to a comment. New users create a free account. Related Stories More by John P. Mello Jr. view all More in Emerging Tech

Few companies in the history of capitalism have amassed as much wealth and influence as Meta.A global superpower in the information space, Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Threads — has a market cap of $1.68 trillion at the time of writing, which for a rough sense of scale is more than the gross domestic product of Spain.In spite of its immense influence, none of its internal algorithms can be scrutinized by public watchdogs. Its host country, the United States, has largely turned a blind eye to its dealings in exchange for free use of Meta's vast surveillance capabilities.That lack of oversight coupled with Meta's near-omnipresence as a social utility has had devastating consequences throughout the world, manifesting in crises like the genocide of Muslims in Myanmar, or the systemic suppression of Palestinian rights organizations.How do you uncover the harms caused by one of the most powerful companies on earth? In the case of public violence, the evidence isn't hard to trace. However, Meta's unprecedented corporate dynasty also creates less obvious harms, which scores of scholars, researchers, and journalists are devoting entire careers to uncovering.One prominent group of said investigators is GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which recently released its annual report on social media safety, privacy, and expression for LGBTQ people.The report notes that Meta has undergone a "particularly extreme" ideological shift over the past year, adding harmful exceptions to its content moderation policies while disproportionately suppressing LGBTQ users and their content. The tech giant has also failed to give LGBTQ users sovereignty over their own personal data, which it collects, analyzes, and wields to generate huge profits.While Meta collects all of our data — from which it draws over 95 percent of its revenue — the practice is particularly harmful to LGBTQ users, who then have to contend with algorithmic biases, non-consensual outing, harassment, and in some countries state oppression."It's a dangerous time, certainly for trans people, who as a minority have been so ridiculously maligned, but also a dangerous time for gay people, openly bi[sexual] people, people who are different in any way," says Sarah Roberts, a UCLA professor and Director of the Center for Critical Internet Inquiry.To address these shortcomings and the dangers they introduce, GLAAD made a number of recommendations. One key suggestion was to improve moderation "by providing training for all content moderators focused on LGBTQ safety, privacy and expression." The media advocacy group doesn't mince words, adding that "AI systems should be used to flag for human review, not for automated removals."However, it doesn't look like Meta got the message.Weeks after GLAAD issued its findings, internal Meta documents leaked to NPR revealed the company's plan to hand 90 percent of its privacy and integrity reviews over to "artificial intelligence."This will impact nearly every new feature introduced to its platforms, where human moderators would typically evaluate new features for risks to privacy and safety, and the wellbeing of user groups like minors, immigrants, and LGBTQ people.Meta's internal risk assessment is an already opaque process, and Roberts notes that government attempts at risk oversight, like the EU's Digital Services Act, are likewise a labyrinth of filings which are largely dictated by the social media companies themselves. AI, chock full of biases and prone to errors — as admitted by Meta's own AI chief — is certain to make the situation even worse.Earlier this week, meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal revealed Meta's plans to fully automate advertising via the company's generative AI software, which will allow advertisers to "fully create and target ads" directly, with no human in the loop.This includes hyper-personalized ads, writes the WSJ, "so that users see different versions of the same ad in real time, based on factors such as geolocation."Data hoarders like Meta — which track you even when you're not using its platforms — have long been able to profile LGBTQ users based on gender identify and sexual orientation, including those who aren't publicly out.Removing any human from these already sinister practices serves to streamline operations and distance Meta from its own actions — "we didn't out gay users living under an oppressive government," the company can say, "even if our AI did." It's no coincidence that Meta had already disbanded its "Responsible AI" team as early as 2023.At the root of these decisions — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's right wing turn notwithstanding — is the calculated drive to maximize revenue."If there's no reason to rigorously moderate harmful content, then why pay so many content moderators? Why engage researchers to look into the circulation of this kind of content?" observes Roberts. "There ends up being a real cost savings there.""One of the things I've always said is that content moderation of social media is not primarily about protecting people, it's about brand management," she told Futurism. "It's about the platform managing its brand in order to make the most hospitable environment for advertisers."Sometimes these corporate priorities line up with progressive causes, like LGBTQ user safety or voter registration. But when they don't, Roberts notes, "dollars are dollars.""We are looking at multibillion-dollar companies, the most capitalized companies in the world, who have operated with impunity for many, many years," she said. "How do you convince them that they should care, when other powerful sectors are telling them the opposite?"Share This Article

European tech leaders are pushing back against high-profile VCs urging founders to work seven days a week — slamming the grindset mentality as everything from “toxic” to “childish.”  “Calling on founders to work insane hours nonstop is just bad advice,” Suranga Chandratillake, general partner at Balderton Capital and former CEO of video search engine Blinkx, told TNW. “Even sprinters don’t sprint all the time — rest and reflection is just as important as putting in the work.” His comments follow a LinkedIn post on Saturday by Harry Stebbings, podcast host and 28-year-old founder of London-based venture firm 20VC. “What European founders need to realise [is that] 7 days a week is the required velocity to win right now,” he wrote, implying that they need to match the infamous grind culture of Silicon Valley.       Martin Mignot, a partner at New York-based Index Ventures, rallied behind Stebbings. In a LinkedIn post of his own, he applauded the 9am-9pm, six days a week (illegal) work culture adopted by some tech firms in China. “Forget 9 to 5, 996 is the new startup standard,” he said.  While some echoed their views, many European tech founders and investors weren’t happy with the rhetoric. Amelia Miller, co-founder of return-to-work platform Ivee, called Stebbings’ post “unbelievably toxic.” Register Now “Only bad founders work 7 days non-stop,” she wrote. “It’s poor time management and a fast track to burnout.” Miller also said she thinks that working such long hours unfairly discriminates against parents and those with responsibilities outside the office.   Chandratillake also warned against taking advice from VCs without experience of starting and running a company. “If you’re a CEO, don’t listen to a jumped-up finance bro in a hoodie who has never done your job telling you how to do it!” he said.  The lively debate comes amid a broader conversation in European tech over whether workplace culture is holding the region back compared to the US or China.  In a podcast interview in March, Revolut boss Nik Storonsky criticised European startup entrepreneurs, saying they weren’t working hard enough and valued work-life balance too highly. Those comments followed another lively social media debate earlier this year about whether French founders lacked the “grindset” to succeed.   However, a recent survey of 128 European founders by early-stage VC firm Antler found that three-quarters of them work more than 60 hours weekly. Almost 20% of them exceeded 80 hours, challenging the notion that European founders don’t hustle.  Chandratillake said he believes that scrutinising work hours overlooks some of the real challenges founders face in Europe, such as access to late-stage financing. That said, the investor thinks there is a time and a place for the grind. “Sometimes founders have to work extremely hard and long hours, but that’s not sustainable all the time,” he said. “Building a successful company is a marathon, it takes endurance.”  European startup founders are the lifeblood of TNW Conference — and we want you there too. The tech festival takes place on June 19-20 in Amsterdam. Use the code TNWXMEDIA2025 at the ticket checkout to get 30% off. Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with

Brooklinen is one of our favorite brands for quality bedding designed to last. Making it in our lists for pillows, duvets, and even robes, the best Brooklinen sheets are also staples in many of our editors’ bedrooms for this very reason. Founded in 2014 by a pair of millennials with a passion for high-end textiles on a tight budget , this retailer made a splash on the market by offering direct-to-consumer bedding that merged thoughtfully designed linens at affordable price points—complete with 200-plus thread counts for ultimate durability and Oeko-Tex-certified backing to ensure the fabrics are free of harsh chemicals. While they also became well-known for the ubiquity of their subway ads, they caught our eye at AD Shopping for delivering breathability and sturdy sheets in modern colorways that made a bedroom feel anything but stuffy.That being said: the brand’s catalog is big, so if you know you want Brooklinen sheets but don’t know where to start, we’ve assembled a list of our tried-and-true favorites. Available in sizes ranging from twin XL to California king, we note our go-to percale, sateen, and linen sets in this lineup.Brooklinen Luxe Sateen Core Sheet SetBrooklinen’s Luxe Core Sheet Set is beloved by multiple AD staffers—commerce director Rachel Fletcher says this sateen set is “super classic, smooth, and has a crisp feel,” and contributor Erika Owen loves “the deep design of the fitted sheet pocket” and how easy it is to get it over her mattress and mattress topper. Owen also says it has great temperature regulation. As a self-proclaimed hot sleeper, she says the fabric maintains an even sleep temperature, including during a New York City heat wave. This set of sheets also comes in 21 colorways to bring your inspo pics to life, but move fast, these sell out quickly. Machine wash these on cold, tumble dry low, and you’ll see no signs of fading or wear, but an increase in softness, according to Fletcher.Brooklinen Washed Linen Core Sheet SetAs for Brooklinen’s linen sheets, their original core set recently got an upgrade. Our team members have tested their first iteration for years, including contributor Madeleine Luckel. While she confessed in our best sheets roundup that they felt a “bit thin,” she said the bedding lived up to her expectations. Plus, she would recommend them to other shoppers, so long as you weren’t “picturing a superdense weave.” After debuting the washed European linen sheets this spring, our team got our hands on them and found them to be soft and lightweight. Ranking in our best-of-linen sheets story, the washed material European linen brings a softer but stronger fabric to the beloved set, meaning it wears less with wash and continues to get softer with routine care Perhaps the best part of this sheet set—aesthetically, anyway—is its many colorways: the recent collaboration with Brooklyn-based textile artist Caroline Z Hurley offers warm, neutral stripe options, a white-and-blue stripe lends itself to a nautical-inspired coastal bedding set, and chambray and moss give the linen a particularly welcoming wash, appearing earthy and grounded for year-round use. Contributor Yelena Moroz Alpert says, “There is natural texture because of slubs (teeny bumps) in the weave, but I think this adds to the softness.” “Think of your favorite linen shirt, but in the form of a sheet.” They’re extremely light, “If you hold it up, you can see through it,” Alpert adds. Our editors recommend machine washing these on cold without any other items on the first cycle to help prevent color bleeding. These should get softer and look a bit more worn with each wash, which gives linen its coveted slouchy, worn look.Brooklinen Classic Percale Core Sheet Set“The texture of these is unreal,” says contributor Yelena Alpert, who recently tested this. “It feels buttery soft like a sateen, but still crisp as percale cotton should be.” Brooklinen promises these classic percale sheets feel like sleeping in your worn-in button-down shirt—sans buttons, of course. And after thorough testing, we agree. Besides the silky-soft feel, Alpert loves these sheets for lingering at an accessible price point for high-quality cooling sheets. While this set includes a flat sheet, fitted sheet, and two pillowcases, the hard-core sheet bundle includes a duvet cover and two more pillowcases to completely flesh out your new bedding set. Percale only improves with wash, as a few turns in the washing machine help loosen its fibers to create a softer texture. Alpert adds that this percale is also durable and pilling-resistant, though you can expect a bit more of a wrinkle if you’re not on top of the dry cycle.Like the linen sheets noted above, the percale sets are available in designs by Caroline Z Hurley. Commerce writer Julia Harrison attests these are not only cooling, comfortable, and soft, but they are also “so damn cute.” In a gray-beige, blue, and coral floral print, they bring a welcome dose of whimsy to your bedding without becoming twee about it.Between their designs and fabrics, and with a focus on temperature regulation and non-toxic materials, Brooklinen hits the sweet spot for budget-friendly, sturdy sheets that’ll last for the long haul. Few AD staffers haven’t tried a pair of sheets from them and loved their new drops, colorways, and ever-improving textures. Brooklinen offers free shipping with no minimum, as well as a 365-day warranty in case you’d like to return the items. However, we stand behind them for some of the best sheets out there. “It’s sort of a no-brainer,” Harrison says. “They’re the first brand I recommend when people ask me where to start for bedding, because they’re luxurious, affordable, and come in every pattern and colorway a person could want.”

As his time in DC disintegrated this week, Musk intimated to the Washington Post that he was very surprised by what he saw in American government — but not as surprised as he was by everyone's reaction."The federal bureaucracy situation is much worse than I realized," the billionaire told the newspaper. "I thought there were problems, but it sure is an uphill battle trying to improve things in DC, to say the least."That "uphill battle" apparently included getting people on board with his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the cost-cutting agency that Musk was seemingly gifted in exchange for his help getting Donald Trump elected.While the boy-brained billionaire wasn't exactly popular before his debut in American politics, he and his agency have become downright detested in 2025. From its iffy mandate and its enormous failure to reach its savings goals to its massive professional and competence breaches, DOGE has been a major dud — and Musk's companies are bearing the brunt.But ask Musk, and he has no idea why everybody is so mad. As he told it to WaPo, the agency mysteriously became the "whipping boy for everything.""Something bad would happen anywhere," Musk said, "and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it."Despite his attempts at a breezy reboot this week, it's clear the uber-wealthy memelord is aware that the public hates him and his politics — but the alleged "free speech absolutist" can't seem to figure out why people would want to take their righteous anger out on his company's cars."People were burning Teslas," he lamented. "Why would you do that? That’s really uncool."This isn't the first time Musk has searched around dumbfounded, like a confused John Travolta in "Pulp Fiction," looking for the reason people are taking their anger out Teslas.In March, the world's sometimes-richest man took to the social network he purchased to claim that an "investigation" had found five individuals, along with a liberal-leaning fundraising platform, were behind the widespread protests against his electric vehicle company.He didn't acknowledge, of course, the crux of those protests: that even Republicans and former fanboys consider the mass firing of civil servants toxic, and that his own poor approval ratings were bringing down Trump's.Despite his unceremonious exit from government, DOGE's work will go on in Musk's stead, and the agency will soon be "tackling projects with the highest gain for the pain, which still means a lot of good things in terms of reducing waste and fraud."Today in Washington, as in South Texas, it's business as usual as the White House prepares to send a new slew of DOGE cuts to Congress in a spending bill and SpaceX launches more than two dozen Starlink satellites aboard a Falcon 9 rocket.Life in DC has gone on after Musk has left the building — not with a bang, but with a whimper.More on Musk: You Can Suddenly Sense Elon Musk's DesperationShare This Article

When the computer or phone you’re using right now blinks its last blink and you drop it off for recycling, do you know what happens? At the recycling center, powerful magnets will pull out steel. Spinning drums will toss aluminum into bins. Copper wires will get neatly bundled up for resale. But as the conveyor belt keeps rolling, tiny specks of valuable, lesser-known materials such as gallium, indium, and tantalum will be left behind. Those tiny specks are critical materials. They’re essential for building new technology, and they’re in short supply in the U.S. They could be reused, but there’s a problem: Current recycling methods make recovering critical minerals from e-waste too costly or hazardous, so many recyclers simply skip them. Sadly, most of these hard-to-recycle materials end up buried in landfills or get mixed into products like cement. But it doesn’t have to be this way. New technology is starting to make a difference. As demand for these critical materials keeps growing, discarded electronics can become valuable resources. My colleagues and I at West Virginia University are developing a new technology to change how we recycle. Instead of using toxic chemicals, our approach uses electricity, making it safer, cleaner, and more affordable to recover critical materials from electronics. How much e-waste are we talking about? Americans generated about 2.7 million tons of electronic waste in 2018, according to the latest federal data. Including uncounted electronics, the U.S. recycles only about 15% of its total e-waste, suggests a survey by the United Nations. Even worse, nearly half the electronics that people in Northern America sent to recycling centers end up shipped overseas. They often land in scrapyards, where workers may use dangerous methods like burning or leaching with harsh chemicals to pull out valuable metals. These practices can harm both the environment and workers’ health. That’s why the Environmental Protection Agency restricts these methods in the U.S. The tiny specks matter Critical minerals are in most of the technology around you. Every phone screen has a super-thin layer of a material called indium tin oxide. LEDs glow because of a metal called gallium. Tantalum stores energy in tiny electronic parts called capacitors. All of these materials are flagged as “high risk” on the U.S. Department of Energy’s critical materials list. That means the U.S. relies heavily on these materials for important technologies, but their supply could easily be disrupted by conflicts, trade disputes, or shortages. Right now, just a few countries, including China, control most of the mining, processing, and recovery of these materials, making the U.S. vulnerable if those countries decide to limit exports or raise prices. These materials aren’t cheap, either. For example, the U.S. Geological Survey reports that gallium was priced between $220 to $500 per kilogram in 2024. That’s 50 times more expensive than common metals like copper, at $9.48 per kilogram in 2024. Revolutionizing recycling with microwaves At West Virginia University’s Department of Mechanical, Materials, and Aerospace Engineering, I and materials scientist Edward Sabolsky asked a simple question: Could we find a way to heat only specific parts of electronic waste to recover these valuable materials? If we could focus the heat on just the tiny specks of critical minerals, we might be able to recycle them easily and efficiently. The solution we found: microwaves. This equipment isn’t very different from the microwave ovens you use to heat food at home, just bigger and more powerful. The basic science is the same: Electromagnetic waves cause electrons to oscillate, creating heat. In our approach, though, we’re not heating water molecules like you do when cooking. Instead, we heat carbon, the black residue that collects around a candle flame or car tailpipe. Carbon heats up much faster in a microwave than water does. But don’t try this at home; your kitchen microwave wasn’t designed for such high temperatures. In our recycling method, we first shred the electronic waste, mix it with materials called fluxes that trap impurities, and then heat the mixture with microwaves. The microwaves rapidly heat the carbon that comes from the plastics and adhesives in the e-waste. This causes the carbon to react with the tiny specks of critical materials. The result: a tiny piece of pure, sponge-like metal about the size of a grain of rice. This metal can then be easily separated from leftover waste using filters. So far, in our laboratory tests, we have successfully recovered about 80% of the gallium, indium, and tantalum from e-waste, at purities between 95% and 97%. We have also demonstrated how it can be integrated with existing recycling processes. Why the Department of Defense is interested Our recycling technology got its start with help from a program funded by the Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA. Many important technologies, from radar systems to nuclear reactors, depend on these special materials. While the Department of Defense uses less of them than the commercial market, they are a national security concern. We’re planning to launch larger pilot projects next to test the method on smartphone circuit boards, LED lighting parts, and server cards from data centers. These tests will help us fine-tune the design for a bigger system that can recycle tons of e-waste per hour instead of just a few pounds. That could mean producing up to 50 pounds of these critical minerals per hour from every ton of e-waste processed. If the technology works as expected, we believe this approach could help meet the nation’s demand for critical materials. How to make e-waste recycling common One way e-waste recycling could become more common is if Congress held electronics companies responsible for recycling their products and recovering the critical materials inside. Closing loopholes that allow companies to ship e-waste overseas, instead of processing it safely in the U.S., could also help build a reserve of recovered critical minerals. But the biggest change may come from simple economics. Once technology becomes available to recover these tiny but valuable specks of critical materials quickly and affordably, the U.S. can transform domestic recycling and take a big step toward solving its shortage of critical materials. Terence Musho is an associate professor of engineering at West Virginia University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.