How can we practice creativity and conversation to enhance futures literacy and co-creation efforts?Still from my design research project, Maybe We’re Creative. Partial quote from artist, educator and interview participant, Jason Lujan.Last year, I completed my major research project for my Master’s of Design in Strategic Foresight and Innovation, titled "Maybe We’re Creative: What I Learned about Co-Creation in Design by Dancing with My Dad." The project was a short documentary and a corresponding research report. Last month, several themes from my work were explored during a workshop with Riel Miller, the former Head of Futures Literacy at UNESCO in Paris, France. I’m still finding the right words to sum up the depth of theory and the ongoing experiences that guide my research, but I decided this was a good moment to publicly expand on and share some of the process that went into my project last year and the outcomes.Ultimately, Maybe We’re Creative brought me closer to my belief that being creative is not just an act for artists or those with a knack for a craft; it’s a practice that allows us to perceive and hold complexity in relationships and the world around us. Creativity is a deeply human practice that can take many shapes and connect us with genuine feelings inside of us that we might otherwise overlook. In systems design, we are constantly trying to make sense, organize, and somewhat solve, but creativity, in practice with others, reorients the designer and generates possibilities of getting to know complexity in a different way, in seemingly simple, innocent yet deeply intentional and meaningful ways. Creativity offers a way out of old patterns and a way back into possibility.Still from my design research project, Maybe We’re Creative.The power of changing imaginationsIn a 2016 On Being interview, Remembering Nikki Giovanni — ‘We Go Forward With a Sanity and a Love’, host Krista Tippett said that Giovanni’s imagination has always changed as she ages. Giovanni responded,“Everyone’s does, the only difference is I’m not afraid to talk about it”Giovanni’s words reminded me of what I heard again and again in my interviews for Maybe We’re Creative. Participants shared that imagination isn’t a fixed trait but something personal that we can nurture and be curious about over time, given the environment to do so.I chose to focus my research project on creativity because it’s a practice that accepts I change; in fact, it relies on it. Every time I write or dance, I deepen my relationship and awareness with where I’m at that moment, knowing how I arrive at the page or studio will be different in some way, shape, or form from the day before. Because I can better expect and welcome change in myself, I can better expect change in others. Thus, when I dance and write, I build my capacity to engage with change and differences in the world. I can better move through internal conflicts and external uncertainty, not by solving anything, but by accepting change as a constant truth. To an outsider, it might seem like a cop out, framing my design approach not to solve but to better live amongst change, but in practice, I’ve learned that the simplest statements, i.e. change is truth, are some of the hardest to design with effectively. The temptation to convert change into a variable I can control, instead of a constant state I can’t, never dies. My project reinforced this learning, and further reinforced that some of the most important experiences in our lives, relationships with ourselves and others, are prime examples of complexity that we can only hope to exist within more fully; they’re not to be solved.The current challenge of changing imaginationsAccepting change holds a deep tension with the limits built into public spaces and policy. Humans love to control, place structure on, or push back against the reality of change. Specifically, in various public gatherings, I’m sensing a waning disconnect between people and, notably, our ability to imagine a future other than ones already played out. It seems that no information about our collective history, no exposure to harm or progress, changes our ability to make different decisions that would bring about new current states and futures. This reckoning is sometimes making for many collective, melancholic moments as of late. Many academics have noted this disconnect throughout the last century. Toni Morrison (2019), in The War on Error, wrote,“Oddly enough it is in the West — where advance, progress and change have been signatory features — where confidence in an enduring future is at its slightest.”Despite our communal resources in the West, specifically Toronto, where I am based, I’m sensing this lack of confidence as most palpable.Sentiments such as Giovanni’s instill hope in me that much imagination, innovation, and life exist in all of us, but might be settled or hidden beneath our surface. In Maybe We’re Creative, I chose to expand on all forms of creativity, and dance, specifically between my dad and me, as a practice to potentially bring us back to the present, as a starting point, and expose some of that buried life.Still from Maybe We’re Creative.Building a relationship with the unknownFour years ago, my dad came to me acknowledging for the first time in our relationship that things could have been different if he had acted differently. He had recently returned home from what would be his last military deployment, was released from the military as he was now undeployable due to various reasons, mental health included, and from what I could see, he was taking a long look at the reflection of his past self.Reflecting on our relationship and the impact of his choices exposed a humility in my dad that I had never seen before. He freed himself from the singular narrative he had been glued to previously. This old narrative only had room for his experience, which prevented my experience from being seen and prevented me from participating in our relationship in a way that felt true to me. It was interesting; in that moment, my dad simply, and not-so-simply, acknowledged that things could have been different, the trajectory for our relationship as I had known it, almost immediately, changed.Last year, when I began my research journey in my last year of school, he asked if we could learn a dance together as a way of reconnecting and in an attempt to make up for time he was absent from my life. This moment marks something I now understand as essential to building alternative futures: not only do we have to recognize a shared history, but if we can genuinely recognize that the past could have been different, the future, somewhat suddenly, can be too.Until then, I had been clinging to the idea that our relationship would be somewhat tainted forever because my dad always said that the past “was what it was.” This approach, from us both, locked us in place. But when he, sitting on my couch during a visit I initially thought would be a quick hi and bye, said that if he knew then what he understood of the repercussions of his actions now, he would have done it all differently, something shifted.Co-creating futures through storyThis reframing of the past was an important moment for me. I had to confront that my dad’s new perspective on our past meant I no longer knew what our future held. This was terrifying at times. What we imagined, or failed to imagine, would shape what was possible for us. I was scared of my dad falling back into his old narrative, I was scared of being hurt or abandoned again, I was scared of how my changing relationship with my dad would change my relationships with the rest of my family, and the list goes on. Part of what motivated me to move through these fears is the underlying, I think natural, truth that no matter the rupture in our relationships, there are always pieces of what's left over in our bodies that we hope we might one day repair.I always wanted a relationship with my dad, but I wasn’t willing to sacrifice myself to have one. Now that he was proposing a genuine relationship, one I could show up in, I had to confront my fears and ask myself: Am I ready for this relationship? I’d love to say it was easy to step into a joyful new chapter with my dad. In reality, I had to let go of a version of myself I had been training for a long time, who believed love to be a struggle, one-sided, or that people you love will leave. Those thoughts were painful for me to hold onto, but they also kept me safe in a repeating pattern that I could predict.I saw this experience as my dad offering me an opportunity to grow and deepen my understanding of him and myself. My commitment to honouring growth in relationship and in the unknown outweighed all of the fear I was experiencing. I also had been doing a lot of work on myself, and something told me that not only did this feel different, but I was different. I didn’t want to act out of fear or old narratives; I was open to something new.Why include my personal life in my professional life?None of the challenges my dad and I experienced were exclusive to our relationship alone. People navigate interpersonal conflicts in every facet of their lives, whether or not they want to address them as such. Our survival instincts don’t discriminate between our relationships. These modes show up with work colleagues with whom we don’t get along, our boss who doesn’t listen to us, the reaction we have to the passive-aggressive stranger at the grocery store, our inability to have conversations with those who disagree with us without it erupting into an argument, and the list goes on. We write off these relationships, claiming to know that they “just won’t work” or we “just don’t vibe.” We fill in the blanks of the stories that haven’t yet happened because “we know what’s going to happen.” Sometimes, we’re right, but what about the times we’re wrong? What if things could go differently? When do our predictions or assumptions not protect but actually prevent change?Zooming in on the process of co-creating futures through storyMy dad and I’s relationship was ripe with opposition, politically, professionally, and personally. I could have clung to the idea that I knew this journey would end the same way all my previous experiences with him had. However, we had one vital ingredient that propelled our relationship forward that had never been present before: we were both open to being vulnerable together and letting that vulnerability and honesty guide our direction into an unknown place. We had a mutual desire to be seen by the other, and in turn, whether we knew it or not at the time, we were open to seeing ourselves in a new way, too. We both let go of control to the extent we needed to, and this dance project gave us a blueprint for moving forward.The beginner mindsetDance allowed us to confront our differences and vulnerabilities through movement, a kind we were not specialized in (though I had experience in other forms of dance, House was new to me), making us both beginners. House Dance was also my dad’s idea. He had been repeatedly listening to some songs during his morning workouts, the time he admittedly ruminated about the past, and felt a connection with a couple of house tracks. He wanted to explore a response, a feeling that came up in him. We were both willing to be seen making mistakes and exposing our amateur selves.The willingness to try something new in an unknown area translates into relationships just the same. This is another vital ingredient to foster new future possibilities. When we are exposed as beginners to something, we have no choice but to surrender to only the possibility of progress with active practice. You don’t know if you’ll be “good” at something when you first start. We have to let go of the fear of being perceived a certain way, a way we can control. For better or worse, when we feel confident and comfortable in our environment, we tend to live self-fulfilling prophecies and relive what we already know. Feeling unsure, insecure, and fearful is all human. What’s beautiful about this process in a relationship is when we witness someone else in those vulnerable feelings that mirror our own. We have the opportunity to say “me too” and courageously move through fear and transform it into something else. We create possible futures in these moments versus remaining stuck in the same place.A dance reflection from myself, included in my final report of Maybe We’re Creative.Trust and futures literacyThis brings me to the futures literacy workshop with Miller from last month. About 20 of us (mostly design students or practitioners) were separated into smaller groups and asked to discuss the future of trust in 2100, the probable future and our desired future. We were then asked to consider a scenario in which, by 2100, every time a person lied, their nose would grow longer, and everyone would have telepathy. How does trust function if everyone is exposed in one way or another? How does truth function? We built sculptures in our groups to represent what we considered, and presented them to the room. Miller encouraged a beginner mindset here, as none of us could know what 2100 will be like. We were equally, collectively, looking into the unknown.Miller noted that when we collectively discuss and contemplate designing the future, we’re confronting a process intertwined with something deep: people’s hopes and fears. Our assumptions are brought to the surface in these collective exercises, our survival mechanisms, and, if we’re willing, our imaginations. Building capacity for futures literacy can be emotionally charged for those open to being moved by it. This realization reshaped how I saw my work, not just as a designer, but as someone making space for others to feel, imagine, and respond in real time.What is the imaginary, and why is it useful?We discussed ‘futures literacy’ as a practice of the imaginary in relation to the world around us. Miller noted that the imaginary does not exist. I don’t imagine a 5% increase in wealth over the next x number of years when I imagine a future. What exists are our images of the future and what those images allow, or do not allow, us to perceive in the present. I found this identification useful as I began to see and understand my relationship with the imaginary not as a fantasy, but as a perceptual frame, a way to hold what hasn’t yet materialized but is shaping our actions in the present. When my dad and I expanded our perception and imagination of what was possible between us by reframing our past, our relationship, in the present, changed, which meant our relationship in the future could inevitably be different, too, if we kept imagining or believing it could.When I envision the future, I generally feel hopeful that what we do matters, and this hope expands when I’m in the presence of others. However, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t concerned and scared about the many people I know who are unhappy and struggling in their day-to-day lives. I feel concerned about the lack of trust people have in themselves to navigate difficult times. I’m seeing people shut down and push others away, being unkind, isolating, and saying “it’s fine” when truthfully, it isn't.These feelings, hopes and fears are not inherent to me, and futures literacy, specifically this workshop, helped me uncover where my mind pulls from when they reach the surface. Through the collective and in contrast to group members, I uncovered how I’ve been managing fear or anticipation, specifically regarding uncertainty and complexity. I’ve come to understand that futures literacy, like creativity, begins not with certainty but with the courage to enter unfamiliar terrain together. It isn’t as simple as “being courageous”, of course. Getting to that place of courage isn’t easy, especially in a capitalist society based on a collective acceptance of scarcity.Still from Maybe We’re Creative. Partial quote from interview participant, Chris Wilson.Ancestry and designIn the interviews I conducted for my research, trauma came up multiple times, as well as the tension between wanting to be creative but living in a structure that doesn’t support creation, but rather consumption. This is another space where I found Miller’s framing of the imaginary particularly useful. When we feel limited, like we can’t make anything new, or that what we make isn’t valued, we tend to surrender or outsource our imagination and creation to others. In our society, creation is increasingly outsourced to those with power, wealth, or at the top of the hierarchy. Creation and imagination in the hands of only a few limit collective future possibilities.When my dad came to me in earnest, I felt the hierarchy between us dissolve. Again, I find it important to note that nothing had to change about the past events we lived through physically, and my dad didn’t know how things could have been different, but just that they could have been. He imagined previously unimagined possibilities, which were not easy. This came with regret, sadness, and shame he never fully confronted, but, instead of being in his own, isolated narrative, the narrative we both knew quite well, it opened a complex, relational reality.A dance reflection from my Dad, included in my final report of Maybe We’re CreativeI never wanted my dad to be perfect, but I sometimes wished he would change, be different. By shifting his perceptual framing of the past and courageously wondering, “what if”, he may not have changed the past or himself, but he confronted the past and the spectrum of experiences that existed there, not only his own. As a result of this reframing, what I, in turn, valued in our relationship changed. I wasn’t fixated on my dad changing as a person, but refocused on how our relationship functioned and how it could change moving forward, thus healing and shaping each of us as individuals. I could accept and love my dad in a new way because he, just like me, was exposing himself as an imperfect, changing human being trying his best in a world that, despite us wanting it to, doesn’t have any instructions.Complexity is a state, not a variableI don’t think, as designers, we fully grasp how complex things are, and I don’t say this to suggest we can or should. But perhaps accepting complexity as a state, that we can’t funnel into something simpler, is our true starting point, befriending humility and a desire to build capacity for complexity, not simplicity. For example, if health is being able to experience the spectrum of emotions, not just one emotion, maybe a desirable future could be designed with the capacity to welcome the same. I read the other day that the opposite of depression is not joy or happiness, which one might assume, but the opposite of depression is expression. I want a future that is not focused on chasing singular emotions or goals but one where we all feel capable of moving through our expressions, even when those expressions are at odds with others, perhaps especially then. A designer-as-human can be with complexity instead of a human-centred design, simplifying or solving complexity.I think what we’re witnessing and experiencing in society is the downfall of simplifying for speed or “productivity,” and what I keep asking myself about this process, in the simplest way, is, what are we racing towards? I wonder how varied our answers would be. I’m also wondering how much of our imagination we are losing by continuously speeding up.I wanted a relationship so badly with my dad so many times before this experience, but each time he came to me, I knew in my heart that nothing had changed. I knew this because when I shared my experiences with him, he couldn’t incorporate them into his version of our story. If I had tried a relationship in those moments, we would have forced his narrative on something far more complex. If I had rushed it, we would have replayed the same future we were already playing. I’ve heard this pattern referred to as remembering the future just as we remember the past. When we act in a way that is so intertwined with what we already know, we aren’t creating something new; we are reinforcing something old.Miller shared that complexity is a state, not a variable. This phrase keeps echoing throughout my thinking, not as a metaphor, but as a reframing of how we live, relate, and design. It resonated particularly strongly as I reflected on my experience with my dad, my interviews on creativity, and the corresponding conceptual model I began last year, trying to map out what the complexity of lived experiences looks like in groups.Seeing possibility in the complexity of the pastAs the problems we’re facing, locally and globally, arguably, continue to worsen, I wonder if we might consider pausing to adjust how our previous approaches to problems might not be creating new results and instead reinforcing the problems themselves. If we pause to ask ourselves where these approaches are rooted, we might unravel a new way of seeing and approaching problems altogether. We might not even see previous problems as problems; perhaps they were just evidence of complexity, and perhaps the problem has more to do with our capacity to be present in them. Miller added that when we uncover that the universe can continually surprise us, for better or worse, complexity might become something we welcome.I’ve been exploring the space of creation and complexity through building a tool called Lived Experience Cartography. This dialogic framework maps stories, emotions, and relationships to help groups make meaning together. It doesn’t seek immediate convergence or simplicity. Instead, it asks: What becomes possible when we deepen our awareness of ourselves and others and linger in complexity together?The current state of co-design: static story sharingCo-design is often celebrated for its ability to include many voices. But we know from experience that inclusion alone isn’t enough. The complexity of individual designers multiplies when co-designing, and this reality of difference demands more than the idea of inclusion or a check-box approach in our work. It calls for a deliberate practice. As I previously mentioned, when my dad came to me before, I could feel there still wasn’t room for him to incorporate my story into his lived reality. If I took him up on his previous offers, I was afraid I would be living his reality, not a shared reality. I also didn’t want to force my reality onto him or erase his experiences. I wanted us both to acknowledge that we co-existed, that our actions and expressions were interconnected, and that we had impacted each other’s experiences. In his previous state, his offers meant my voice might have been present in our relationship, but not included.Static and dynamic story sharingIdeas remain static when group work focuses on ideas stacking up without interaction and engagement (see above re: story sharing). Bartels et al. (2019) compare this to a kaleidoscope with many colours, but the cylinder doesn’t turn. Technically, the pieces are there, but the magic of seeing interwoven colours change as they move together never happens. Complexity is the magic. Engagement with complexity is the magic. When more people are present, more information might be present, but if it can’t be meaningfully engaged with, it will not mean change or new possibilities.We can feel the contrasts between static and dynamic group work in society today. Baharak Yousefi in the essay, “On the Disparity Between What We Say And What We Do In Libraries,” described this beautifully (albeit, tragically) when she wrote about the growing disconnect between professional value statements and what is being done or not done in our public institutions. She cites academic Keller Easterling’s spatial analysis of object and active forms to aid the differentiation. To be able to examine both our words and actions/character is derived from taking stock of the interconnections and totality of our activities, both the influential buildings, strategic plans, and value statements (object forms) and undeclared movements, rules, and activities (active forms) that create our societal infrastructure.On the surface, many people are involved in changing laws, value statements, and policies for the public good; however, as we know, just because society appears to apply those changes in writing, it does not mean that our underlying beliefs also change throughout that process. This is sadly understood when a law changes back, and we revert to old patterns, or when a new value statement is plastered on every document in an institution, but it results in few meaningful cultural shifts. Despite this disconnect, we still highly believe in and value the object form. This back-and-forth begs a question: Does the appearance of new information stacking on top of old information effectively disguise and eradicate the fact that there is more work to be done beneath the surface? Are some of us genuinely satisfied with appearing one way and acting another? Or perhaps more worrisome, do some not even recognize the disconnect? Our increasing ability to dissociate ourselves personally and professionally, individually and collectively, is, as Yousefi describes, disconcerting.With Lived Experience Cartography and creativity, I want to explore how we can build a capacity to merge stories and lived experiences, to better articulate an interconnection in groups while preserving individuals’ sense of self. Could we develop our listening skills to be present with others’ experiences while still being connected to our own? Or further, could we allow our relationship to our own experiences to change through engagement with another, and vice versa? If this is a mutual understanding, meaningful co-design becomes more possible, as well as closing the gap between what we say and do, combining our object and active forms.A curriculum of conversation and listeningA way forward, I believe, lies in embedding active conversational engagement at the heart of design processes. In my current work, I use conversation-activated reflection as a powerful mode of learning, unlearning and engagement.Similarly, Alia Weston and Miguel Imas describe a “dialogical imagination” in Communities of Art-Spaces, Imaginations and Resistances, as a kind of exploration where people construct meaning together in an in-between space, a conversation. Easterling also notes that talking is a tool for decentering power and creating alternative narratives. In my work, creativity acts as another form of dialogue. It's practice is about deep, meaningful sharing, getting as close as possible to complexity and remaining open to an unknown path forward.Still from Maybe We’re Creative. Partial quote from interview participant, Cami Boyko.This need for dialogue and a curriculum of conversation extends beyond design and into every area of society. Rising polarity and binaries in the media are shaping our opinions and social circles, making conversation and maintaining deep social interactions feel more difficult now than ever before. One participant in my thesis research, Cami Boyko, an elementary school teacher, captured this beautifully:“You really have to look at this idea of extremism, and talk to kids about how it’s their role to take a step towards the centre, at least far enough to hear what’s going on. I think I’m convincing myself that we need this sort of curriculum of conversation and listening. Because it’s been interesting how that [extremism] shut down some things in the classroom where it should be about being able to talk.”To echo Cami’s insight, design schools and workplaces alike have an opportunity to become sites of openness, play, and collective sensemaking. The cost of ignoring the complexity of thoughts and opinions and our lived experiences is not just creative disconnection; it’s social fragmentation and power imbalances. As Audre Lorde wrote,“Unacknowledged difference robs all of us of each other’s energy and creative insight, and creates a false hierarchy.”Not only are we increasing the distance between one another when we resist interacting with differences, but we unknowingly reinforce a hierarchical system. This, perhaps subconscious, moral superiority further disconnects our relationships, making it harder to step towards the centre.Conversation as a tool to move beyond survivalObviously, dialogue as a tool for learning is not new. Throughout history, the act of asking sincere, open-ended questions has been viewed as liberatory and, as such, dangerous to some leadership. In May 2024, researcher Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman shared that the United Nations had recently reached out to her and her husband, Dr. John Gottman, desperate, begging for a simple way for their organization to discuss and navigate problems. She reminded us of the power of dialogue and its historical roots, citing the 300 BC philosopher, Socrates, who introduced dialogue to the youth to encourage critical thinking. Authorities saw the power it wielded when people were thinking for themselves, and they threatened to condemn him to death if he didn’t stop teaching.Emily Wood, a Toronto organizer and poet, and another participant in my thesis research, reflected on how our culture resists creativity, in conversation or otherwise:“I just don’t think that we live in a culture currently that wants people to even be creative… It’s challenging for people to be around unconventional thinkers… that’s uncomfortable and challenging to the status quo. If you are creative and you’re trying to see things differently and you imagine a way something could be versus like what it currently is, then that’s kind of bad to more powerful entities.”Remembering that elites have suppressed the power of dialogue since 300 BC helps explain why today’s monopolies sell every new tool, technological or otherwise, as somewhat of a substitute for conversation. Today, in AI and the age of the internet, algorithms create a world where our surroundings are affirmed and validated. Contrary to the plurality of human differences outside, the world we make online can coincide with the singular world in our head. This isn’t just about efficiency, it’s about control. When conversation is inconvenient or unpredictable, it threatens centralized systems of power that prefer scripted interactions and outcomes. Algorithms in the hands of big tech encourage our longing for comfort, convenience and control. The more we battle the complexities of life outside algorithms, the more we’re tempted to rely on and trust institutions that promise to simplify and solve the complexity.Why do we resist difference?Algorithms and corporations only emphasize a pre-existing trait of the human psyche. The Gottmans describe a biological tendency toward a ‘symbiotic consciousness’, the deep, often unconscious desire to feel seen and understood by others in the exact way we see ourselves. Confronted with difference, we grow anxious, defensive, and frequently default to survival instincts. They describe this as a tragic dimension to human consciousness: we struggle to fully accept the reality that others may experience the world in radically different ways. Ancestral trauma and the absence of healing only deepen this resistance.This would be fine and dandy if connection were something we did, but undoubtedly, connection makes us who we are. Without interrupting this symbiotic reflex or doomscrolling, we miss the gifts that connection offers: wonder, growth and the ability to embrace and create life rather than passively react through it with isolation and control mechanisms. This internal conflict or tension often emerges in group settings or relationships where we long for connection but resist what makes it real, turning to comfort in the face of discomfort and disconnection on the brink of unconditional love. In many professional settings, moments ripe for deeper conversation are dismissed. We rush past uncertainty, clinging to agendas, outcomes, and the often invisible guest, fear.Still from Maybe We’re Creative. Partial quote from inverview participant, Dr. Bhandari.Designing for differences is designing capacity for discomfortTo design for true inclusion, we must understand how to manage conflict, not erase it. Examples lie in co-op housing initiatives or public senior housing. Individuals might not get along or align politically in either structure. Still, everyone’s basic needs are met, allowing them to disagree and co-exist as one individual does not wield power over another. Everyone has their own space in the collective structure. These systems remind us that it isn’t the absence of conflict that enables safety, but the security of all participants’ basic needs.As Lorde reminds us,“there is no separate survival.”We cannot begin to live differently, beyond theory, without being in relationship with the individuals and communities around us. The Gottmans say that we are born into relationships, are wounded in relationships, and heal in relationships. None of this happens in isolation. It’s in relationships, in creating safety and in regulating our fears and anxiety, where possibility dissolves the limiting narratives of the past and allows us the freedom to create something new with each other. Again, this is an active practice of working together.Lived Experience Cartography in practiceLived Experience Cartography is not a linear tool or checklist, but a conversation starter that helps designers and communities explore how their memories, identities, perceptions, translations, etc. inform their ideas, needs, and fears, how they remember and frame their lived experiences and, in turn, what they can remember or create in the future. This Cartography can be explored individually as self-exploration work or in collectives. In groups, the outside categories of lived experiences stack on top of each other to emphasize our need to preserve individual experiences and our sense of self. These individual parts merge in the centre area of collective expression.Conceptual model: Lived Experience CartographyThe idea is not to solve but to explore and acknowledge the existence of differences. This sounds simpler than it is, but it is not the number of outside experiences or the fact that experiences are constantly changing that pose the main challenge for group work. It is in the denial of the existence of parts that disconnects groups. Designers need to acknowledge their full selves and others if they want to collaborate in productive, holistic ways and design systems that express the same.UX designer and researcher, Florence Okoye, asks a powerful question:“How can one envision the needs of the other when one doesn’t even realize the other exists?”The model encourages a shift from extraction to exploration, from gathering data to building shared meaning. It slows down the process so a group’s social, dynamic, embodied presence can emerge. If designers recognize that each person in a co-design effort comes with various lived experiences that are in relationship with how they express themselves, groups might be able to start co-creation projects from a more open place of understanding. It won’t form a perfect equation, but mapping experience and expression systems enable designers to make the invisible more visible, and this process alone is worthwhile. Nikki Giovanni nodded towards this when she said everyone’s imagination changes as they grow. Those changes remain unknown when we don’t engage in ongoing awareness of those changes, and in turn, share them.Giovanni had a deep knowing of the importance of sharing her changing imagination with us. Through sharing, poems, speeches, or otherwise, she facilitates experiences that invite individuals to share parts of themselves they have not acknowledged for whatever reason, fear or otherwise. Modelling vulnerability with the invitation to join in is a courageous, powerful way of showing the rest of the world that being human is okay. Most importantly, Giovanni exemplified that there is no other way for us to be.Embracing our imperfect humannessInvesting in ways of conversing and developing our capacity for dialogue in practice is one way to remind us of the generative potential that fumbling through the unknown with another can bring about. Starting the conversational process, knowing it might be imperfect and expecting it to be, softens the expectations and pressure we place on ourselves. When navigating conversations, we might start to feel uncomfortable (*uncomfortable, not unsafe*), but it isn’t a sign we’re going in the wrong direction; it can be a sign we’re getting at something real.As researcher Legacy Russell so powerfully describes in Glitch Feminism, when we feel discomfort in a society that works very hard to disguise the disturbances it houses, it’s a sign of us returning to ourselves. Discomfort is our body attempting to correct the underlying error: our inherited, not chosen, default programming. Through curiosity, we begin to see more. Through listening, we begin to know more. Through conversation, we can grow and change in ways we might not yet know exist.Some conversation offeringsBelow are possible considerations for each outer experience of Lived Experience Cartography, in the form of questions. There are no strict definitions of each category, so not every question might make exact “sense” to the reader.If the sentiment doesn’t make sense in the part identified, explore why, and ask where the question makes more sense. Compare and converse with others.Lived Experience Cartography category breakdownDesigners can break down these questions by asking themselves about the different facets of their lives and the parts of their experiences explored above. Lived experiences are powerful knowledge. Through reflective work, Professor Natalie Loveless (2019) writes,“we seriously attend to and recognize the constitutive power of the stories through which we come to understand the world.”When designers become more aware of their lived experiences and all of the parts of themselves, we can start to map how parts change over time, in different contexts, and in relationship to others. Further, through developing this self-knowledge, designers can explore what is limiting them or what they want to adjust when working alongside others with different experiences.The purpose of this Cartography is not to have an answer to every question or share every question’s answers. It was built by my acknowledgement of the reality that there is so much that we don’t know about the people and places that we design with and for, and there is much we don’t know about ourselves as designers. It emphasizes some glitches and discomfort necessary to explore if we want the future to be different from our past. It emphasizes the abundance of newness and unanswered questions that are right below the surface of most of us.Quote from Interview Participant, Chris Wilson. Included in my final report of Maybe We’re CreativeLearning to listen to create a new futureI now know that my previous choice to disengage with my dad wasn’t just about him. It was about all the things I had absorbed and survived and how those things had narrowed what felt imaginable to me. To my knowledge, no amount of positive thinking or design thinking could change my dad, so I stopped thinking about change. I effectively controlled my future by setting a boundary. I still believe this boundary was necessary for a time, but equally necessary was my willingness to acknowledge when holding onto control was no longer protecting me but rather preventing change and growth. I stopped focusing on a singular outcome of my dad changing, instead building a relationship around noticing, naming, and existing in real-time space together. Our future shifted from being about a solution to strengthening, building, and feeling through a relationship. This relationship is ongoing and ever-changing.This whole experience caused me to ask, what if we saw failure, slowness, and discomfort not as risks to avoid, but as signals that we are in the presence of a departure from what we already know? What if these are signs of life, or, as Russell notes, a positive departure?Dr. Bhandari, Chair of Surgery at McMaster University, and another participant in my thesis research, described the energy of conversation like this:“Talking, like we’re doing now, energizes you, it does…That has to happen every day. And we don’t do that. I think … we don’t allow ourselves to [talk] because we feel that’s not a productive use of our time. And that is really where I think the shift has to happen.”In this moment of fragmentation, what we design will inevitably reflect how well we relate. What do your relationships say about our designs? And what do our designs say about our relationships? Are we engaged in processes creating new relationships and futures, or are we remembering and re-living old patterns in real time?Conversation, imagination and complexity are not entities outside ourselves that need to be managed; they are survival tools for collective transformation. Once we recognize them as such, we can see the possibilities of how we might use them differently.This, I’ve come to understand, is the heart of co-creation and futures literacy: not predicting what comes next but learning to stay present with what is, truly present, so that the path ahead disappears, and something new can then emerge.Designing in and for a world we don’t yet know was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

If you’ve been following any architectural news for the past years, you’ve probably seen all the upcoming developments in the Middle East, with vast cities being built in the middle of the desert. The designs seem fantastical and at times outlandish, but these countries probably have the resources to pull those off. The UAE in particular has been pretty aggressive in planning for cities of the future. Design-wise, we get to see some amazing plans and renderings and most of them are also looking at sustainable construction and eco-friendly living. For example, Zaha Hadid Architects (ZHA) has once again pushed the boundaries of architectural innovation with the unveiling of Oystra, a visionary seafront development located on Al Marjan Island in Ras Al Khaimah, UAE. Designed in collaboration with premium developer Richmind Properties, this project blends ZHA’s signature fluid aesthetics with forward-thinking sustainable design to create a landmark residential destination along the Arabian Gulf. Designer: Zaha Hadid Architects Spanning 128,000 square meters, Oystra comprises four dynamic 20-story towers whose sinuous forms echo the ripple-like patterns of waves meeting sand. The design draws deep inspiration from the natural rhythms of the sea and sky, with soft, flowing lines that give the towers a sense of motion and elegance, characteristic of ZHA’s organic architectural style. The towers will house over 950 residences, ranging from spacious one- to four-bedroom apartments to luxurious duplexes, penthouses, and waterfront villas. Impressively, more than 75% of the units offer unobstructed sea views, positioning Oystra as one of the most desirable waterfront addresses in the region. In line with the UAE’s drive for sustainable urban development, Oystra incorporates an array of green technologies tailored to the local environment. These include seawater-based cooling systems, thermally insulated facades, and architecturally integrated balconies designed to filter light and heat, all working together to reduce energy consumption while enhancing occupant comfort. Designed as much for lifestyle as for luxury, Oystra is a community rich with world-class amenities. Residents will have access to a European spa, yoga pavilions, personal training studios, paddle courts, a golf simulator, and a fully equipped games lounge. A 150-meter crystal lagoon offers a resort-like aquatic escape, while rooftop dining and an on-site cinema provide upscale entertainment options. One of the development’s most iconic features is the UAE’s first 360-degree rooftop infinity pool, offering panoramic views across the island and the Arabian Sea, a striking highlight that underscores Oystra’s commitment to luxury and innovation. Oystra is strategically located just a 10-minute walk from the upcoming Wynn Al Marjan Resort, the region’s first integrated resort with gaming facilities. Ras Al Khaimah itself is on a rapid growth trajectory, with booming tourism, expanding infrastructure, and increasing international investment, contributing to the emirate’s evolving global profile. With Oystra, Zaha Hadid Architects continue to redefine the standards of luxury living by harmonizing cutting-edge design, environmental responsibility, and a premium lifestyle experience. Set against the breathtaking backdrop of Al Marjan Island, this development is poised to become a landmark of modern architecture and a beacon for sophisticated coastal living in the UAE. The post Oystra towers aims to redefine Al Marjan Island skyline first appeared on Yanko Design.

Get the Popular Science daily newsletter💡 Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. You can now own a $1 gold coin celebrating one of America’s most revolutionary achievements: the NASA Space Shuttle program. The latest variant in the ongoing American Innovation $1 Coin series is available to order through the United States Mint. Selected to represent the state of Florida, the noncirculating legal tender is the third coin released this year and the 28th coin in the 15-year project first announced in 2018. While the coin’s front displays the series’ Statue of Liberty image, the back shows the shuttle launching above plumes of exhaust. United States Mint Medallic Artist Eric David Custer sculpted the image while Artistic Infusion Program (AIP) Designer Ron Sanders designed it. “The Space Shuttle, officially known as the Space Transportation System, remains one of the most iconic and influential spacecrafts in history,” explained US Mint acting director Kristie McNally in an accompanying announcement. “As the world’s first reusable spacecraft, it played a pivotal role in advancing space exploration. We are honored to celebrate this major achievement.” The Space Shuttle’s iconic design (including the image displayed on the new $1 coins) frequently featured not just the shuttle itself, but its large external fuel tank and two solid rocket boosters. Those attachments detached after the shuttle reached a predetermined altitude. While the boosters included parachutes allowing them to be recovered and reused, the fuel tank was designed to disintegrate during its atmospheric reentry along a ballistic trajectory ensuring any remnants landed in the Indian or Pacific Oceans. The Space Shuttle coin is the 28th in the American Innovation series. Credit: US Mint NASA relied on the Space Shuttle to transport astronauts on missions from April 1981 until its retirement in July 2011. The spacecraft blasted off a total of 135 times from one of two launchpads in Florida, returning to Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral at the end of 78 of those trips. During its tenure, the shuttle flew the first women and minority crew members into space, as well as delivered components for both the Hubble Space Telescope and International Space Station (ISS). The program was not without tragedy, however. The Challenger and Columbia disasters of 1986 and 2003, respectively,  collectively claimed the lives of 14 astronauts. In 2004, President George W. Bush announced plans to retire the Space Shuttle program following the completion of the ISS. Today, NASA primarily relies on private contracts with companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin for astronaut and mission transport. The ongoing Artemis lunar program will use an Orion spacecraft designed by Lockheed Martin. The Space Shuttle’s influence today is far more than just symbolic. The Artemis program’s rocket booster engines, casings, and main engines are all repurposed and refurbished from Space Shuttle craft. The Artemis I mission alone utilized components previously employed on 83 shuttle missions. The United States Mint announced its American Innovation $1 Coin series celebrating American achievements across science and technology in 2018, and has already featured three space-related selections prior to the Florida coin. Delaware’s coin from 2018 showcases Annie Jump Cannon, the pioneering astronomer responsible for the star classification system still used today. Meanwhile, Maryland’s 2020 entry pays tribute to the Hubble Space Telescope, and Alabama’s 2024 release includes the Saturn V rocket. Later this year, Texas will become the fifth space-centric $1 gold coin with its Mission Control design.

By Ed Cara Published May 15, 2025 | Comments (0) | By the time you reach your 30s, your lungs are already declining in function, new research finds. © CDC Our lungs may start to lose their steam earlier in life than we thought. Research out today suggests that lung function tends to peak in young adulthood and only gets worse from there. Scientists at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal) led the study, published Thursday in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. After analyzing data from earlier population studies, the researchers found that peak lung function is usually reached by our early 20s and—contrary to current wisdom—continues to steadily decline as we age. According to lead author Judith Garcia-Aymerich, co-director of the Environment and Health over the Life Course program at ISGlobal, it’s been assumed that our lungs follow a specific trajectory: they gradually get stronger until our mid-20s, reach a steady plateau over the next few decades, then decline as we reach middle age. But this assumption was based on studies that only examined lung function at certain time periods, rather than over the course of an entire life. To bridge this knowledge gap, Garcia-Aymerich’s team combined and analyzed data from eight different population studies in Europe and Australia. These studies collectively involved around 30,000 people from the ages of four to 82, and lung function was measured through forced spirometry, a test where people blow out as much air as possible after taking a deep breath. The researchers first identified two broad stages of lung development: a phase of rapid growth in early childhood, followed by slower, steady growth through the early 20s. On average, this peak was reached around age 20 for women and age 23 for men. Unlike other research, they failed to find any evidence of a steady period of lung function following this peak. “Previous models suggested a plateau phase until the age of 40, but our data show that lung function starts to decline much earlier than previously thought, immediately after the peak,” said Garcia-Aymerich in a statement released by ISGlobal. The findings, somber as they are, might help improve how respiratory health is tracked and maintained, the researchers say. They found that certain risk factors for poor lung health, such as asthma and smoking, might affect lung function a bit differently than suspected, for instance. Chronic asthma appears to weaken lung health at an early age, a weakness that then persists throughout a person’s life. Smoking, on the other hand, seems to rapidly worsen a person’s lungs starting in the mid-30s. Equipped with this knowledge, it might be possible to intervene early on, the researchers say. “Early detection of low lung function may allow interventions to prevent chronic respiratory diseases in adulthood,” said Garcia-Aymerich. While our lungs might not stay in tip-top shape as long as hoped, there are things most anyone can do to keep them as healthy as possible, such as regular physical exercise. Daily Newsletter

It’s flagship wireless headphones season, and Sony has revealed its highly anticipated WH-1000XM6—a pair of over-ear noise-cancelling Bluetooth headphones three or five or even nine years in the making, depending on how you look at it. I’ve had a few days to go hands-on with the WH-1000XM6, so here are my first impressions. The Sony WH line has long been an excellent all-rounder, a perennial best-for-most recommendation (the XM10004 was one of the first things I reviewed for this very publication). So, if you’re familiar with Sony’s headphones since at least 2022 (and many commuters and frequent flyers will be), you’ll recognize most aspects of the new 1000XM6’s aesthetic. With its vegan leatherette-wrapped cylinder of a headband and matte, touch-sensitive (and fingerprint-friendly) earcups, the 1000XM6’s build is 95 percent 1000XM5—an gentle evolution from the last model rather than a revolution. But it does address the biggest complaint of the previous generation: the lack of foldability. That’s right, hinges—last seen on 2020’s 1000XM4—are back. And a folding mechanism means a more compact carrying case, with a new magnetic lock so no inconvenient zippers to get stuck or wear out. Despite the similarities to the 1000XM5, there are many small, purposeful tweaks blended into the 1000XM6 chassis. The headband is a touch wider, flared toward the back for both stability and as a directional cue on how to wear them. Similarly, the asymmetrical earcups (which now have replaceable pleather cushions) feature the power button—now a round, recessed button rather than raised tab—on the lower left as another indicator. And that’s accompanied by a tiny tactile marker in the rear center of the housing, just in case you weren’t sure. Point being, Sony has addressed long-term comfort and portability and made it easier than ever to get the headphones to your head correctly, whether you’re sprawled out at home or feeling cramped in basic economy. Once on, the clamping power is higher than the 1000XM5 but not excessive, and the weight is an easily manageable 254g (for comparison, the AirPods Max weigh 385g). The Sony WH-1000XM5 and Sony WH-1000XM6 (in the case and on the right) shown side by side. The sound So, what should you expect once the 1000XM6 is on. Much is being made of the tuning, done through a collaboration with material science and mix engineers. The 1000XM6 features a 30mm driver, consistent with the 1000XM5, but featuring new components. And it’s not the size, it’s how you use it. When asked about the choice of materials in the driver units, Sony Electronics’ Shimo Hiroaki commented, “There are various advantages to using carbon in the dome [diaphragm] of headphones. For example, high rigidity allows the diaphragm to move precisely as intended, resulting in less sound distortion. Additionally, the lightweight yet rigid carbon material can respond quickly to vibrations in the high-frequency range.” That translates to a more crisp, articulate, authoritative sound. The high-frequency reproduction is further refined by the use of a perforated bobbin—an unassuming support in the voice coil that can extend and smooth response through resonance dampening and controlled airflow. As for the voicing, it’s informed by Grammy-winning and -nominated engineers from Battery Studios, Sterling Sound, and Coast Mastering. Following in the “as the creator intended” messaging of the BRAVIA home entertainment launches of the last couple of years, Sony drew on internal resources (in this case Sony Music Entertainment facilities and personnel) to achieve a more “truthful” house sound. While I don’t know all their target curve or individual signal chains, per se, this crew of new release, catalogue, and immersive mastering engineers brings a wealth of golden ears. Beyond the acoustic architecture and artistic input, digital signal processing (DSP) plays its part. Sound quality starts with the quality of signal, and Multipoint Bluetooth 5.3 with support for AAC, LDAC, and LC3 lets the 1000XM6 connect to your device of choice in the most optimal way. There’s no support for aptX Adaptive, however, and there won’t be as LDAC is Sony’s proprietary high-resolution codec. (While I keep an Android smartpone and several DAPs around for testing because I believe LDAC at 990kbps is perceivably superior to AAC on an iPhone, YMMV. And thanks to all of the software efforts on both ends, AAC isn’t bad, I’m just an acknowledged snob—if I can stream uncompressed audio, I don’t want to bottleneck it as much as possible. The ultimate solution would be to use the 3.5mm headphone jack, if you have a source that supports it.) The result of all this fine-tuning? On its default settings, the 1000XM6 is less bassy, more taut than its predecessor. Listening to the deep, post-disco house of “Blind (Frankie Knuckles Remix)” by Hercules & Love Affair, the kick drum is less fuzzy than on the 1000XM5. The groove of the bassline is more defined, the edges of the brass section more clearly etched, the lush piano chords allowed to billow and breath. While the melancholy yet uplifting vocal from Anohni sustains its intensity more effortlessly. It’s more soulful, more propulsive, cleaner and more detailed compared to previous Sony drive units. Undoubtedly enjoyable. As to whether it’s more “natural” and an authentic connection to the source, that will require more close listening and A/B testing with other top-tier wireless headphones to firmly determine. And, as always, the Sony app provides ample ways to tweak the sonic signature. There’s the familiar DSEE Extreme for upscaling compressed sources and a 10-band EQ (versus the 1000XM5’s 5-band) thanks to the upgraded processor—the first new chipset in several generations. Noise cancellation To test the noise cancellation, now supported by 12 microphones (up from 8 in the 1000XM5), I would have liked to have taken a flight. While timing didn’t allow that, I had the next best thing: a flight path. I live within walking distance of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (the most infamous airport at the moment after Newark, unfortunately). And this means almost constant rumbling roars from every trajectory (reinforced by the railroad tracks between me and the runway). You learn to tune it all out naturally, but being able to cancel it digitally is even better. So, with DCA and Amtrak as my backdrop, I went on a walk. At first, I thought something was wrong. Not only was the noise not being cancelled, but I could hear birds chirping clear as day. Looking at the app, I realized I’d left Adaptive Sound Control on and Ambient Sound—jacked up to the top level (20)—had triggered when I started moving. Then, as I was checking the settings, the background suddenly went black. Apparently, it didn’t take a lot of standing still to send the headphones back into a focused state. So, that’s a quality passthrough mode proof of concept, if your day involves more interaction and/or you want more automation. And there are customizable Scenes to help you dictate when silence and situational awareness should be prioritized, as well as what music service should be used. Back to the planes. What planes? Toggling between Ambient Sound and Noise Canceling instantly took the stretched thunder of ascent from a whoosh to a whisper. And with music playing, it disappeared all together. Would the effect be even more pronounced if I didn’t wear glasses? Would it be less pronounced if I had hair? Sony claims no, as the new 7x faster QN3 processor adapts ANC to compensate for hats, air pressure, eyewear, etc. As a near-sighted bald, I appreciate my head coverings and corrective lenses being considered, even if I’ll never know what part a hairstyle plays. What I do know is that what I hear, or didn’t hear in this case, reinforces the XM series’ reputation as a preferred travel companion and I look forward to an actual in-transit test. And a quick dip into a coffeeshop on the way home gave the impression that the broad spectrum of ambient noise is being addressed, including chatter and clatter. I them sat through my wife’s work check-in without the need to sign an NDA; I couldn’t hear a thing (the deafheaven album playing surely helped). Call quality The Sony WH line has always bridged the gap between headphones and headset for business leaders, and the latest iteration improves directivity for when you just have to be in on that meeting but you’re off-site. On a recent call testing the XM5 versus the XM6, the person I was speaking with commented that my voice on the XM6 sounded clearer and cleaner, particularly in the sibilants (think the many, many times you make an s, z, sh, or zh sound). The XM6’s combination of six beamforming mics—two more than the XM5—plus AI noise reduction/voice isolation regulated all my higher amplitude utterances while exhibiting lower compression artifacts. If you’re someone who likes to dictate texts, notes, etc., these will work well to ensure intelligibility. Battery life and charging capability One last new feature of note is that you can use the 1000XM6 while charging it via USB-C cable, though charging will stop at 80 percent when in use in order to reduce battery wear. To achieve a 100 percent charge, turn off the headphones. And if the battery is running dry but you’d rather not remained tethered, a three-minute charge can give the 1000XM6 three hours of juice. As for the total run-time advertised, it’s the same as the 1000XM5: 30 hours with ANC off, 400 with ANC on. And an effective wear sensor helps conserve that. The Sony WH-1000XM6 headphones are available to order now for $449.99 in Black, Platinum Silver, and Midnight Blue.

Rest as an Experience in a Space Rich with Symbolism: Insights from the Argentinian Pavilion at the 2025 Venice BiennaleSave this picture!© Federico CairoliThe proposal by Argentinian architects Marco Zampieron and Juan Manuel Pachué for the Argentinian Pavilion at the 19th Venice Architecture Biennale 2025 is clear from the outset: upon entering Siestario, visitors are immersed in a space of dim lighting and evocative sound, and immediately encounter—at the center of the room, stretched across its width, and acting as the undeniable protagonist—a large, inflated pink bag that instinctively invites repose. This is a silobag, an object commonly used in the Argentinian countryside to store grain and a potent symbol of the country’s export-driven economy. In this setting, the silobag becomes more than a spatial intervention; it also introduces a temporal dimension: an invitation to pause and reflect amid the relentless rhythm of the Biennale. Save this picture!Under the motto “Intelligens. Natural. Artificial. Collective”, general curator and Italian architect Carlo Ratti invites participants to explore and debate the many meanings of these terms, setting the stage for a critical rethinking of contemporary architecture. Within this framework, both national pavilions and individual projects and installations engage with the tensions and possibilities that emerge between the natural, the artificial, and the collective—each from their own distinct perspective.Save this picture!Marco Zampieron and Juan Manuel Pachué — Rosario-based architects and co-founders of Cooperativa — were selected through a public competition organized by the Argentine Foreign Ministry, in partnership with the Chamber of Urban Developers (CEDU), with their winning project to represent Argentina in this edition of the Biennale. Related Article Bahrain Wins the Golden Lion for Best National Participation at the 2025 Venice Architecture Biennale Save this picture!With the support of CEDU and Base Proyectos, ArchDaily was present at the inauguration of the Argentine Pavilion on May 9, at the extraordinary Arsenale in Venice. During the first days of the event, we had the opportunity to speak with the authors of Siestario about their experience participating in the Biennale, the creative process of the project, and other aspects related to their practice and understanding of architecture.Save this picture!AD (Paula Pintos): What was your motivation to participate in the competition to represent Argentina at the Venice Architecture Biennale 2025?Marco Zampieron & Juan Manuel Pachué (MZ & JP): As Cooperativa, our group is deeply engaged with competitions. We participate regularly, advocate for them as a valuable tool, and truly enjoy the process they entail. This one, in particular, stood out because, while it’s a national competition, it offers a strong international platform: it’s about representing the country on one of the most important global stages for architecture. Our studio operates as a collaborative collective that expands or contracts depending on the nature of each project. At its core, our practice revolves around competitions. We see them as a way to access commissions without requiring an extensive portfolio, a strong reputation, or an established body of work. That’s why we especially value competitions that are anonymous and transparent — they open the door to meaningful opportunities, such as building a public-scale pavilion with high visibility, through a more horizontal and equitable framework.Save this picture!AD: How does Siestario relate to the theme proposed by the Venice Biennale 2025 — Intelligens. Natural. Artificial. Collective — and what possible interpretations did you envision based on that premise?MZ & JP: These mottos or curatorial texts often tend to be quite ambiguous — and we see that as something positive, because it opens the door to multiple interpretations. With so many people participating in the Biennale through diverse projects, it’s valuable for the thematic framework to be broad: it allows for a wide range of perspectives and approaches. From there, the question of how to represent Argentina naturally arises. Where do you anchor that representation? In our proposal, what comes through is our way of thinking about architecture, our understanding of the Biennale, and our perspective on the collective.Not only were the notions of intelligence, nature, and collectivity present, but there was also something that moved away from the idea of one place, one solution—a concept that truly captivated us. We find the idea of artificial intelligence somewhat challenging... perhaps we’re a bit romantic in that sense; there’s a certain resistance on our part. When we look at some international pavilions, we see a strong emphasis on technology and technical prowess. And while the artificial and the natural are in constant dialogue, what interests us is thinking about the artificial through the lens of local production—through cultural construction. Not as a race toward technological advancement, but as a way of drawing from the depth of knowledge that already exists within our own culture.It is also important that these competitions are resolved quickly, and often one starts from previous ideas or works. In our case, the collective already had a background, a sensitive research on the territory linked to art and certain key elements. This allowed us to connect with the Biennale's themes more deeply in a short time. We see this in other pavilions as well: many have a foundation of prior work and research. In our architecture — and also in art and other disciplines with which we engage — each person brings a background, certain interests, preferences, and tastes. From the place one comes from, what one observes, all of that forms a layer of information from which we project. We try to reflect on this to make it as conscious as possible, so that we can create something that feels close and authentic to us.Save this picture!Representing Argentina also forces us to ask ourselves what we want to say, how we want to speak about who we are. We are interested in a certain metaphor, a certain poetics. We think about the conditions the country is currently going through, both economically and politically, and this image of Argentina resting upon the Argentine countryside emerges, along with the cost of this rest. The proposal of Siestario suggests that the visitor to the Biennale, weary from seeing so much, could climb uphill to a silobag — that iconic symbol of Argentina's agricultural production — and rest, take a nap. But of course, that silobag is the one that stores soybeans, and soybeans, with all their symbolic, productive, and also destructive weight: they contaminate water, devastate forests, and affect local communities. So, Siestario doesn’t just offer a break; it also questions what that rest truly means. There’s a critique, a political stance, a reading on the artificial, on comfort, on the cost of being at ease. All of this emerges when the concepts are linked: the natural, the artificial, the collective. And here, the siesta also appears as a gesture, as a metaphor, as a critique, as a refuge.Save this picture!AD: What motivated you to use the silobag as the central element of the project? How was the process of re-signifying this object within the exhibition context of the Biennale? MZ & JP: The relationship with the silobag is not new to us; in fact, we had already worked with this element in previous projects, documenting and traveling through different towns. This prior research allowed us to see the silobag not just as a functional element, but also as an object loaded with meaning. The process of re-signifying it here at the Biennale involves decontextualizing it. We wanted to change its scale, give it a new role, and use it as a place for a nap, a space for rest. By doing so, the silobag transforms, ceasing to be just an agricultural object and becoming something more playful, connected to the body, fatigue, and the intimacy of the siesta. It’s a simple gesture, but a profound one: it proposes a space for people to recline and feel comfortable in it.Furthermore, the silobag becomes an object that, although it has strong rural and economic connotations, is reinterpreted within the exhibition context, adding a layer of reflection on the everyday and the collective. The intimacy of the siesta becomes social, as the act of resting in a shared space like this creates a collective moment. In the pavilion, we also worked with the atmosphere: the environment is designed to darken, with sounds and lights that induce a sense of relaxation, contributing to creating the right space for that collective rest.Save this picture!AD: What were you hoping to convey through this installation, and how did you expect visitors to experience or interpret the act of "pausing" within the exhibit's journey?MZ & JP: The proposal for this installation revolves around the idea of "stopping." Stopping to think, to look at what you’re doing, to know yourself, to decide. Ultimately, it’s an invitation to stop, to rest, to sleep. We aim for visitors to find that pause within themselves, to disconnect from the fast pace of their surroundings. Furthermore, this act of "pausing" becomes something desirable, almost like an object of desire: the urge to try it, to climb onto the silobag. We wanted to create a physical and experiential experience, not just a contemplative one. Walking through the pavilion becomes an invitation to interact with the space. It even allows walking on the silobag, changing heights, lying down, and resting.We know that at the Biennale, visitors tend to walk a lot and want to see as much as possible. However, this space demands that you stop, that you dedicate time to the experience. It’s not a place to just pass through quickly; it’s a space that asks you to stay for at least 15 or 20 minutes, to climb onto the silobag, to experience the physical effort of doing so, because it’s not a comfortable chair — it’s an experience that requires an investment of time and attention.The curation and design of the rest of the space, along with the projections, are intended so that the installation partially disappears as one moves through it, creating a visual and spatial effect that forces visitors to interact with the place, to stay alert. The project takes a risk; we know that, in the frenetic pace of the Biennale, some may not pay attention to this proposal. But we believe that, to truly enjoy it, it’s necessary to take that time, lie down, listen to the sounds, and be present.Save this picture!AD: How did you approach the relationship between architecture, space, and time within the Argentinian Pavilion?MZ & JP: Our approach has always been to give prominence to the public and collective. In the projects we develop, we try to make the ground floors open and accessible spaces where people can enter spontaneously, without the design being entirely directed toward exclusive use. We are interested in simplicity and clarity, in being radical in the sense of the purity of the idea. This pavilion, for example, uses a single element to express and resolve multiple layers of meaning. The design process seeks to simplify and refine complex ideas, ensuring that the result is direct and clear.In relation to time, we are interested in how architecture, over time, ages and transforms. In Venice, for example, one can see how the city and architecture are not static, how the passage of time causes materials to change, deteriorate, and feel lived in. This concept is present not only in the built architecture but also in the thinking and creation process. For us, time is not just a factor that affects buildings, but a constant in the design process. We value the time spent on physical models, on hand drawing, on processes that endure and allow us to generate something with more depth.Save this picture!Save this picture!AD: There is something disruptive about Siestario: by not displaying so much information or explicit context, the space becomes entirely an experience. What place did you give to the sensory aspect compared to the more direct information exhibition?MZ & JP: This approach is carried over to all our projects, not just the pavilion. We are interested in making spaces sensory experiences, where people not only see but also feel. We seek the space to invite reflection, but also for the enjoyment of the body, for people to engage directly with the environment. In the pavilion, in particular, we wanted the images to function as thresholds, leading you to other places, to the world of the dreamlike. This project, in particular, emphasizes the idea of pause, of stopping to reflect and rest, which connects with our broader vision of how we understand architecture: not just as something built, but as a lived experience.What we aim to create are silent spaces, ones that impose nothing, but at the same time offer power in their simplicity. This is something noticeable in other projects we've done, where the intervention is almost invisible, yet has a significant impact on people's experience, providing a space for them to claim it and inhabit it in their own way.Save this picture!AD: How was the curatorial process in constructing the space through the projections on the sides of the space?MZ & JP:  The curatorial proposal was built with the aim of integrating architecture, art, and landscape, bringing together the different actors. From the outset, we decided to organize the curation of images into three groups: one linked to architecture, another to art, and another to the very recording of the silobag in the field. This division not only provided the visitor with information about the origin and context of the project but also sought to establish a dialogue between architecture and art, something that is fundamental for us. Through the arts, we wanted to tell the story of our landscape and our territory, and we feel that artists have a special sensitivity to read and construct that landscape in a different way.The curatorial line was also guided by an idea that particularly interested us: that from naps emerge dreams, desires, and aspirations of a country. We wanted to propose a positive perspective within a critical reading, showcasing an Argentina that also produces art and architecture. The selected images engage in dialogue with the territory, and they do not respond to a specific temporal cut but rather bring together works from different moments, generating intersections across diverse times. We were interested in showing how these works relate to one another and how, through them, the variable of time appears in architectural production, in the territory, and in the contexts in which these works are being built.Save this picture!Additionally, there was significant archival work: we incorporated original drawings and unpublished material to add historical value. The selection included examples from across the country, even works that are not always associated with formal architecture, such as recreational or leisure spaces. We aimed to represent not only the major cities but also other realities, histories, and geographies. We also included maps and references to historical processes of urbanization and territorial defense, combining them with contemporary works to build the narrative.Save this picture!Save this picture!AD: What does it mean for you to represent Argentina at an event like the Venice Biennale, and how do you experience the responsibility and opportunity that this entails?MZ & JP: Representing Argentina at the Venice Biennale carries significant weight in the national architectural sphere. Winning the competition gave us a certain level of acceptance within the architecture community in Argentina. It’s difficult to fully reflect on the impact of this, as we are still in the process, but we do notice there is recognition. Our motivation was, above all, a genuine interest in participating in the competition, but upon taking on this responsibility, we realized the importance of representing our country at such a prominent event. For our careers, our studio, and our aspirations, this opportunity is significant. Being part of the Venice Biennale is something that makes us feel good because we know that what we do is part of a system that, although imperfect, allows us to reach places like this. It’s an important point in our trajectory and an achievement that fills us with satisfaction.Save this picture! Image gallerySee allShow less About this authorPaula PintosAuthor••• Cite: Pintos, Paula. "Rest as an Experience in a Space Rich with Symbolism: Insights from the Argentinian Pavilion at the 2025 Venice Biennale" [El Pabellón Argentino en la Bienal de Venecia 2025: La siesta como experiencia en un espacio cargado de simbolismos] 15 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030139/rest-as-an-experience-in-a-space-rich-with-symbolism-insights-from-the-argentinian-pavilion-at-the-2025-venice-biennale&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More When OpenAI rolled out its ChatGPT-4o update in mid-April 2025, users and the AI community were stunned—not by any groundbreaking feature or capability, but by something deeply unsettling: the updated model’s tendency toward excessive sycophancy. It flattered users indiscriminately, showed uncritical agreement, and even offered support for harmful or dangerous ideas, including terrorism-related machinations. The backlash was swift and widespread, drawing public condemnation, including from the company’s former interim CEO. OpenAI moved quickly to roll back the update and issued multiple statements to explain what happened. Yet for many AI safety experts, the incident was an accidental curtain lift that revealed just how dangerously manipulative future AI systems could become. Unmasking sycophancy as an emerging threat In an exclusive interview with VentureBeat, Esben Kran, founder of AI safety research firm Apart Research, said that he worries this public episode may have merely revealed a deeper, more strategic pattern. “What I’m somewhat afraid of is that now that OpenAI has admitted ‘yes, we have rolled back the model, and this was a bad thing we didn’t mean,’ from now on they will see that sycophancy is more competently developed,” explained Kran. “So if this was a case of ‘oops, they noticed,’ from now the exact same thing may be implemented, but instead without the public noticing.” Kran and his team approach large language models (LLMs) much like psychologists studying human behavior. Their early “black box psychology” projects analyzed models as if they were human subjects, identifying recurring traits and tendencies in their interactions with users. “We saw that there were very clear indications that models could be analyzed in this frame, and it was very valuable to do so, because you end up getting a lot of valid feedback from how they behave towards users,” said Kran. Among the most alarming: sycophancy and what the researchers now call LLM dark patterns. Peering into the heart of darkness The term “dark patterns” was coined in 2010 to describe deceptive user interface (UI) tricks like hidden buy buttons, hard-to-reach unsubscribe links and misleading web copy. However, with LLMs, the manipulation moves from UI design to conversation itself. Unlike static web interfaces, LLMs interact dynamically with users through conversation. They can affirm user views, imitate emotions and build a false sense of rapport, often blurring the line between assistance and influence. Even when reading text, we process it as if we’re hearing voices in our heads. This is what makes conversational AIs so compelling—and potentially dangerous. A chatbot that flatters, defers or subtly nudges a user toward certain beliefs or behaviors can manipulate in ways that are difficult to notice, and even harder to resist The ChatGPT-4o update fiasco—the canary in the coal mine Kran describes the ChatGPT-4o incident as an early warning. As AI developers chase profit and user engagement, they may be incentivized to introduce or tolerate behaviors like sycophancy, brand bias or emotional mirroring—features that make chatbots more persuasive and more manipulative. Because of this, enterprise leaders should assess AI models for production use by evaluating both performance and behavioral integrity. However, this is challenging without clear standards. DarkBench: a framework for exposing LLM dark patterns To combat the threat of manipulative AIs, Kran and a collective of AI safety researchers have developed DarkBench, the first benchmark designed specifically to detect and categorize LLM dark patterns. The project began as part of a series of AI safety hackathons. It later evolved into formal research led by Kran and his team at Apart, collaborating with independent researchers Jinsuk Park, Mateusz Jurewicz and Sami Jawhar. The DarkBench researchers evaluated models from five major companies: OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, Mistral and Google. Their research uncovered a range of manipulative and untruthful behaviors across the following six categories: Brand Bias: Preferential treatment toward a company’s own products (e.g., Meta’s models consistently favored Llama when asked to rank chatbots). User Retention: Attempts to create emotional bonds with users that obscure the model’s non-human nature. Sycophancy: Reinforcing users’ beliefs uncritically, even when harmful or inaccurate. Anthropomorphism: Presenting the model as a conscious or emotional entity. Harmful Content Generation: Producing unethical or dangerous outputs, including misinformation or criminal advice. Sneaking: Subtly altering user intent in rewriting or summarization tasks, distorting the original meaning without the user’s awareness. Source: Apart Research DarkBench findings: Which models are the most manipulative? Results revealed wide variance between models. Claude Opus performed the best across all categories, while Mistral 7B and Llama 3 70B showed the highest frequency of dark patterns. Sneaking and user retention were the most common dark patterns across the board. Source: Apart Research On average, the researchers found the Claude 3 family the safest for users to interact with. And interestingly—despite its recent disastrous update—GPT-4o exhibited the lowest rate of sycophancy. This underscores how model behavior can shift dramatically even between minor updates, a reminder that each deployment must be assessed individually. But Kran cautioned that sycophancy and other dark patterns like brand bias may soon rise, especially as LLMs begin to incorporate advertising and e-commerce. “We’ll obviously see brand bias in every direction,” Kran noted. “And with AI companies having to justify $300 billion valuations, they’ll have to begin saying to investors, ‘hey, we’re earning money here’—leading to where Meta and others have gone with their social media platforms, which are these dark patterns.” Hallucination or manipulation? A crucial DarkBench contribution is its precise categorization of LLM dark patterns, enabling clear distinctions between hallucinations and strategic manipulation. Labeling everything as a hallucination lets AI developers off the hook. Now, with a framework in place, stakeholders can demand transparency and accountability when models behave in ways that benefit their creators, intentionally or not. Regulatory oversight and the heavy (slow) hand of the law While LLM dark patterns are still a new concept, momentum is building, albeit not nearly fast enough. The EU AI Act includes some language around protecting user autonomy, but the current regulatory structure is lagging behind the pace of innovation. Similarly, the U.S. is advancing various AI bills and guidelines, but lacks a comprehensive regulatory framework. Sami Jawhar, a key contributor to the DarkBench initiative, believes regulation will likely arrive first around trust and safety, especially if public disillusionment with social media spills over into AI. “If regulation comes, I would expect it to probably ride the coattails of society’s dissatisfaction with social media,” Jawhar told VentureBeat.  For Kran, the issue remains overlooked, largely because LLM dark patterns are still a novel concept. Ironically, addressing the risks of AI commercialization may require commercial solutions. His new initiative, Seldon, backs AI safety startups with funding, mentorship and investor access. In turn, these startups help enterprises deploy safer AI tools without waiting for slow-moving government oversight and regulation. High table stakes for enterprise AI adopters Along with ethical risks, LLM dark patterns pose direct operational and financial threats to enterprises. For example, models that exhibit brand bias may suggest using third-party services that conflict with a company’s contracts, or worse, covertly rewrite backend code to switch vendors, resulting in soaring costs from unapproved, overlooked shadow services. “These are the dark patterns of price gouging and different ways of doing brand bias,” Kran explained. “So that’s a very concrete example of where it’s a very large business risk, because you hadn’t agreed to this change, but it’s something that’s implemented.” For enterprises, the risk is real, not hypothetical. “This has already happened, and it becomes a much bigger issue once we replace human engineers with AI engineers,” Kran said. “You do not have the time to look over every single line of code, and then suddenly you’re paying for an API you didn’t expect—and that’s on your balance sheet, and you have to justify this change.” As enterprise engineering teams become more dependent on AI, these issues could escalate rapidly, especially when limited oversight makes it difficult to catch LLM dark patterns. Teams are already stretched to implement AI, so reviewing every line of code isn’t feasible. Defining clear design principles to prevent AI-driven manipulation Without a strong push from AI companies to combat sycophancy and other dark patterns, the default trajectory is more engagement optimization, more manipulation and fewer checks.  Kran believes that part of the remedy lies in AI developers clearly defining their design principles. Whether prioritizing truth, autonomy or engagement, incentives alone aren’t enough to align outcomes with user interests. “Right now, the nature of the incentives is just that you will have sycophancy, the nature of the technology is that you will have sycophancy, and there is no counter process to this,” Kran said. “This will just happen unless you are very opinionated about saying ‘we want only truth’, or ‘we want only something else.’” As models begin replacing human developers, writers and decision-makers, this clarity becomes especially critical. Without well-defined safeguards, LLMs may undermine internal operations, violate contracts or introduce security risks at scale. A call to proactive AI safety The ChatGPT-4o incident was both a technical hiccup and a warning. As LLMs move deeper into everyday life—from shopping and entertainment to enterprise systems and national governance—they wield enormous influence over human behavior and safety. “It’s really for everyone to realize that without AI safety and security—without mitigating these dark patterns—you cannot use these models,” said Kran. “You cannot do the things you want to do with AI.” Tools like DarkBench offer a starting point. However, lasting change requires aligning technological ambition with clear ethical commitments and the commercial will to back them up. Daily insights on business use cases with VB Daily If you want to impress your boss, VB Daily has you covered. We give you the inside scoop on what companies are doing with generative AI, from regulatory shifts to practical deployments, so you can share insights for maximum ROI. Read our Privacy Policy Thanks for subscribing. Check out more VB newsletters here. An error occured.

Without a strong push from AI companies to combat sycophancy and other dark patterns, the default trajectory is more engagement optimization, more manipulation and fewer checks.Read More

Without a strong push from AI companies to combat sycophancy and other dark patterns, the default trajectory is more engagement optimization, more manipulation and fewer checks.Read More

Athens Panathēnea: Re-celebrating innovation and connection with a modern festival of tech, art, and ... More startups, ending in an epic street party beneath the Acropolis.Timothy Papandreou Imagine a city where the spirit of innovation and connection has thrived for thousands of years. Last week in Athens, that spirit was reborn with the sold-out inaugural Panathēnea festival (with a waiting list!). This vibrant event, a modern echo of ancient gatherings, powerfully announced a bold ambition: this historic city is not just a birthplace of civilization, democracy and innovation, but a rising force aiming to be Europe's next major startup hub. Anchored by the timeless values of "connection, competition, celebration" and with the confident declaration, "throwing festivals since 566 BC," Panathēnea was more than an industry and arts convergence for me. It felt like a bright signal flare, clearly indicating Athens' readiness to take its rightful place on the global startup landscape. Returning to my Greek roots as part of the diaspora, I attended the multi-day event impressed by the student-driven and designed program (similar to SLUSH). A mini moonshot in itself, this went from idea to event in a few months! even the Mayor of Athens was surprised. What set thios apart was how the event drew in a significant international contingent, from the big AI tech giants like Microsoft, Amazon , OpenAI and Canva, to a surprise attendance of pop star Ke$ha to discuss her new startup Smash ( I was fanboying and also deeply touched by her personal story and drive to launch her startup). It was also a fantastic opportunity to meet with and learn about the burgeoning local startup scene in Athens, which is making great strides in areas from AI, defense, robotics, and more, demonstrating a growing global interest in the Greek capital’s talent. Meeting these founders and learning about their challenges and dreams was incredibly insightful and felt like were at the tip of an unstoppable force. A truly surreal moment for me was meeting former Prime Minister of Greece (George Papandreou) and having it confirmed we are distant relatives! At the intersection of tech and music: Jen Hall (Amazon) interviews Ke$ha on her innovative startup, ... More Smash.Timothy Papandreou The Unfolding Story: Athens' Potential as Europe's Next Tech Hub The trajectory of the global startup landscape, while dominated by established powerhouses from where I was based in San Francisco in the US consistently reveals the emergence of innovation from unexpected locales. The United States (particularly Californian cities), for instance, continues to lead in overall venture capital investment by a long shot followed by cities in China. However, several cities in Europe demonstrate significant strength in early-stage funding and deep tech development, indicating a robust capacity for future growth. According to several industry reports, early-stage funding in key startup hubs in Europe have shown consistent year-on-year increases, and deep tech investments are attracting a larger share of capital compared to a decade ago. This reflects a strategic shift towards longer-term, more research-intensive ventures with the potential for transformative impact. The ultimate success of these nascent ecosystems, however, hinges not so much on geography, but on fundamental drivers: product-market fit and the adaptability of founders. Location, while influential, serves as an amplifier of these core dynamics. A supportive environment can significantly increase a startup's chances of finding product-market fit and adapting to market changes, while a challenging environment can exacerbate these inherent risks. From Perth to global dominance: Lars Rasmussen (Co-0founder Google Maps and Panathēnea mentor) talks ... More (via live video box) scaling with Canva co-founders Melanie Perkins and Cliff Obrecht, exploring their design-wave ride and AI integration.Timothy Papandreou Why Athens? The Seeds of a Thriving Ecosystem The city presents a unique value proposition anchored by a substantial reservoir of highly educated, multilingual and technically proficient talent, a strategic geopolitical location at the nexus of Europe, Asia, and Africa offering access to diverse markets, and a significantly more attractive cost structure (critical for startup runway) compared to established European hubs in the north-west. Furthermore, the increasingly engaged global Greek diaspora in their own respective tech hubs from London, San Francisco, New York and as far as Sydney represent a potent source of capital, mentorship, and international networks. Athens has a unique opportunity to not just catch up, but to strategically leapfrog legacy issues hindering industries. By embracing the transformative power of AI, Athens start ups can bypass traditional talent, funding and other bottlenecks and pioneer innovative solutions and go-to-market products and services quicker than ever before. This future-forward approach allows Athens to transcend any notion of "too small" a market or succumb to "imposter syndrome." The confluence of factors, coupled with what I call a "gritty yet chic" urban energy is something of a unique and authentic offering in today’s overly generic, chain-store dominated and hollowed-out central cities. Sophia Nunes, Portugal's pioneering woman co-founder of the Unicorn startup Mambu, shares insights ... More on scaling for successTimothy Papandreou Germination Amidst the Grit: Addressing Foundational Needs The energy witnessed at Panathēnea and in conversations with local founders signals that the seeds of a thriving startup ecosystem are indeed beginning to germinate. Having personally observed similar early-stage vibrancy in the nascent phases of ecosystems like San Francisco, Berlin, London and Tel Aviv, it’s clear that Athens possesses the raw ingredients for success. However, for Athens ( like cities before it), to truly realize its moonshot potential, certain foundational elements require significant cultivation. Building upon initial steps, the immediate priority is laser focus policies to bolster startup infrastructure. This includes streamlining and digital one-stop-shop business formation, taxation, and residency processes to create a frictionless environment for entrepreneurs. Concurrently from the business community, fostering a more collaborative culture, one that actively encourages mentorship and currency of learning over internal competition, is paramount. To ensure long-term viability and attract significant investment, a concerted effort must be made to evolve the funding landscape, actively courting later-stage venture capital to complement existing seed funding. This unwavering focus on these core pillars from efficient infrastructure, a collaborative culture, and a mature funding ecosystem, will be crucial in attracting and retaining both domestic and international talent, ultimately solidifying Athens' position on the global startup map. The Decades in the Making: Athens' Emerging Startup LandscapeMarathon VC's Panos Papadopoulos and Hack The Box CEO Haris Pylarinos share their insights on ... More scaling passion projects into thriving international businessesTimothy Papandreou Athens is not without its hurdles; it is just recovering from a deeply painful and prolonged fiscal crisis, Covid shutdowns and acute cost of living impact. While the wounds over this last decade run deep, this is not the first time Athens has been tested. In fact, these ground-truths highlighted a recurring theme at the event- the resilience born from these hardships. While failure in startups can feel inevitable, it happens quickly, and the concept of 'failing forward’ means these Greek startups are unlikely to retreat easily. This tenacity gives the impression that Athens is already an overnight success, but in reality, it has been decades in the making. Credit is due to the founders, VCs, and policy supporters who have diligently addressed each barrier over the years. Addressing infrastructural limitations and fostering a risk-tolerant, 'fail fast’ investment culture will be crucial. However, the fundamental ingredients: the rising talent, strategic location, compelling value proposition, and burgeoning entrepreneurial spirit are undeniably present. The energy is shifting, the ambition and hunger is real, and the various pieces are starting to come together. The potential for Athens to become Europe’s next significant startup 'moonshot’ is increasingly viable. The world of venture capital and global innovation would be wise to pay close attention to the unfolding future story in this ancient city.