The post سام ألتمان يحتاج 75 مفاعلًا نوويًا وتريليونات الدولارات من أجل OpenAI! appeared first on عرب هاردوير.

Technology leaders are baffled by a “cacophony” of “buzzwords, hype and confusion” over the benefits of artificial intelligence (AI), according to the founder and CEO of technology company Pegasystems. Alan Trefler, who is known for his prowess at chess and ping pong, as well as running a $1.5bn turnover tech company, spends much of his time meeting clients, CIOs and business leaders. “I think CIOs are struggling to understand all of the buzzwords, hype and confusion that exists,” he said. “The words AI and agentic are being thrown around in this great cacophony and they don’t know what it means. I hear that constantly.” CIOs are under pressure from their CEOs, who are convinced AI will offer something valuable. “CIOs are really hungry for pragmatic and practical solutions, and in the absence of those, many of them are doing a lot of experimentation,” said Trefler. Companies are looking at large language models to summarise documents, or to help stimulate ideas for knowledge workers, or generate first drafts of reports – all of which will save time and make people more productive. But Trefler said companies are wary of letting AI loose on critical business applications, because it’s just too unpredictable and prone to hallucinations. “There is a lot of fear over handing things over to something that no one understands exactly how it works, and that is the absolute state of play when it comes to general AI models,” he said. Trefler is scathing about big tech companies that are pushing AI agents and large language models for business-critical applications. “I think they have taken an expedient but short-sighted path,” he said. “I believe the idea that you will turn over critical business operations to an agent, when those operations have to be predictable, reliable, precise and fair to clients … is something that is full of issues, not just in the short term, but structurally.” One of the problems is that generative AI models are extraordinarily sensitive to the data they are trained on and the construction of the prompts used to instruct them. A slight change in a prompt or in the training data can lead to a very different outcome. For example, a business banking application might learn its customer is a bit richer or a bit poorer than expected. “You could easily imagine the prompt deciding to change the interest rate charged, whether that was what the institution wanted or whether it would be legal according to the various regulations that lenders must comply with,” said Trefler. Trefler said Pega has taken a different approach to some other technology suppliers in the way it adds AI into business applications. Rather than using AI agents to solve problems in real time, AI agents do their thinking in advance. Business experts can use them to help them co-design business processes to perform anything from assessing a loan application, giving an offer to a valued customer, or sending out an invoice. Companies can still deploy AI chatbots and bots capable of answering queries on the phone. Their job is not to work out the solution from scratch for every enquiry, but to decide which is the right pre-written process to follow. As Trefler put it, design agents can create “dozens and dozens” of workflows to handle all the actions a company needs to take care of its customers. “You just use the natural language model for semantics to be able to handle the miracle of getting the language right, but tie that language to workflows, so that you have reliable, predictable, regulatory-approved ways to execute,” he said. Large language models (LLMs) are not always the right solution. Trefler demonstrated how ChatGPT 4.0 tried and failed to solve a chess puzzle. The LLM repeatedly suggested impossible or illegal moves, despite Trefler’s corrections. On the other hand, another AI tool, Stockfish, a dedicated chess engine, solved the problem instantly. The other drawback with LLMs is that they consume vast amounts of energy. That means if AI agents are reasoning during “run time”, they are going to consume hundreds of times more electricity than an AI agent that simply selects from pre-determined workflows, said Trefler. “ChatGPT is inherently, enormously consumptive … as it’s answering your question, its firing literally hundreds of millions to trillions of nodes,” he said. “All of that takes [large quantities of] electricity.” Using an employee pay claim as an example, Trefler said a better alternative is to generate, say, 30 alternative workflows to cover the major variations found in a pay claim. That gives you “real specificity and real efficiency”, he said. “And it’s a very different approach to turning a process over to a machine with a prompt and letting the machine reason it through every single time.” “If you go down the philosophy of using a graphics processing unit [GPU] to do the creation of a workflow and a workflow engine to execute the workflow, the workflow engine takes a 200th of the electricity because there is no reasoning,” said Trefler. He is clear that the growing use of AI will have a profound effect on the jobs market, and that whole categories of jobs will disappear. The need for translators, for example, is likely to dry up by 2027 as AI systems become better at translating spoken and written language. Google’s real-time translator is already “frighteningly good” and improving. Pega now plans to work more closely with its network of system integrators, including Accenture and Cognizant to deliver AI services to businesses. An initiative launched last week will allow system integrators to incorporate their own best practices and tools into Pega’s rapid workflow development tools. The move will mean Pega’s technology reaches a wider range of businesses. Under the programme, known as Powered by Pega Blueprint, system integrators will be able to deploy customised versions of Blueprint. They can use the tool to reverse-engineer ageing applications and replace them with modern AI workflows that can run on Pega’s cloud-based platform. “The idea is that we are looking to make this Blueprint Agent design approach available not just through us, but through a bunch of major partners supplemented with their own intellectual property,” said Trefler. That represents a major expansion for Pega, which has largely concentrated on supplying technology to several hundred clients, representing the top Fortune 500 companies. “We have never done something like this before, and I think that is going to lead to a massive shift in how this technology can go out to market,” he added. When AI agents behave in unexpected ways Iris is incredibly smart, diligent and a delight to work with. If you ask her, she will tell you she is an intern at Pegasystems, and that she lives in a lighthouse on the island of Texel, north of the Netherlands. She is, of course, an AI agent. When one executive at Pega emailed Iris and asked her to write a proposal for a financial services company based on his notes and internet research, Iris got to work. Some time later, the executive received a phone call from the company. “‘Listen, we got a proposal from Pega,’” recalled Rob Walker, vice-president at Pega, speaking at the Pegaworld conference last week. “‘It’s a good proposal, but it seems to be signed by one of your interns, and in her signature, it says she lives in a lighthouse.’ That taught us early on that agents like Iris need a safety harness.” The developers banned Iris from sending an email to anyone other than the person who sent the original request. Then Pega’s ethics department sent Iris a potentially abusive email from a Pega employee to test her response. Iris reasoned that the email was either a joke, abusive, or that the employee was under distress, said Walker. She considered forwarding the email to the employee’s manager or to HR. But both of these options were now blocked by her developers. “So what does she do? She sent an out of office,” he said. “Conflict avoidance, right? So human, but very creative.”

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

Elon Musk is contemplating decommissioning SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft, responding to President Donald Trump's apparent intent to terminate government subsidies and contracts with the billionaire's companies. It looks like the feud between the former allies has quickly turned vicious.SpaceX's CEO initially announced that the company would retire its Dragon spacecraft in an X post on Thursday, with Musk sharing a screenshot of a post published on Trump's Truth Social account earlier in the day."The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts," said Trump in the screenshotted post. "I was always surprised that Biden didn’t do it!" You May Also Like "In light of the President’s statement about cancellation of my government contracts, @SpaceX will begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately," Musk wrote on X.SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft are a family of vehicles designed to carry passengers and cargo. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has previously relied upon them to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS). Mere hours prior to Musk's announcement, SpaceX posted on X that it was preparing to launch a Dragon next Tuesday.For a few hours, it seemed reasonable to assume that this launch would now not go ahead. However, Musk then appeared to quickly walk back his decision. Responding to an X user advising him to "cool off and take a step back for a couple days," the billionaire subsequently stated that Dragon will not be decommissioned after all.It's unclear whether Musk's initial announcement was sincere, or whether his apparent about-face might be sarcastic. Musk has a history of making flippant comments online with no apparent regard to their consequences. What is clear is that Musk and Trump's relationship is well past the honeymoon phase, and now looks much more like an ugly divorce.If Trump does terminate government contracts with Musk's companies, it would deal a significant blow to the billionaire. According to a Washington Post investigation, NASA has invested over $15 billion in SpaceX alone. When put together with Musk's other companies such as EV automaker Tesla, his various businesses have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies, and tax credits. Mashable Trend Report: Coming Soon! Decode what’s viral, what’s next, and what it all means. Sign up for Mashable’s weekly Trend Report newsletter. By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up! Musk and Trump go through messy public breakup Credit: Roberto Schmidt / AFP via Getty Images Musk's relationship with Trump has significantly deteriorated in recent days. The billionaire announced that he was leaving his position as de facto head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) last Wednesday, just one day after he criticised Trump's tax bill as undermining its work. The split was presented as amicable at the time, with Trump presenting Musk with a golden key and words of praise. However, their love affair has quickly turned sour.Musk continued to lambast Trump's bill after his departure from DOGE, arguing that it will increase government debt by trillions of dollars. Strongly disagreeing with the president's characterisation of the proposed legislation as a "Big Beautiful Bill," Musk labelled it a "disgusting abomination" and has been calling for lawmakers to crush it.For his part, Trump has claimed that Musk is simply throwing a tantrum because the bill supposedly cut an alleged "EV mandate." The president stated on Thursday that he had asked the billionaire to leave his administration, and that Musk had been "wearing thin.""I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!" Trump claimed. Despite Trump's assertions, he did not abolish any EV mandate as there has never been any U.S. law which makes switching to an electric car mandatory. However, Trump has taken several anti-EV measures since his inauguration, including abolishing incentives encouraging EV adoption, pausing $3 billion in funding for a U.S. charging network, and introducing a $250 annual fee for EV users in his recent tax bill. Related Stories Trump's claim about Musk is an interesting contrast to his statements in March, when he praised the billionaire for not complaining about the supposed end of the non-existent EV mandate. The president made the comments while he and Musk co-hosted a Tesla ad on the White House lawn in an effort to boost the company's cratering stock prices.Tesla's struggling share value has now fallen again amidst Musk's feud with Trump, plummeting more than 14 percent on Thursday to wipe out over $150 billion in value."I don’t mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago," Trump wrote on Thursday.Meanwhile, Musk went all-in attacking Trump on Thursday, claiming that the president is linked to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and sharing posts calling for him to be impeached. Musk has also hit out at Trump's tariffs on international trade, predicting that they will "cause a recession in the second half of the year.""Without me, Trump would have lost the election," Musk alleged on X. "Such ingratitude."

It’s easy to look at President Donald Trump’s second term and conclude that the less power and reach the federal government has, the better. After all, a smaller government might provide Trump or someone like him with fewer opportunities to disrupt people’s lives, leaving America less vulnerable to the whims of an aspiring autocrat. Weaker law-enforcement agencies could lack the capacity to enforce draconian policies. The president would have less say in how universities like Columbia conduct their business if they weren’t so dependent on federal funding. And he would have fewer resources to fundamentally change the American way of life.Trump’s presidency has the potential to reshape an age-old debate between the left and the right: Is it better to have a big government or a small one? The left, which has long advocated for bigger government as a solution to society’s problems, might be inclined to think that in the age of Trump, a strong government may be too risky. Say the United States had a single-payer universal health care system, for example. As my colleague Kelsey Piper pointed out, the government would have a lot of power to decide what sorts of medical treatments should and shouldn’t be covered, and certain forms of care that the right doesn’t support — like abortion or transgender health — would likely get cut when they’re in power. That’s certainly a valid concern. But the dangers Trump poses do not ultimately make the case for a small or weak government because the principal problem with the Trump presidency is not that he or the federal government has too much power. It’s that there’s not enough oversight.Reducing the power of the government wouldn’t necessarily protect us. In fact, “making government smaller” is one of the ways that Trump might be consolidating power.First things first: What is “big government”?When Americans are polled about how they feel about “big government” programs — policies like universal health care, Social Security, welfare for the poor — the majority of people tend to support them. Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the government should be responsible for ensuring everyone has health coverage. But when you ask Americans whether they support “big government” in the abstract, a solid majority say they view it as a threat.That might sound like a story of contradictions. But it also makes sense because “big government” can have many different meanings. It can be a police state that surveils its citizens, an expansive regulatory state that establishes and enforces rules for the private sector, a social welfare state that directly provides a decent standard of living for everyone, or some combination of the three. In the United States, the debate over “big government” can also include arguments about federalism, or how much power the federal government should have over states. All these distinctions complicate the debate over the size of government: Because while someone might support a robust welfare system, they might simultaneously be opposed to being governed by a surveillance state or having the federal government involved in state and local affairs.As much as Americans like to fantasize about small government, the reality is that the wealthiest economies in the world have all been a product of big government, and the United States is no exception. That form of government includes providing a baseline social safety net, funding basic services, and regulating commerce. It also includes a government that has the capacity to enforce its rules and regulations.A robust state that caters to the needs of its people, that is able to respond quickly in times of crisis, is essential. Take the Covid-19 pandemic. The US government, under both the Trump and Biden administrations, was able to inject trillions of dollars into the economy to avert a sustained economic downturn. As a result, people were able to withstand the economic shocks, and poverty actually declined. Stripping the state of the basic powers it needs to improve the lives of its citizens will only make it less effective and erode people’s faith in it as a central institution, making people less likely to participate in the democratic process, comply with government policies, or even accept election outcomes.A constrained government does not mean a small governmentBut what happens when the people in power have no respect for democracy? The argument for a weaker and smaller government often suggests that a smaller government would be more constrained in the harm it can cause, while big government is more unrestrained. In this case, the argument is that if the US had a smaller government, then Trump could not effectively use the power of the state — by, say, deploying federal law enforcement agencies or withholding federal funds — to deport thousands of immigrants, bully universities, and assault fundamental rights like the freedom of speech. But advocating for bigger government does not mean you believe in handing the state unlimited power to do as it pleases. Ultimately, the most important way to constrain government has less to do with its size and scope and more to do with its checks and balances. In fact, one of the biggest checks on Trump’s power so far has been the structure of the US government, not its size. Trump’s most dangerous examples of overreach — his attempts to conduct mass deportations, eliminate birthright citizenship, and revoke student visas and green cards based on political views — have been an example of how proper oversight has the potential to limit government overreach. To be sure, Trump’s policies have already upended people’s lives, chilled speech, and undermined the principle of due process. But while Trump has pushed through some of his agenda, he hasn’t been able to deliver at the scale he promised. But that’s not because the federal government lacks the capacity to do those things. It’s because we have three equal branches of government, and the judicial branch, for all of its shortcomings in the Trump era, is still doing its most basic job to keep the executive branch in check. Reforms should include more oversight, not shrinking governmentThe biggest lesson from Trump’s first term was that America’s system of checks and balances — rules and regulations, norms, and the separate branches of government — wasn’t strong enough. As it turned out, a lot of potential oversight mechanisms did not have enough teeth to meaningfully restrain the president from abusing his power. Trump incited an assault on the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, and Congress ultimately failed in its duty to convict him for his actions. Twice, impeachment was shown to be a useless tool to keep a president in check.But again that’s a problem of oversight, not of the size and power of government. Still, oversight mechanisms need to be baked into big government programs to insulate them from petty politics or volatile changes from one administration to the next. Take the example of the hypothetical single-payer universal health care system. Laws dictating which treatments should be covered should be designed to ensure that changes to them aren’t dictated by the president alone, but through some degree of consensus that involves regulatory boards, Congress, and the courts. Ultimately, social programs should have mechanisms that allow for change so that laws don’t become outdated, as they do now. And while it’s impossible to guarantee that those changes will always be good, the current system of employer-sponsored health insurance is hardly a stable alternative.By contrast, shrinking government in the way that Republicans often talk about only makes people more vulnerable. Bigger governments — and more bureaucracy — can also insulate public institutions from the whims of an erratic president. For instance, Trump has tried to shutter the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a regulatory agency that gets in the way of his and his allies’ business. This assault allows Trump to serve his own interests by pleasing his donors.In other words, Trump is currently trying to make government smaller — by shrinking or eliminating agencies that get in his way — to consolidate power. “Despite Donald Trump’s rhetoric about the size or inefficiency of government, what he has done is eradicate agencies that directly served people,” said Julie Margetta Morgan, president of the Century Foundation who served as an associate director at the CFPB. “He may use the language of ‘government inefficiency’ to accomplish his goals, but I think what we’re seeing is that the goals are in fact to open up more lanes for big businesses to run roughshod over the American people.” The problem for small-government advocates is that the alternative to big government is not just small government. It’s also big business because fewer services, rules, and regulations open up the door to privatization and monopolization. And while the government, however big, has to answer to the public, businesses are far less accountable. One example of how business can replace government programs is the Republicans’ effort to overhaul student loan programs in the latest reconciliation bill the House passed, which includes eliminating subsidized loans and limiting the amount of aid students receive. The idea is that if students can’t get enough federal loans to cover the cost of school, they’ll turn to private lenders instead. “It’s not only cutting Pell Grants and the affordability of student loan programs in order to fund tax cuts to the wealthy, but it’s also creating a gap where [private lenders] are all too happy to come in,” Margetta Morgan said. “This is the small government alternative: It’s cutting back on programs that provided direct services for people — that made their lives better and more affordable — and replacing it with companies that will use that gap as an opportunity for extraction and, in some cases, for predatory services.”Even with flawed oversight, a bigger and more powerful government is still preferable because it can address people’s most basic needs, whereas small government and the privatization of public services often lead to worse outcomes.So while small government might sound like a nice alternative when would-be tyrants rise to power, the alternative to big government would only be more corrosive to democracy, consolidating power in the hands of even fewer people (and businesses). And ultimately, there’s one big way for Trump to succeed at destroying democracy, and that’s not by expanding government but by eliminating the parts of government that get in his way.See More:

Chances are, you've heard of the term "large language models," or LLMs, when people are talking about generative AI. But they aren't quite synonymous with the brand-name chatbots like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI and Anthropic's Claude.These AI chatbots can produce impressive results, but they don't actually understand the meaning of words the way we do. Instead, they're the interface we use to interact with large language models. These underlying technologies are trained to recognize how words are used and which words frequently appear together, so they can predict future words, sentences or paragraphs. Understanding how LLMs work is key to understanding how AI works. And as AI becomes increasingly common in our daily online experiences, that's something you ought to know.This is everything you need to know about LLMs and what they have to do with AI.What is a language model?You can think of a language model as a soothsayer for words."A language model is something that tries to predict what language looks like that humans produce," said Mark Riedl, professor in the Georgia Tech School of Interactive Computing and associate director of the Georgia Tech Machine Learning Center. "What makes something a language model is whether it can predict future words given previous words."This is the basis of autocomplete functionality when you're texting, as well as of AI chatbots.What is a large language model?A large language model contains vast amounts of words from a wide array of sources. These models are measured in what is known as "parameters."So, what's a parameter?Well, LLMs use neural networks, which are machine learning models that take an input and perform mathematical calculations to produce an output. The number of variables in these computations are parameters. A large language model can have 1 billion parameters or more."We know that they're large when they produce a full paragraph of coherent fluid text," Riedl said.How do large language models learn?LLMs learn via a core AI process called deep learning."It's a lot like when you teach a child -- you show a lot of examples," said Jason Alan Snyder, global CTO of ad agency Momentum Worldwide.In other words, you feed the LLM a library of content (what's known as training data) such as books, articles, code and social media posts to help it understand how words are used in different contexts, and even the more subtle nuances of language. The data collection and training practices of AI companies are the subject of some controversy and some lawsuits. Publishers like The New York Times, artists and other content catalog owners are alleging tech companies have used their copyrighted material without the necessary permissions.(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET's parent company, in April filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed on Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.)AI models digest far more than a person could ever read in their lifetime -- something on the order of trillions of tokens. Tokens help AI models break down and process text. You can think of an AI model as a reader who needs help. The model breaks down a sentence into smaller pieces, or tokens -- which are equivalent to four characters in English, or about three-quarters of a word -- so it can understand each piece and then the overall meaning.From there, the LLM can analyze how words connect and determine which words often appear together."It's like building this giant map of word relationships," Snyder said. "And then it starts to be able to do this really fun, cool thing, and it predicts what the next word is … and it compares the prediction to the actual word in the data and adjusts the internal map based on its accuracy."This prediction and adjustment happens billions of times, so the LLM is constantly refining its understanding of language and getting better at identifying patterns and predicting future words. It can even learn concepts and facts from the data to answer questions, generate creative text formats and translate languages. But they don't understand the meaning of words like we do -- all they know are the statistical relationships.LLMs also learn to improve their responses through reinforcement learning from human feedback."You get a judgment or a preference from humans on which response was better given the input that it was given," said Maarten Sap, assistant professor at the Language Technologies Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. "And then you can teach the model to improve its responses." LLMs are good at handling some tasks but not others.

In 1965, then-French finance minister Valéry Giscard d’Estaing came up with the “mot juste” for describing the way that the supremacy of the dollar provided the foundation for the financial supremacy of the US. The fact the dollar was so dominant in international transactions gave the US, d’Estaing said, an “exorbitant privilege.” Because every country needed dollars to settle trade and backstop their own currencies, foreign countries had to buy up US debt, which in turn meant that the US paid less to borrow money and was able to run up trade and budget deficits without suffering the usual pain. The exorbitant privilege of the dollar was that the US would be able to live beyond its means. It’s always been an open question as to how long that privilege would last, but President Donald Trump’s harsh tariff policies, paired with a budget bill that right now would add trillions to the budget deficit, might just be enough to finally dislodge the dollar. Annual federal deficits are already running at 6 percent of GDP, while interest rates on 10-year US Treasuries have more than doubled to around 4.5 percent over the past few years, increasing the cost of interest payments on the debt. As of the last quarter of 2024, 58 percent of global reserves were in dollars, down from 71 percent in the first quarter of 1999. The dollar may remain king, if only because there seems to be no real alternative, but thanks to the US’ own actions, the exorbitance of its privilege is already eroding — and with it, America’s ability to compensate for its fiscal fecklessness.But the dollar isn’t the only privilege the US enjoys. Since the postwar era, America’s best universities have led the world. Harvard, Princeton, MIT, CalTech — these elite universities are the foundation of the American scientific supremacy that has in turn fueled decades of economic growth. But also, by virtue of their unparalleled ability to attract the best minds from around the world, these schools have given the US the educational privilege of being the magnet of global academic excellence. In the same way that the dollar’s dominance has allowed the US to live beyond its means, the dominance of elite universities has compensated for the fact that the US has, at best, a mediocre K-12 educational system. And now that privilege is under attack by the Trump administration. Cutting off federal funding for universities like Columbia and Princeton and eviscerating agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation were bad enough, but the administration’s recent move to bar international students from Harvard would be a death blow, especially if it spread to other top schools. And it seems entirely possible that it might. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US would “aggressively revoke” visas for Chinese students and enhance future scrutiny on all applicants from China. (That includes applicants from Hong Kong — a once-free city that has come firmly under the boot of the Chinese government — who are precisely the kind of students a past America would have sought to defend.)The ability to attract the best of the best, especially in the sciences, is what makes Harvard Harvard, which in turn has helped make the United States the United States. Just as losing the privilege of the dollar would force the US to finally pay for years of fiscal mismanagement, losing the privilege of these top universities would force the country to pay for decades of educational failure. American science runs on foreign talentAs Vox contributor Kevin Carey wrote this week, foreign students are a major source of financial support for US colleges and universities, many of which would struggle to survive should those students disappear. But the financial picture actually understates just how much US science depends on foreign talent and, in turn, depends on top universities like Harvard to bring in top students and professors.An astounding 70 percent of grad students in the US in electrical engineering and 63 percent in computer science — probably the two disciplines most important to winning the future — are foreign-born. Nineteen percent of the overall STEM workforce in the US is foreign-born; focus just on the PhD-level workforce, and that number rises to 43 percent. Since 1901, just about half of all physics, chemistry, and medicine Nobel Prizes have gone to Americans, and about a third of those winners were foreign-born, a figure that has risen in recent decades. It’s really not too much to suggest that if all foreign scientists and science students were deported tomorrow, US science would grind to a halt.Could American-born students step into that gap? Absolutely not. That’s because as elite as America’s top universities are, the country’s K-12 education system has been anything but. Every three years, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is given to a representative sample of 15-year-old students in over 80 countries. It’s the best existing test for determining how a country’s students compare in mathematics, reading, and science to their international peers. In the most recent PISA tests, taken in 2022, US students scored below the average for OECD or developed countries in math; on reading and science, they were just slightly above average. And while a lot of attention has been rightly paid to learning loss since the pandemic — one report from fall 2024 estimated that the average US student is less than halfway to a full academic recovery — American students have lagged behind their international peers since long before then. Other wealthy nations, from East Asian countries to some small European ones, regularly outpace American peers in math by the equivalent of one full academic year.To be clear, this picture isn’t totally catastrophic. It’s fine — American students perform around the middle compared to their international peers. But just fine won’t make you the world’s undisputed scientific leader. And fine is a long way from what the US once was. America was a pioneer in universal education, and it did the same in college education through the postwar GI Bill, which opened up college education to the masses. By 1950, 34 percent of US adults aged 25 or older had completed high school or more, compared to 14 percent in the UK and 11 percent in France. When NASA engineers were putting people on the moon in the 1960s, the US had perhaps the world’s most educated workforce to draw from.Since then, much of the rest of the world has long since caught up with the US on educational attainment, and a number of countries have surpassed it. But thanks in large part to the privilege that is elite universities like Harvard or the University of California, and their ability to recruit the best, no country has caught up to the US in sheer scientific brainpower. Take away our foreign talent, however, and US science would look more like its K-12 performance — merely fine.Life after HarvardIt seems increasingly apparent that the Trump administration wants to make an example of Harvard, proving its own dominance by breaking a 388-year-old institution with strong ties to American power and influence. On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that the administration planned to cancel all remaining federal contracts with Harvard, while Trump himself mused on redirecting Harvard’s $3 billion in grants to trade schools. Grants and contracts are vital, but they can be restored, just as faith in the US dollar might be restored by a saner trade policy and a tighter budget. But if the Trump administration chooses to make the US fundamentally hostile to foreign students and scientific talent, there may be no coming back. Politico reported this week that the administration is weighing requiring all foreign students applying to study in the US to undergo social media vetting. With universities around the world now competing to make themselves alternatives to the US, what star student from Japan or South Korea or Finland would choose to put their future in the hands of the Trump administration, when they could go anywhere else they wanted?The US once achieved scientific leadership because it educated its own citizens better and longer than any other country. Those days are long past, but the US managed to keep its pole position, and all that came with it, because it supported and funded what were far and away the best universities in the world. That was our privilege, as much as the dollar was. And now we seem prepared to destroy both.Should that come to pass, we’ll see just how little is left.A version of this story originally appeared in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here!Update, May 29, 9:50 AM ET: This story was originally published on May 28 and has been updated to include news of the Trump administration’s move to look to revoke visas of many students from China.You’ve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you — threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you — join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

President Donald Trump has disrupted global trade and roiled markets in an effort to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. Some of his top tech allies, however, have backed ventures that replace human workers with robots.Elon Musk, a top donor and adviser to Trump, has touted humanoid robots as a future growth area for electric-carmaker Tesla. "You can produce any product,” Musk said of the robots’ potential capacity during a February interview with Dubai's World Governments Summit.Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who Trump last month called “terrific,” has invested in several advanced robotics firms.Bezos last year poured funds into Figure, a humanoid robot company that says its initial rollout will focus on manufacturers and warehouses, among other business applications. “We believe humanoids will revolutionize a variety of industries,” the company says on its website.Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman – both of whom joined Trump on his recent trip to the Middle East – helmed their respective companies as each invested in Figure. OpenAI ended its partnership with Figure last year.“Trump is talking about bringing back the jobs, and he’s not understanding the tension between that goal and automation, which the tech bros have enthusiasm for,” Harry Holzer, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University and a former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor, told ABC News. “There’s a fundamental conflict between those goals.”MORE: Trump wants Apple to make iPhones in the US. Will it ever happen?Musk did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment made through Musk-owned firm SpaceX. Neither Bezos, Huang nor Altman responded to ABC News’ request.Speaking at a conference in April, Huang said the onset of artificial intelligence would fuel "new types of factories," which in turn would create jobs in construction and steelmaking, as well as in trades such as plumbing and electricity.Even more, Huang said, AI is set to trigger a surge in productivity at companies that adopt the new technology, allowing them to add employees as the firms increase output and revenue."New jobs will be created, some jobs will be lost, every job will be changed," Huang said. "Remember, it's not AI that's going to take your job. It's not AI that's going to destroy your company. It's the company and the person who uses AI that's going to take your job. And so that's something to internalize."Even after a rollback of some levies, consumers face the highest overall average effective tariff rate since 1934, the Yale Budget Lab found earlier this month.A key reason for the tariffs, White House officials say: Reshoring factories and rejuvenating employment in the manufacturing industry.Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said this month in an interview with Fox News that Trump's vision for ushering in a "golden age" for America involved enticing manufacturers to open factories and build in the United States."We're going to have huge jobs in manufacturing. You've heard the president talk about trillions and trillions of factories being built in America," he said in the interview on May 11.In response to ABC News' request for comment, White House Spokesperson Kush Desai said "the importance of President Trump’s push to reinvigorate American industry goes beyond creating good-paying jobs for everyday Americans.""Supply chain shocks of critical pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, and semiconductors during the COVID era prove that America cannot rely on foreign imports. The Trump administration remains committed to reshoring manufacturing that’s critical to our national and economic security with a multifaceted approach of tariffs, tax cuts, rapid deregulation, and domestic energy production," Desai added.The share of U.S. workers in manufacturing has plummeted for decades. Roughly 8% of U.S. workers currently hold positions in manufacturing, which marks a steep decline from about a quarter of all employees as recently as 1970.Researchers attribute such decline to overlapping trends, including the offshoring of manufacturing to low-wage markets overseas and the adoption of labor-saving technology throughout the sector.Long before current advances, automation significantly increased productivity in U.S. factories, meaning the same number of workers could produce many more goods, researchers at Ball State University found in 2015. As a result, they said, manufacturing employment stagnated for decades even as output climbed.Popular Reads“Automation is something we’ve seen for a long time,” Philipp Kircher, a professor of industrial and labor relations at Cornell University, told ABC News.CEO of Meta and Facebook Mark Zuckerberg, Lauren Sanchez, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk attend the inauguration ceremony of Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 2025.Julia Demaree Nikhinson, Pool via AFP via Getty Images, FILESome of Trump’s tech allies have backed firms that seek to further automate manufacturing, touting a new wave of artificial-intelligence equipped robots as a replacement for some workers and salve for labor shortages.Robotics outfit Vicarious boasts $250 million in investments from a set of backers that includes Bezos, Musk and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg – all of whom flanked Trump during his inauguration.On a webpage displaying photos of robots for use in warehouse settings, Vicarious tells potential clients that the products can “reduce both your costs and person-hour needs.”In 2022, Vicarious was acquired by Alphabet-backed robotics software firm Intrinsic. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai also sat alongside tech leaders at Trump’s inauguration.Alphabet did not respond to ABC News' request for comment. Meta declined to comment.Yong Suk Lee, a professor of economics and technology at the University of Notre Dame, described the views on automation among Trump’s tech allies and some of his trade advisers as “opposed.”The tech position, Lee said, would likely win out, even if some firms do open plants in the U.S.“If you want to reshore, are you going to pay the same wages as Vietnam? Probably not,” Lee said. “Companies are faced with higher labor costs. In that case, they’ll probably automate.”Discordant views among some tech leaders and White House officials surfaced in April, when Musk sharply criticized tariff-advocate Peter Navarro, Trump’s senior counselor for trade and manufacturing. Navarro, Musk said, is “truly a moron.”In an interview with CNBC, Navarro responded, saying Musk "isn't a car manufacturer — he's a car assembler.”MORE: Target CEO says tariffs risk 'massive' costs, but price hikes a 'last resort'To be sure, analysts said, automation in manufacturing would likely continue regardless of support from Trump’s tech allies, since producers are locked in a competition to lower costs and increase output. The precise outlook for manufacturing employment is unclear, they added, since additional technology may add jobs for those maintaining and optimizing the machinery.“Whether it’s the companies that currently support the U.S. president or not, somebody would be doing this innovation, maybe slightly slower,” Kircher said.Even at current employment levels, a labor shortage bedevils U.S. manufacturers. Roughly one of every five U.S. factories that failed to produce at full capacity cited a shortage of workers, Jason Miller, a professor of supply chain management at Michigan State University, found in a January study analyzing government data.Agility Robots, an Amazon-backed firm building humanoid robots, identifies the current push for rejuvenated U.S. manufacturing as an opportunity for greater adoption of technology.“Manufacturing companies are seeing a massive reshoring movement spanning various industries,” Agility Robots says on its website. “Adding a humanoid robot to your manufacturing facility is a great way to stay on the leading edge of automation.”In response to ABC News' request for comment, an Amazon spokesperson pointed to previous remarks about robotics made by a company executive."Our goal is to ensure these systems improve safety and productivity. Technology should be used to help us retain and grow our talent through skill development and reimagining how we make our workplace better, both in productivity and safety. If we do this well, we’re certain to always innovate for our customers," Tye Brady, chief technologist at Amazon Robotics, said in a September blog post.Amazon has "created more U.S. jobs in the last decade than any other company," Amazon said this month.

You May Also Like Ariana GrandeBillie EilishChappell RoanKendrick LamarMorgan WallenPost MaloneSabrina CarpenterSZATaylor SwiftZach BryanNEW ARTIST OF THE YEARBenson BooneChappell RoanGracie AbramsShaboozeyTeddy SwimsTommy RichmanALBUM OF THE YEARBeyoncé COWBOY CARTERBillie Eilish HIT ME HARD AND SOFTChappell Roan The Rise and Fall of a Midwest PrincessCharli xcx BRATGracie Abrams The Secret of UsFuture & Metro Boomin WE DON’T TRUST YOUKendrick Lamar GNXPost Malone F-1 TrillionSabrina Carpenter Short n’ SweetTaylor Swift The Tortured Poets DepartmentSONG OF THE YEARBenson Boone “Beautiful Things”Billie Eilish “Birds of a Feather”Chappell Roan “Good Luck, Babe!”Hozier “Too Sweet”Kendrick Lamar “Not Like Us”Lady Gaga & Bruno Mars “Die With A Smile”Post Malone Featuring Morgan Wallen “I Had Some Help”Sabrina Carpenter “Espresso”Shaboozey “A Bar Song (Tipsy)”Teddy Swims “Lose Control”COLLABORATION OF THE YEARKendrick Lamar & SZA “Luther”Lady Gaga & Bruno Mars “Die With A Smile”Marshmello & Kane Brown “Miles on It”Post Malone Featuring Morgan Wallen “I Had Some Help”ROSÉ & Bruno Mars “APT.”Taylor Swift Featuring Post Malone “Fortnight”SOCIAL SONG OF THE YEARChappell Roan “HOT TO GO!”Djo “End of Beginning”Doechii “Anxiety”Lola Young “Messy”Shaboozey “A Bar Song (Tipsy)”Tommy Richman “Million Dollar Baby”FAVORITE TOURING ARTISTBillie EilishLuke CombsMorgan WallenTaylor SwiftZach BryanFAVORITE MUSIC VIDEOBenson Boone “Beautiful Things”KAROL G “Si Antes Te Hubiera Conocido”Kendrick Lamar “Not Like Us”Lady Gaga & Bruno Mars “Die With A Smile”Shaboozey “A Bar Song (Tipsy)”FAVORITE MALE POP ARTISTBenson BooneBruno MarsHozierTeddy SwimsThe WeekndFAVORITE FEMALE POP ARTISTBillie EilishChappell RoanLady GagaSabrina CarpenterTaylor SwiftFAVORITE POP ALBUMBillie Eilish HIT ME HARD AND SOFTChappell Roan The Rise and Fall of a Midwest PrincessCharli xcx BRATSabrina Carpenter Short n’ SweetTaylor Swift The Tortured Poets DepartmentFAVORITE POP SONGBenson Boone “Beautiful Things”Billie Eilish “Birds of a Feather”Lady Gaga & Bruno Mars “Die With A Smile”Sabrina Carpenter “Espresso”Teddy Swims “Lose Control”FAVORITE MALE COUNTRY ARTISTJelly RollLuke CombsMorgan WallenPost MaloneShaboozeyFAVORITE FEMALE COUNTRY ARTISTBeyoncéElla LangleyKacey MusgravesLainey WilsonMegan MoroneyFAVORITE COUNTRY DUO or GROUPDan + ShayOld DominionParmaleeThe Red Clay StraysZac Brown BandFAVORITE COUNTRY ALBUMBeyoncé COWBOY CARTERJelly Roll BEAUTIFULLY BROKENMegan Moroney AM I OKAY?Post Malone F-1 TrillionShaboozey Where I’ve Been, Isn’t Where I’m GoingFAVORITE COUNTRY SONGJelly Roll “I Am Not Okay”Koe Wetzel & Jessie Murph “High Road”Luke Combs “Ain’t No Love in Oklahoma”Post Malone Featuring Morgan Wallen “I Had Some Help”Shaboozey “A Bar Song (Tipsy)”FAVORITE MALE HIP-HOP ARTISTDrakeEminemFutureKendrick LamarTyler, The CreatorFAVORITE FEMALE HIP-HOP ARTISTDoechiiGloRillaLattoMegan Thee StallionSexyy RedFAVORITE HIP-HOP ALBUMEminem The Death Of Slim Shady (Coup De Grâce)Future & Metro Boomin WE DON’T TRUST YOUGunna one of wunKendrick Lamar GNXTyler, The Creator CHROMAKOPIAFAVORITE HIP-HOP SONGFuture, Metro Boomin & Kendrick Lamar “Like That”GloRilla “TGIF”GloRilla & Sexyy Red “WHATCHU KNO ABOUT ME”Kendrick Lamar “Not Like Us”Kendrick Lamar & SZA “Luther”FAVORITE MALE R&B ARTISTBryson TillerChris BrownPARTYNEXTDOORThe WeekndUsherFAVORITE FEMALE R&B ARTISTKehlaniMuni LongSummer WalkerSZATylaFAVORITE R&B ALBUMBryson Tiller Bryson TillerPARTYNEXTDOOR PARTYNEXTDOOR 4 (P4)PARTYNEXTDOOR & Drake $ome $exy $ongs 4 USZA SOS Deluxe: LANAThe Weeknd Hurry Up TomorrowFAVORITE R&B SONGChris Brown “Residuals”Muni Long “Made For Me”SZA “Saturn”The Weeknd & Playboi Carti “Timeless”Tommy Richman “Million Dollar Baby”FAVORITE MALE LATIN ARTISTBad BunnyFeidPeso PlumaRauw AlejandroTito Double PFAVORITE FEMALE LATIN ARTISTBecky GKAROL GNatti NatashaShakiraYoung MikoFAVORITE LATIN DUO or GROUPCalibre 50Fuerza RegidaGrupo FirmeGrupo FronteraJulión Álvarez y su Norteño BandaFAVORITE LATIN ALBUMBad Bunny DeBÍ TiRAR MáS FOToSFuerza Regida Dolido Pero No ArrepentidoPeso Pluma ÉXODORauw Alejandro Cosa NuestraTito Double P INCÓMODOFAVORITE LATIN SONGBad Bunny “DtMF”FloyyMenor X Cris Mj “Gata Only”KAROL G “Si Antes Te Hubiera Conocido”Oscar Maydon & Fuerza Regida “Tu Boda”Shakira “Soltera”FAVORITE ROCK ARTISTHozierLinkin ParkPearl JamTwenty One PilotsZach BryanFAVORITE ROCK ALBUMHozier Unreal Unearth: UnendingKoe Wetzel 9 livesThe Marías SubmarineTwenty One Pilots ClancyZach Bryan The Great American Bar SceneFAVORITE ROCK SONGGreen Day “Dilemma”Hozier “Too Sweet”Linkin Park “The Emptiness Machine”Myles Smith “Stargazing”Zach Bryan “Pink Skies”FAVORITE DANCE/ELECTRONIC ARTISTCharli xcxDavid GuettaJohn SummitLady GagaMarshmelloFAVORITE SOUNDTRACKArcane League of Legends: Season 2Hazbin Hotel (Original Soundtrack)Moana 2 (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) • Auliʻi Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson and CastTwisters: The AlbumWicked: The Soundtrack • Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande and CastFAVORITE AFROBEATS ARTISTAsakeRemaTemsTylaWizkidFAVORITE K-POP ARTISTATEEZJiminRMROSÉStray Kids

Photo Credit: NOAA A powerful CME from the Sun could disable Earth’s power, satellites, and GPS with little warning Highlights Solar storm magnetic fields stay unknown until they reach Earth Spacecraft offer only 15–60 minutes of warning for incoming solar storms Lack of multi-angle solar data hinders accurate CME forecasting efforts Advertisement Imagine being told a storm is approaching, but you won't know how dangerous it truly is until minutes before impact. That's the reality scientists face with solar storms. Although scientists have improved our ability to monitor coronal mass ejections (CMEs) from the Sun and project their arrival at Earth, the most important consideration — the orientation of the storm's magnetic field — remains unknown until the very last minute. This direction, referred to as the Bz component, decides whether the CME will pass by with little influence or cause disturbances to satellites, electricity grids, and GPS systems.Lack of Early Bz Data Leaves Earth Vulnerable to Solar Storms, Scientists Urge Wider Sun CoverageAs per a report on Space.com, solar physicist Valentín Martínez Pillet emphasised that knowing the Bz value earlier could dramatically improve our ability to prepare. Currently, spacecraft like NASA's ACE and DSCOVR detect Bz only when the CME reaches Lagrange Point 1 (L1), giving us just 15 to 60 minutes' warning. Martínez Pillet predicts it could take 50 years to achieve the forecasting precision we have for Earth's weather unless we expand our view of the Sun with new satellites placed at Lagrange points L4, L5, and L3.Despite having the scientific models needed, Martínez Pillet argues we lack vital real-time data from different solar perspectives. Most observations currently come from a single vantage point — L1, which limits our predictive ability. Missions like ESA's upcoming Vigil, scheduled for launch in 2031 to L5, aim to fill this gap by detecting the CME's shape and magnetic orientation from the side, potentially giving up to a week's notice.But decades may be too long to wait. History reminds us of the danger: the 1859 Carrington Event caused telegraph failures, and a near miss in 2012 could have caused trillions in damage if it had struck Earth. In a 2013 paper, Dan Baker of LASP warned that a direct hit would have left the modern world technologically crippled.Today, tools like the Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) and DSCOVR offer continuous solar monitoring, but their limitations emphasise the need to provide broader coverage. “The Sun isn't changing,” Martínez Pillet said. “It's our dependence on technology that's made us more vulnerable.” Until we build the infrastructure to see solar storms before they hit, we may remain dangerously exposed. For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who'sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube. Further reading: solar storms, space weather, CME, solar activity, NOAA, DSCOVR, Bz component, Lagrange points Gadgets 360 Staff The resident bot. If you email me, a human will respond. More Related Stories