Microsoft is looking to save precious seconds during cyberattacks by unifying threat actor naming.

How Will Transportation Work in the Future? A Look at the Rise of Electric Mobility in CitiesSave this picture!Boise, United States. Image via Wikipedia user: Fæ. License under CC0 1.0. Image Author: Alden SkeieFrom greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution to deforestation, one of the leading contributors to global warming today is emissions from the transportation sector. Exploring its origins and evolution, as well as the major challenges it faces, the development of electric mobility in urban environments represents a global transition that requires a coordinated mix of policies and actions to achieve cleaner and more sustainable transportation systems. Designing safe and comfortable infrastructure for walking and cycling, promoting public transit and shared mobility, and designing more efficient streets that include electric vehicles, among other actions, are part of a growing worldwide effort to reduce carbon emissions.Although electric vehicles were invented before gasoline and diesel cars in the first half of the 19th century, they have undergone significant technological advances over the past 20 years, reducing their costs and their environmental impact, and increasing their utility. Around 1834, Thomas Davenport developed the first battery-powered electric vehicle, building a small train on a circular track and inventing the first direct current (DC) electric motor. Although there were numerous innovations in the years that followed, battery limitations were a major obstacle. The zinc consumption of a battery was four times more expensive than the coal consumption of a steam engine, so at that time it competed with the electric motor. Save this picture!By 1898, the first commercially available electric vehicles were operating in London and New York. As Francisco Martín Moreno explains in "Vehículos eléctricos. Historia, estado actual y retos futuros", in the early 1900s, several electric car models emerged, primarily accessible to wealthy consumers and designed for short distances. In contrast, the early gasoline-powered cars introduced in the 1920s were noisy, emitted strong gasoline odors, and were hard to drive due to complex gear systems. However, large quantities of oil were discovered between 1920 and 1930, making gasoline-powered cars cheaper in Texas and other US states. Highways began to be built connecting cities, allowing gasoline-powered vehicles to travel from one city to another, something beyond the reach of electric vehicles due to their short range. Mass production techniques like Henry Ford's assembly line further reduced costs, making gas-powered cars affordable to the middle class. Related Article Gas Stations and Electric Cars: How Do They Change Cities Save this picture!By the late 1920s, gasoline vehicles had overtaken electric vehicles, and electric car production largely ceased in the 1930s. However, as a result of the oil crisis in the 1970s and the Gulf War in the 1990s, along with the emergence of climate change as a priority, there was a renewed interest in electric cars. This resurgence led to new models of electric vehicles—from small cars to buses and even trucks. The energy crisis led to an increase in gasoline prices, and society in advanced countries began to become aware of the effects of greenhouse gas emissions from oil combustion, the greenhouse effect, and climate change. Concern about greenhouse gas emissions and climate change increased as oil prices rose, and society began to recognize and become more aware of the impact of the current transportation model on cities and the urgency of finding more environmentally friendly transportation alternatives.Save this picture!Save this picture!In developed countries during the 20th century, the growth of cities was largely due to private car use, allowing citizens to travel miles and miles daily from home to work. Suburban expansion shifted the cost of commuting to individuals. Some residential areas are developing far from the city center and industrial zones, where a large proportion of the population relies on cars. In 2010, the global population was around 7 billion, and it's expected to reach 10 billion by 2050. The number of vehicles, meanwhile, is projected to grow from 75 million in 2010 to 2.5 billion by 2050. Will there be enough fossil fuels to power this massive fleet? What will be the future of gas stations?Save this picture!To meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and reduce growing air pollution, low- and middle-income countries should join the global transition to zero-emission electric transport. According to data from the International Energy Agency and the European Alternative Fuels Observatory, China led the world in 2024 with over 7 million electric vehicles (including cars and buses) in operation—an increase of over 3 million in just one year. The U.S. ranked second, followed by Germany, which leads in Europe with about 1.3 million EVs. The UK and France round out the top five.Save this picture!To support this transition, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has launched a global initiative alongside private sector partners, academic institutions, and financial organizations, helping low- and middle-income countries shift to electric mobility. In Latin America, transportation accounts for around one-third of CO₂ emissions. In Africa, Asia, and parts of Latin America, motorcycles and three-wheelers are essential for daily mobility, often covering over 100 km per day. However, these vehicles usually rely on outdated technologies, making them highly polluting and inefficient. Electrifying two- and three-wheelers presents a significant opportunity to reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. UNEP is assisting 17 countries in creating national strategies and running pilot projects to introduce these electric vehicles in regions like Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.Save this picture!Given the rapid urbanization in many low- and middle-income countries, mass public transport remains a cornerstone of urban mobility. Cities across Africa, Asia, and Latin America are investing in better transportation systems, including high-capacity bus corridors and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. Yet, with the average bus lifespan exceeding 12 years, it's essential to avoid locking cities into outdated technologies. Developing policies to support and incentivize the adoption of zero-emission vehicles is essential to achieving the electrification of public transport. The European Commission proposes promoting investment initiatives in charging infrastructure and emissions trading, to be implemented starting in 2026, by putting a carbon price on fossil-fuel vehicles. This measure seeks to boost the use of electric vehicles and the transformation of transport systems. Now, how could charging infrastructure be developed to support a potential massive growth in the electric vehicle fleet? What upgrades and innovations are needed to handle this future demand? What would happen if all transportation suddenly depended on the power grid?Save this picture!Save this picture!The UN emphasizes that using public transportation is critical to curbing climate change. Electrifying buses and trains could cut greenhouse gas emissions by up to two-thirds per passenger per kilometer compared to private vehicles. Still, private cars hold the greatest potential for emission reduction. In 2018, light-duty vehicles were responsible for nearly half of all transport emissions—including those from rail, sea, and air travel. Several major carmakers have announced ambitious plans to release new EV models in the next five years.Save this picture!According to a study by the McKinsey Center for Future Mobility (2019), roughly 60% of global car trips are under 8 kilometers, making them ideal for micromobility solutions. Electromicromobility refers to small, lightweight, and low-speed electric transportation options for short distances, such as electric skateboards, scooters, bikes, mopeds, and quadricycles. From a user perspective, electric vehicles still face hurdles like high costs, limited range, and long charging times. However, their broader societal benefits—particularly emissions reductions—are significant. Therefore, local and national governments are encouraged to implement supportive policies, such as vehicle purchase subsidies, tax breaks, free charging stations, parking benefits, access to city centers, and special electricity rates for nighttime charging, etc.Save this picture!Save this picture!Ultimately, we should ask: What lies ahead for modern transportation? How could new forms of natural, artificial, and collective intelligence be integrated into the design of today's transportation systems to improve resilience to environmental and growth challenges? What partnerships between countries, industries, and organizations are needed to ensure a sustainable and innovative supply of key materials? What will happen to used EV batteries and electronic components? Will be electric mobility in cities the only way to reduce carbon emissions?This article is part of the ArchDaily Topics: What Is Future Intelligence?, proudly presented by Gendo, an AI co-pilot for Architects. Our mission at Gendo is to help architects produce concept images 100X faster by focusing on the core of the design process. We have built a cutting edge AI tool in collaboration with architects from some of the most renowned firms such as Zaha Hadid, KPF and David Chipperfield.Every month we explore a topic in-depth through articles, interviews, news, and architecture projects. We invite you to learn more about our ArchDaily Topics. And, as always, at ArchDaily we welcome the contributions of our readers; if you want to submit an article or project, contact us. Image gallerySee allShow less About this authorAgustina IñiguezAuthor••• Cite: Agustina Iñiguez. "How Will Transportation Work in the Future? A Look at the Rise of Electric Mobility in Cities" 03 Jun 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030500/how-will-transportation-work-in-the-future-a-look-at-the-rise-of-electric-mobility-in-cities&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

Nearly two decades ago, scientists made an alarming discovery in upstate New York: Bats, the world’s only flying mammal, were becoming infected with a new, deadly fungal disease that, in some cases, could wipe out an entire colony in a matter of months. Since then, the disease — later called white-nose syndrome — has spread across much of the country, utterly decimating North American bats that hibernate in caves and killing over 90 percent of three bat species. According to some scientists, WNS has caused “the most precipitous wildlife decline in the past century in North America.” These declines have clear consequences for human populations — for you, even if you don’t like bats or visit caves. Bats eat insect pests, such as moths and beetles. And as they decline, farmers need to spray more pesticides. Scientists have linked the loss of bats in the US to an increase in insecticide use on farmland and, remarkably, to a rise in infant deaths. Insecticide chemicals are known to harm the health of newborns. The only reason we know any of this is because of a somewhat obscure government program in the US Geological Survey (USGS), an agency nested within the Interior Department. That program, known as the Ecosystems Mission Area (EMA), is the biological research division of Interior. Among other functions, it monitors environmental contaminants, the spread of invasive species, and the health of the nation’s wildlife, including bees, birds, and bats.White-nose syndrome, a fungal disease, has caused massive declines in a handful of bat species, including the tricolored bat, shown here in flight. J. Scott Altenbach/Bat Conservation InternationalThe Ecosystems Mission Area, which has around 1,200 employees, produces the premier science revealing how animals and ecosystems that Americans rely on are changing and what we can do to keep them intact — or risk our own health and economy. This program is now at an imminent risk of disappearing.Send us a confidential tipAre you a current or former federal employee with knowledge about the Trump administration’s attacks on wildlife protections? Reach out to Vox environmental correspondent Benji Jones on Signal at benji.90 or at benji.jones@vox.com or at benjijones@protonmail.com.In the White House’s 2026 budget request, the Trump administration asked Congress to slash funding for EMA by about 90 percent, from $293 million in 2025 to $29 million next year. Such cuts are also in line with Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s conservative policy roadmap, which calls for the government to “abolish” Interior’s Biological Resources Division, an outdated name for the Ecosystems Mission Area.Meanwhile, the Trump administration is also reportedly trying to fire government employees in the Ecosystems Mission Area, though a federal judge has so far blocked those efforts. Eliminating biological research is not good. In fact, it’s very bad.For a decade now, EMA’s North American Bat Monitoring Program, or NABat, has been gathering and analyzing data on bats and the threats they face. NABat produces research using data from hundreds of partner organizations showing not only how white-nose syndrome is spreading — which scientists are using to develop and deploy vaccines — but also how bats are affected by wind turbines, another known threat. Energy companies can and do use this research to develop safer technologies and avoid delays caused by wildlife regulations, such as the Endangered Species Act. The irony, an Interior Department employee told me, is that NABat makes wildlife management more efficient. It also helps reveal where declines are occurring before they become severe, potentially helping avoid the need to grant certain species federal protection — something the Trump administration would seem to want. The employee, who’s familiar with Interior’s bat-monitoring efforts, spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by the Trump administration. A northern long-eared bat with white-nose syndrome. Steve Taylor/University of IllinoisA dead bat infected with white-nose syndrome under UV light. USGS“If they want to create efficiencies in the government, they should ask us,” another Interior employee told Vox. “The damage that can be done by one administration takes decades to rebuild.”In response to a request for comment, an Interior Department spokesperson told Vox that “USGS remains committed to its congressional mandate as the science arm of the Department of the Interior.” The White House did not respond to a request for comment. In a Senate appropriations hearing last week, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum refused to commit to maintaining funding for EMA.“There’s no question that they don’t know what EMA does,” said a third Interior employee, who has knowledge of the Ecosystems Mission Area.Ultimately, it’s not clear why the administration has targeted Interior’s biological research. EMA does, however, do climate science, such as studying how plants and animals are responding to rising temperatures. That’s apparently a no-go for the Trump administration. It also gathers information that sometimes indicates that certain species need federal protections, which come with regulations (also a no-go for President Donald Trump’s agenda).What’s especially frustrating for environmental advocates is that NABat, now 10 years old, is starting to hit its stride.“We should be celebrating the 10-year anniversary of this very successful program that started from scratch and built this robust, vibrant community of people all collecting data,” said Winifred Frick, the chief scientist at Bat Conservation International, an environmental group. “We have 10 years of momentum, and so to cut it off now sort of wastes all that investment. That feels like a tremendous loss.” Meanwhile, the cost of maintaining the program is less than 1 percent of Interior’s overall budget.The government’s wildlife monitoring programs are “jewels of the country,” said Hollis Woodard, an associate professor of entomology at University of California Riverside who works with USGS on bee monitoring. “These birds and bats perform services for us that are important for our day-to-day lives. Literally everything I value, including food, comes down to keeping an eye on these populations. The idea that we’re just going to wipe them out is just terrifying.”Update, June 2, 12:58 pm ET: This article was originally published on May 29, 2025, and has been updated to include newly public details on the 2026 White House budget request.See More:

Modern software engineering faces growing challenges in accurately retrieving and understanding code across diverse programming languages and large-scale codebases. Existing embedding models often struggle to capture the deep semantics of code, resulting in poor performance in tasks such as code search, RAG, and semantic analysis. These limitations hinder developers’ ability to efficiently locate relevant code snippets, reuse components, and manage large projects effectively. As software systems grow increasingly complex, there is a pressing need for more effective, language-agnostic representations of code that can power reliable and high-quality retrieval and reasoning across a wide range of development tasks.  Mistral AI has introduced Codestral Embed, a specialized embedding model built specifically for code-related tasks. Designed to handle real-world code more effectively than existing solutions, it enables powerful retrieval capabilities across large codebases. What sets it apart is its flexibility—users can adjust embedding dimensions and precision levels to balance performance with storage efficiency. Even at lower dimensions, such as 256 with int8 precision, Codestral Embed reportedly surpasses top models from competitors like OpenAI, Cohere, and Voyage, offering high retrieval quality at a reduced storage cost. Beyond basic retrieval, Codestral Embed supports a wide range of developer-focused applications. These include code completion, explanation, editing, semantic search, and duplicate detection. The model can also help organize and analyze repositories by clustering code based on functionality or structure, eliminating the need for manual supervision. This makes it particularly useful for tasks like understanding architectural patterns, categorizing code, or supporting automated documentation, ultimately helping developers work more efficiently with large and complex codebases.  Codestral Embed is tailored for understanding and retrieving code efficiently, especially in large-scale development environments. It powers retrieval-augmented generation by quickly fetching relevant context for tasks like code completion, editing, and explanation—ideal for use in coding assistants and agent-based tools. Developers can also perform semantic code searches using natural language or code queries to find relevant snippets. Its ability to detect similar or duplicated code helps with reuse, policy enforcement, and cleaning up redundancy. Additionally, it can cluster code by functionality or structure, making it useful for repository analysis, spotting architectural patterns, and enhancing documentation workflows.  Codestral Embed is a specialized embedding model designed to enhance code retrieval and semantic analysis tasks. It surpasses existing models, such as OpenAI’s and Cohere’s, in benchmarks like SWE-Bench Lite and CodeSearchNet. The model offers customizable embedding dimensions and precision levels, allowing users to effectively balance performance and storage needs. Key applications include retrieval-augmented generation, semantic code search, duplicate detection, and code clustering. Available via API at $0.15 per million tokens, with a 50% discount for batch processing, Codestral Embed supports various output formats and dimensions, catering to diverse development workflows. In conclusion, Codestral Embed offers customizable embedding dimensions and precisions, enabling developers to strike a balance between performance and storage efficiency. Benchmark evaluations indicate that Codestral Embed surpasses existing models like OpenAI’s and Cohere’s in various code-related tasks, including retrieval-augmented generation and semantic code search. Its applications span from identifying duplicate code segments to facilitating semantic clustering for code analytics. Available through Mistral’s API, Codestral Embed provides a flexible and efficient solution for developers seeking advanced code understanding capabilities.  vides valuable insights for the community. Check out the Technical details. All credit for this research goes to the researchers of this project. Also, feel free to follow us on Twitter and don’t forget to join our 95k+ ML SubReddit and Subscribe to our Newsletter. Sana HassanSana Hassan, a consulting intern at Marktechpost and dual-degree student at IIT Madras, is passionate about applying technology and AI to address real-world challenges. With a keen interest in solving practical problems, he brings a fresh perspective to the intersection of AI and real-life solutions.Sana Hassanhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/sana-hassan/Off-Policy Reinforcement Learning RL with KL Divergence Yields Superior Reasoning in Large Language ModelsSana Hassanhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/sana-hassan/This AI Paper from Microsoft Introduces WINA: A Training-Free Sparse Activation Framework for Efficient Large Language Model InferenceSana Hassanhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/sana-hassan/Apple and Duke Researchers Present a Reinforcement Learning Approach That Enables LLMs to Provide Intermediate Answers, Enhancing Speed and AccuracySana Hassanhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/sana-hassan/National University of Singapore Researchers Introduce Dimple: A Discrete Diffusion Multimodal Language Model for Efficient and Controllable Text Generation

SwitchBot has a knack for crafting ingenious IoT devices, those little problem-solvers like robotic curtain openers and automated button pressers that add a touch of futuristic convenience. Yet, the true linchpin, the secret sauce that elevates their entire ecosystem, is undoubtedly their Hub. It’s the central nervous system that takes individual smart products and weaves them into a cohesive, intelligent tapestry, turning the abstract concept of a ‘smart home’ into a tangible, daily experience. This unification through the Hub is what brings us closer to that almost mythical dream: a home where technology works in concert, where devices understand each other’s capabilities and, critically, anticipate your needs. It’s about creating an environment that doesn’t just react to commands, but proactively adapts, making your living space more intuitive, responsive, and, ultimately, more attuned to you. The new Hub 3 aims to refine this very connection. Designer: SwitchBot Click Here to Buy Now: $119.99 The predecessor, the Hub 2, already laid a strong foundation. It brought Matter support into the SwitchBot ecosystem, along with reliable infrared controls, making it a versatile little box. It understood the assignment: bridge the old with the new. The Hub 3 takes that solid base and builds upon it, addressing not just functionality but also the nuanced interactions that make a device truly intuitive and, dare I say, enjoyable to use daily. Matter support, the industry’s push for interoperability, remains a cornerstone. The Hub 3 acts as a Matter bridge, capable of bringing up to 30 SwitchBot devices into the Matter fold, allowing them to play nice with platforms like Apple Home. Furthermore, it can send up to 30 distinct commands to other Matter-certified products already integrated into your Apple Home setup, with Home Assistant support on the horizon. This makes it a powerful orchestrator. One of the most striking additions is the new rotary dial, something SwitchBot calls its “Dial Master” technology. Giving users an intuitive tactile control that feels very familiar (think ovens, radios, car ACs), it makes the Hub 3 even more user-friendly. Imagine adjusting your thermostat not by tapping an arrow repeatedly, but by smoothly turning a dial for that exact ±1°C change. The same applies to volume control or any other granular adjustment. This tactile feedback offers a level of hyper-controlled interaction that screen taps often lack, feeling more connected and satisfying. Beyond physical interaction, the Hub 3 gets smarter senses. While the trusty thermo-hygro sensor (cleverly integrated into its cable) makes a return for indoor temperature and humidity, it’s now joined by a built-in light sensor. This seemingly small addition unlocks a new layer of intuitive automation. Your home can now react to ambient brightness, perhaps cueing your SwitchBot Curtain 3 to draw open gently as the sun rises, or dimming lights as natural light fades. Aesthetically, SwitchBot made a subtle but impactful shift from the Hub 2’s white casing to a sleek black for the Hub 3. This change makes the integrated display stand out significantly, improving readability at a glance. And that display now does more heavy lifting. It still shows essential indoor temperature and humidity, but can also pull in local outdoor weather data, giving you a quick forecast without reaching for your phone. Pair it with a SwitchBot Meter Pro, and it’ll even show CO2 levels. The Hub 2 featured two handy customizable buttons. The Hub 3 doubles down, offering four such buttons. This means more of your favorite automation scenes, like “Movie Night,” “Good Morning,” and “Away Mode,” are just a single press away. This reduces friction, making your smart home react faster to your needs without diving into an app for every little thing. It’s these quality-of-life improvements that often make the biggest difference in daily use. Crucially, the Hub 3 retains everything that made its predecessor a strong contender. The infrared control capabilities are still robust, supporting over 100,000 IR codes for your legacy AV gear and air conditioners, now with a signal that’s reportedly 150% stronger than the Hub Mini. Its deep integration with the existing SwitchBot ecosystem means your Bots, Curtain movers, and vacuums will feel right at home, working in concert. Of course, you still have your choice of control methods. Beyond the new dial and physical buttons, there’s comprehensive app control for setting up complex automations and remote access. Voice control via the usual assistants like Alexa and Google Assistant is present and accounted for, ensuring hands-free operation whenever you need it. This flexibility means the Hub 3 adapts to your preferences, not the other way around. The true power, as always, lies in the DIY automation scenes. Imagine your AC, humidifier, and dehumidifier working together, orchestrated by the Hub 3 to maintain your perfect 23°C and 58% humidity. Or picture an energy-saving scene where the built-in motion sensor, coupled with geofencing, detects an empty house and powers down non-essential appliances. It’s these intelligent, personalized routines that transform a collection of smart devices into a truly smart home. The SwitchBot Hub 3 feels like the most potent iteration of that “secret sauce” yet. It takes the individual brilliance of SwitchBot’s gadgets and, through enhanced sensory input and more tactile controls, truly deepens that crucial understanding between device, environment, and user. The best part? It plugs right into your smart home’s existing setup, communicating with your slew of IoT devices – even more efficiently if you’ve got a Hub 2 or Hub Mini and you’re looking to upgrade. Click Here to Buy Now: $119.99The post Your Smart Home Got a New CEO and It’s Called the SwitchBot Hub 3 first appeared on Yanko Design.

Many don’t like it, but (almost) everybody agrees it’s the future.“Vibe Coding” is everywhere. Tools and game engines are implementing AI-assisted coding, vibe coding interest skyrocketed on Google search, on social media, everybody claims to build apps and games in minutes, while the comment section gets flooded with angry developers calling out the pile of garbage code that will never be shipped.A screenshot from Andrej Karpathy with the original “definition” of Vibe CodingBUT, how do professionals feel about it?This is what I will cover in this article. We will look at:How people react to the term vibe coding,How their attitude differs based on who they are and their professional experienceThe reason for their stance towards “vibe coding” (with direct quotes)How they feel about the impact “vibe coding” will have in the next 5 yearsIt all started with this survey on LinkedIn. I have always been curious about how technology can support creatives and I believe that the only way to get a deeper understanding is to go beyond buzzwords and ask the hard questions. That’s why for over a year, I’ve been conducting weekly interviews with both the founders developing these tools and the creatives utilising them. If you want to learn their journeys, I’ve gathered their insights and experiences on my blog called XR AI Spotlight.Driven by the same motives and curious about people’s feelings about “vibe coding”, I asked a simple question: How does the term “Vibe Coding” make you feel?Original LinkedIn poll by Gabriele RomagnoliIn just three days, the poll collected 139 votes and it was clear that most responders didn’t have a good “vibe” about it. The remaining half was equally split between excitement and no specific feeling.But who are these people? What is their professional background? Why did they respond the way they did?Curious, I created a more comprehensive survey and sent it to everyone who voted on the LinkedIn poll.The survey had four questions:Select what describes you best: developers, creative, non-creative professionalHow many years of experience do you have? 1–5, 6–10, 11–15 or 16+Explain why the term “vibe coding” makes you feel excited/neutral/dismissive?Do you think “vibe coding” will become more relevant in the next 5 years?: It’s the future, only in niche use cases, unlikely, no idea)In a few days, I collected 62 replies and started digging into the findings, and that’s when I finally started understanding who took part in the initial poll.The audienceWhen characterising the audience, I refrained from adding too many options because I just wanted to understand:If the people responding were the ones making stuffWhat percentage of makers were creatives and what developersI was happy to see that only 8% of respondents were non-creative professionals and the remaining 92% were actual makers who have more “skin in the game“ with almost a 50/50 split between creatives and developers. There was also a good spread in the degree of professional experience of the respondents, but that’s where things started to get surprising.Respondents are mostly “makers” and show a good variety in professional experienceWhen creating 2 groups with people who have more or less than 10 years of experience, it is clear that less experienced professionals skew more towards a neutral or negative stance than the more experienced group.Experienced professionals are more positive and open to vibe codingThis might be because senior professionals see AI as a tool to accelerate their workflows, while more juniors perceive it as a competitor or threat.I then took out the non-professional creatives and looked at the attitude of these 2 groups. Not surprisingly, fewer creatives than developers have a negative attitude towards “vibe coding” (47% for developers Vs 37% for creatives), but the percentage of creatives and developers who have a positive attitude stays almost constant. This means that creatives have a more indecisive or neutral stance than developers.Creatives have a more positive attitude to vibe coding than developersWhat are people saying about “vibe coding”?As part of the survey, everybody had the chance to add a few sentences explaining their stance. This was not a compulsory field, but to my surprise, only 3 of the 62 left it empty (thanks everybody). Before getting into the sentiment analysis, I noticed something quite interesting while filtering the data. People with a negative attitude had much more to say, and their responses were significantly longer than the other group. They wrote an average of 59 words while the others barely 37 and I think is a good indication of the emotional investment of people who want to articulate and explain their point. Let’s now look at what the different groups of people replied.😍 Patterns in Positive Responses to “Vibe Coding”Positive responders often embraced vibe coding as a way to break free from rigid programming structures and instead explore, improvise, and experiment creatively.“It puts no pressure on it being perfect or thorough.”“Pursuing the vibe, trying what works and then adapt.”“Coding can be geeky and laborious… ‘vibing’ is quite nice.”This perspective repositions code not as rigid infrastructure, but something that favors creativity and playfulness over precision.Several answers point to vibe coding as a democratizing force opening up coding to a broader audience, who want to build without going through the traditional gatekeeping of engineering culture.“For every person complaining… there are ten who are dabbling in code and programming, building stuff without permission.”“Bridges creative with technical perfectly, thus creating potential for independence.”This group often used words like “freedom,” “reframing,” and “revolution.”.😑 Patterns in Neutral Responses to “Vibe Coding”As shown in the initial LinkedIn poll, 27% of respondents expressed mixed feelings. When going through their responses, they recognised potential and were open to experimentation but they also had lingering doubts about the name, seriousness, and future usefulness.“It’s still a hype or buzzword.”“I have mixed feelings of fascination and scepticism.”“Unsure about further developments.”They were on the fence and were often enthusiastic about the capability, but wary of the framing.Neutral responders also acknowledged that complex, polished, or production-level work still requires traditional approaches and framed vibe coding as an early-stage assistant, not a full solution.“Nice tool, but not more than autocomplete on steroids.”“Helps get setup quickly… but critical thinking is still a human job.”“Great for prototyping, not enough to finalize product.”Some respondents were indifferent to the term itself, viewing it more as a label or meme than a paradigm shift. For them, it doesn’t change the substance of what’s happening.“At the end of the day they are just words. Are you able to accomplish what’s needed?”“I think it’s been around forever, just now with a new name.”These voices grounded the discussion in the terminology and I think they bring up a very important point that leads to the polarisation of a lot of the conversations around “vibe coding”.🤮 Patterns in Negative Responses to “Vibe Coding”Many respondents expressed concern that vibe coding implies a casual, unstructured approach to coding. This was often linked to fears about poor code quality, bugs, and security issues.“Feels like building a house without knowing how electricity and water systems work.”“Without fundamental knowledge… you quickly lose control over the output.”The term was also seen as dismissive or diminishing the value of skilled developers. It really rubbed people the wrong way, especially those with professional experience.“It downplays the skill and intention behind writing a functional, efficient program.”“Vibe coding implies not understanding what the AI does but still micromanaging it.”Like for “neutral” respondents, there’s a strong mistrust around how the term is used (especially on social media) where it’s seen as fueling unrealistic expectations or being pushed by non-experts.“Used to promote coding without knowledge.”“Just another overhyped term like NFTs or memecoins.”“It feels like a joke that went too far.”Ultimately, I decided to compare attitudes that are excited (positive) and accepting (neutral) of vibe coding vs. those that reject or criticise it. After all, even among people who were neutral, there was a general acceptance that vibe coding has its place. Many saw it as a useful tool for things like prototyping, creative exploration, or simply making it easier to get started. What really stood out, though, was the absence of fear that was very prominent in the “negative” group and saw vibe coding as a threat to software quality or professional identity.People in the neutral and positive groups generally see potential. They view it as useful for prototyping, creative exploration, or making coding more accessible, but they still recognise the need for structure in complex systems. In contrast, the negative group rejects the concept outright, and not just the name, but what it stands for: a more casual, less rigorous approach to coding. Their opinion is often rooted in defending software engineering as a disciplined craft… and probably their job.😍 “As long as you understand the result and the process, AI can write and fix scripts much faster than humans can.”🤮 “It’s a joke. It started as a joke… but to me doesn’t encapsulate actual AI co-engineering.”On the topic of skill and control, the neutral and positive group sees AI as a helpful assistant, assuming that a human is still guiding the process. They mention refining and reviewing as normal parts of the workflow. The negative group sees more danger, fearing that vibe coding gives a false sense of competence. They describe it as producing buggy or shallow results, often in the hands of inexperienced users.😑 “Critical thinking is still a human job… but vibe coding helps with fast results.”🤮“Vibe-Coding takes away the very features of a good developer… logical thinking and orchestration are crucial.”Culturally, the divide is clear. The positive and neutral voices often embrace vibe coding as part of a broader shift, welcoming new types of creators and perspectives. They tend to come from design or interdisciplinary backgrounds and are more comfortable with playful language. On the other hand, the negative group associates the term with hype and cringe, criticising it as disrespectful to those who’ve spent years honing their technical skills.😍“It’s about playful, relaxed creation — for the love of making something.”🤮Creating a lot of unsafe bloatware with no proper planning.”What’s the future of “Vibe Coding”?The responses to the last question were probably the most surprising to me. I was expecting that the big scepticism towards vibe coding would align with the scepticism on its future, but that was not the case. 90% of people still see “vibe coding” becoming more relevant overall or in niche use cases.Vibe coding is here to stayOut of curiosity, I also went back to see if there was any difference based on professional experience, and that’s where we see the more experienced audience being more conservative. Only 30% of more senior Vs 50% of less experienced professionals see vibe coding playing a role in niche use cases and 13 % Vs only 3% of more experienced users don’t see vibe coding becoming more relevant at all.More experienced professionals are less likely to think Vibe Coding is the futureThere are still many open questions. What is “vibe coding” really? For whom is it? What can you do with it?To answer these questions, I decided to start a new survey you can find here. If you would like to further contribute to this research, I encourage you to participate and in case you are interested, I will share the results with you as well.The more I read or learn about this, I feel “Vibe Coding” is like the “Metaverse”:Some people hate it, some people love it.Everybody means something differentIn one form or another, it is here to stay.What professionals really think about “Vibe Coding” was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

This article is a sponsored by TetraLogical Neurodivergent needs are often considered as an edge case that doesn’t fit into common user journeys or flows. Neurodiversity tends to get overlooked in the design process. Or it is tackled late in the process, and only if there is enough time. But people aren’t edge cases. Every person is just a different person, performing tasks and navigating the web in a different way. So how can we design better, more inclusive experiences that cater to different needs and, ultimately, benefit everyone? Let’s take a closer look. Neurodiversity Or Neurodivergent? There is quite a bit of confusion about both terms on the web. Different people think and experience the world differently, and neurodiversity sees differences as natural variations, not deficits. It distinguishes between neurotypical and neurodivergent people. Neurotypical people see the world in a “typical” and widely perceived as expected way. Neurodivergent people experience the world differently, for example, people with ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia, synesthesia, and hyperlexia. According to various sources, around 15–40% of the population has neurodivergent traits. These traits can be innate (e.g., autism) or acquired (e.g., trauma). But they are always on a spectrum, and vary a lot. A person with autism is not neurodiverse — they are neurodivergent. One of the main strengths of neurodivergent people is how imaginative and creative they are, coming up with out-of-the-box ideas quickly. With exceptional levels of attention, strong long-term memory, a unique perspective, unbeatable accuracy, and a strong sense of justice and fairness. Being different in a world that, to some degree, still doesn’t accept these differences is exhausting. So unsurprisingly, neurodivergent people often bring along determination, resilience, and high levels of empathy. Design With People, Not For Them As a designer, I often see myself as a path-maker. I’m designing reliable paths for people to navigate to their goals comfortably. Without being blocked. Or confused. Or locked out. That means respecting the simple fact that people’s needs, tasks, and user journeys are all different, and that they evolve over time. And: most importantly, it means considering them very early in the process. Better accessibility is better for everyone. Instead of making decisions that need to be reverted or refined to be compliant, we can bring a diverse group of people — with accessibility needs, with neurodiversity, frequent and infrequent users, experts, newcomers — in the process, and design with them, rather than for them. Neurodiversity & Inclusive Design Resources A wonderful resource that helps us design for cognitive accessibility is Stéphanie Walter’s Neurodiversity and UX toolkit. It includes practical guidelines, tools, and resources to better understand and design for dyslexia, dyscalculia, autism, and ADHD. Another fantastic resource is Will Soward’s Neurodiversity Design System. It combines neurodiversity and user experience design into a set of design standards and principles that you can use to design accessible learning interfaces. Last but not least, I’ve been putting together a few summaries about neurodiversity and inclusive design over the last few years, so you might find them helpful, too: ADHD Autism Children Colorblindness Deafness Dyscalculia Dyslexia Legibility Left-Handed Users Mental Health Motivation Older Adults Screen Readers Teenagers A huge thank-you to everyone who has been writing, speaking, and sharing articles, resources, and toolkits on designing for diversity. The topic is often forgotten and overlooked, but it has an incredible impact. 👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾

People Can Fly, the developer of Outriders and Gears of War: Judgement, announced Monday that its ending development on two of its upcoming games due to issues with its publisher and an inability to secure funding to continue development. A

Fit-for-Purpose Digital Platform Regulations: Navigating Thailand’s Economic Future  Tech For Good Institute

Your home's thermostat relies on a sensor to determine when to switch the heat or air conditioning on or off. These wireless sensors are at the core of the so-called "Internet of Things," enabling smart devices to collect and share data.