
Focus should shift away from seeking to exploit discoveries on other planets, researchers say
Humans boldly going into space should echo the guiding principle of Captain Kirk's Star Trek crew by resisting the urge to interfere, researchers have said, stressing a need to end a colonial approach to exploration.
Nasa has made no secret of its desire to mine the moon for metals, with China also keen to extract lunar resources – a situation that has been called a new space race.
Continue reading…
TODAY

Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36758-9
Salmonella typhimurium translocates numerous effectors via its type III secretion system. Here, Göser et al. present a characterisation of selected proteins and their dynamic interaction with Salmonella-containing vacuoles and – induced filaments.

Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36932-z
Multiplexed analyses of near single
Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36964-5
Cyanobacteria mutants with improved tolerance to combined high light and high temperature (HLHT) are rarely reported. Here, the authors use a hypermutation system for adaptive laboratory evolution and identify a mutant with improved HLHT tolerance by enhancing expression of shikimate kinase.



Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36569-y
HIV maturation inhibitors such as bevirimat (BVM) interfering with Gag processing are emerging as alternative anti-retroviral drug candidates. Here, the authors report structures of assemblies of HIV-1 Gag fragments spanning the CA C-terminal domain and SP1 region bound to BVM.




Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36939-6
Fast-growing bamboo still need advanced processing before being fabricated into sustainable structural materials. Here, the authors develop high-performance TiO2 reinforced densified bamboo via in situ hydrothermal synthesis and reveal the flexural failure mechanism of the composite.
Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36968-1

Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36895-1
Although the role of FGFs in
Nature Communications, Published online: 04 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36917-y
Reducing energy loss of sub-cells is critical for high performance tandem organic solar cells. Here, the authors design and synthesize an ultra-narrow bandgap acceptor through replacement of terminal thiophene by selenophene in the central fused ring, achieving efficiency of 19% for tandem cells.
50 years later, will flying cars be realized in life? Maybe this only happens in government. rather than civilians.
[link] [comments]
Okay I've seen many people say AI will replace web devs and programmers. Subsequently it will replace it's own creators, Computer Scientists/ML Engineers.
What I don't understand is that how will other jobs not be replaced as well. Isn't it a paradox? Like if AI replace Computer Scientists, then it means AI must be creative and super smart => If AI is creative and smart, then it can evolve alone and become better => If AI evolves alone, then no job is safe.
In case the AI is not smart enough to replace other jobs, then wouldn't we need Computer Scientists again? The cycle goes on…
My question comes from a discussion with a graphic designer and a Mechanical Engineer. They were saying AI will replace Computer Scientists way before many other jobs, so their jobs (Graphic Design and Mechanical Engineering) are safer than Computer Scientists. How would this be possible?
[link] [comments]






This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.
Many critics of Donald Trump concluded long ago that Attorney General Merrick Garland was not equal to the challenge of holding the former president accountable. It might be time for them to reassess.
First, here are three new stories from The Atlantic:
- There's something odd about the dogs living at Chernobyl.
- The real reason eye cream is so expensive
- Why is Biden attacking democracy?
Deliberate Aggression
No one would mistake Merrick Garland for a firebrand. When President Joe Biden nominated him to lead the Justice Department, the former federal judge cited Edward Levi, the attorney general who restored faith in the department after Watergate, as a role model. But Garland faced a potentially more complicated charge than Levi: Whereas Richard Nixon had resigned, been pardoned, and withdrawn from the national stage, Garland had to rebuild the DOJ while also delivering accountability for Trump, who remains unrepentant and is running to return to office.
As weeks turned to months and we passed the one-year mark of Biden's term, Garland's apparently slow pace on the second task rattled observers who worry that Trump will end up facing little punishment for attempting to steal the election and inciting an insurrection—and that he might even return to the White House. But deliberation is not the same as inaction. The first sign that Garland was not as disengaged as he might have seemed came when the FBI executed a warrant at Mar-a-Lago in August, seeking government records—some highly sensitive—that Trump had allegedly improperly taken. And the more we learn, the more aggressive Garland's approach looks.
This week, The Washington Post reported on how the surprise August search was the culmination of a running disagreement between the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors. (All of them ultimately report to Garland.) Some of the FBI officials were reluctant to push Trump too hard and wanted to ask him for permission or to slow-walk the process. My colleague Adam Serwer notes the irony that the bureau, which Trump and Republicans have portrayed as implacably politically opposed to him, was actually quite eager to protect him. But backed by Garland, who personally approved the search, the prosecutors ultimately won the day.
Separately, the Justice Department argued in a court filing yesterday that Trump can be liable for actions of the mob that stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. A group of Capitol Police officers and members of the House of Representatives have sued the former president for physical and psychological damage from the riot. Trump's lawyers contend that he cannot be held liable for inciting the riot because he was acting as president at the time, which confers immunity. But the Justice Department disagreed.
"Speaking to the public on matters of public concern is a traditional function of the Presidency, and the outer perimeter of the President's Office includes a vast realm of such speech," government attorneys wrote in the filing. "But that traditional function is one of public communication. It does not include incitement of imminent private violence."
While all of this happens, the criminal investigations into Trump's actions around the 2020 election and the Mar-a-Lago documents are moving swiftly. After Trump announced his presidential campaign in November, Garland appointed Jack Smith, a former Justice Department lawyer, to oversee the probes, and Smith has demonstrated an aggressive streak. In the past month, he has subpoenaed Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and former Vice President Mike Pence. CNN also reports that Smith "is locked in at least eight secret court battles" related to the Trump investigations. (Garland also appointed a special counsel to look into classified documents found in one of Biden's houses and a former office space. He has said that the DOJ can handle an investigation into Hunter Biden, the president's son, internally.)
My colleague Franklin Foer saw all of this coming in an October profile of the attorney general. He wrote that Garland did not seem to relish the position in which he found himself, but that the very qualities that worried Garland's naysayers—his institutionalism, caution, and fastidiousness—were the ones that would likely lead him to indict Trump. "I've reached the conclusion that his devotion to procedure, his belief in the rule of law, and in particular his reverence for the duties, responsibilities, and traditions of the U.S. Department of Justice will cause him to make the most monumental decision an attorney general can make," Frank wrote.
What the attorney general has not managed to do so far is depoliticize public perceptions of the department. By all reports, he's returning a greater professionalism to the department after some of the lowlights of the Trump presidency, but the Mar-a-Lago search and other investigations have made the DOJ a subject of greater political strife. Despite his painstaking approach to the Trump investigations, Garland was grilled by Republicans during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week, and accused (unconvincingly) of conducting a witch hunt against conservatives. An indictment of Trump would only exaggerate complaints of bias from the right.
There is, to be fair, a big gap between investigating and indicting. Trump is clearly upset about how things are going. He issued an angry comment after the DOJ's filing yesterday, and last month released a long, unusual statement, replete with very un-Trumpian footnotes, that I wrote was a preview of the legal strategy he might use if charged with crimes connected to the insurrection. The strategy might work, either as a defense or at least as a deterrence to charges. And, as I reported in January, any case against Trump would also have to move fast, with the goal of concluding before January 20, 2025, when a Republican president could take office and shut it down.
But whatever ultimately happens to Donald Trump, what we've seen over the past month should be enough to put to rest the idea that Garland is letting the former president off easy. Perhaps the Trump years made us forget that the Justice Department can get things done without messy public drama.
Related:
- The FBI desperately wants to let Trump off the hook.
- A guide to the possible forthcoming indictments of Donald Trump
Today's News
- The former South Carolina lawyer Alex Murdaugh was convicted of murdering his wife and son, and was sentenced to life in prison.
- Merrick Garland made an unannounced trip to Ukraine, according to a Justice Department official. It is his second trip to the country since Russia first invaded.
- The storm system that damaged parts of the central U.S. this week is now headed toward New England.
Dispatches
- Work in Progress: Derek Thompson asks: Why are we still arguing about masks?
- The Books Briefing: Elise Hannum reflects on the importance of the coming-of-age novel.
Explore all of our newsletters here.
Evening Read

The Vindication of Ask Jeeves
By Charlie Warzel
It was a simpler time. A friend introduced us, pulling up a static yellow webpage using a shaky dial-up modem. A man stood forth, dressed in a dapper black pinstriped suit with a red-accented tie. He held one hand out, as if carrying an imaginary waiter's tray. He looked regal and confident and eminently at my service. "Have a Question?" he beckoned. "Just type it in and click Ask!" And ask, I did. Over and over.
With his steady hand, Jeeves helped me make sense of the tangled mess of the early, pre-Google internet. He wasn't perfect—plenty of context got lost between my inquiries and his responses. Still, my 11-year-old brain always delighted in the idea of a well-coiffed man chauffeuring me down the information superhighway. But things changed.
More From The Atlantic
- What Isaac Asimov can teach us about AI
- The next big political scandal could be faked.
- Photos of the week: lava field, London fox, and more
Read. Go down the Judy Blume rabbit hole. Our senior editor Amy Weiss-Meyer, who recently wrote a profile of Blume, has a guide to get you started.
And these six memoirs are some of the finest of the form.
Watch. In theaters, Creed III makes an old franchise feel fresh.
And these 20 biopics are actually worth spending time with.
Listen. Jazz just lost Wayne Shorter, one of its all-time greats—and one of the greatest composers the United States has ever produced, David wrote yesterday. Spend some time with Shorter's music this weekend.
P.S.
Reading news about the train derailment last month in East Palestine, Ohio, has gotten me thinking about disaster songs, one of my favorite niches in the folk-music tradition. Consider the engineer Casey Jones. The U.S. endured several huge wrecks in 1900, but the only one most people might have heard of is the single-fatality crash that claimed Jones's life—because a folk song about him provided him a sort of immortality. Singers have memorialized deadly railroad catastrophes, mining disasters, storms, and even the sinking of the Titanic, but if songs like this are being written today, the music industry as it has come to exist precludes any path for them to achieve the same permanence. East Palestine's misfortune is more likely to be recorded in documentary films, whose dominance my colleague Megan Garber described in her great recent cover story. Both media mix fact and fiction to grab an audience; perhaps we can call disaster songs the infotainment of their era.
— David
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here.
Isabel Fattal contributed to this newsletter.
Quick definition for those who don't know: "business as usual" in this context means thinking that the future will look largely the same as today with some generational improvements – faster computers, thinner smartphones, more efficient planes, SUVs which now take two lanes instead of one etc. Basically it's a viewpoint stemming from the assumption that no big change will take place in the foreseeable future.
Let me bring up some general examples from comments on this sub first [square brackets contain general topic] (brackets contain explanations when needed):
- [lifespan extension] I don't want to work for 200 years before retiring.
- [lifespan extension] I just want to be healthy longer but I don't want to live longer. (user saying this assumes that death coping like "death is natural part of life" etc. is natural and that they'll want to die at eg. age of 80 and not be allowed to)
- [automation] How can I live if there is no way for me to make money because there is no jobs?
- [automation] My job is too hard to be automated.
- [generative AI] AI will kill human creativity. (user assumes that human creativity will disappear if there is no monetary incentive)
- [generative AI] I will always recognise AI art.
All of those are statements are short sighted when looking at the whole picture and disappointing when considering that this is supposed to be future focused sub. I am not saying that I am better at predicting future than you or that you should be blindly optimistic (some may classify my critique as something stemming from optimism, I consider myself a realist) but being blindly pessimistic or ignorant of many things changing simultanously isn't the way either.
[link] [comments]
Thinking about convivted lawyer Alex Murdaugh, a pillar of his community. Stole from 30-50 clients to get high, among other crimes.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/murdaugh-murders-alex-paul.html
Point is, I trust AI way more than humans. Why would I trust a lawyer to handle my finances in an orderly fashion? Worst case, I am disabled or dead, I get robbed.
We should sue for right of costumized AI Software that can represent clients in courts legally. Of course, once the technology is further developed.
[link] [comments]


YESTERDAY

Bot Bureaucrat
Both the rapidly increasing ubiquity and the power of AI can feel terrifying, but at least AIs aren't running the world yet, right?
Well, maybe not the world, but how about Romania? The country's prime minister Nicolae Ciuca has just announced an AI assistant called "Ion" as the government's "new honorary advisor."
"Hello. You gave me life. I am Ion. Now, my role is to represent you. Like a mirror," Ion said while introducing itself at a press conference, as quoted by The Washington Post.
PM @NicolaeCiuca: As of today, the Government of
Romania has the first government adviser running on AI, a good example of emerging technologies in public service.
Congratulations to theresearchers on this project that brings us closer to citizens! pic.twitter.com/yP5b5pOs5i
— GuvernulRomâniei (@GuvernulRo) March 1, 2023
Voice of the People
With a mirror-like, monolithic body and a somber, deep voice, you'd be forgiven for comparing Ion to HAL 9000 from the sci-fi classic "2001: A Space Odyssey." But instead of being in charge of a mere spaceship, Ion is responsible for gauging the sentiments of an entire country.
"Ion will do, through artificial intelligence, what no human can: listen to all Romanians and represent them before the government of Romania," Ciuca said.
And by listen, Ciuca really does mean listen. The AI will crawl social media to collect citizens' opinions and grievances, and then amalgamate and interpret these back to the government as policy ideas, who, at least in theory, will use the feedback to inform their decisions.
Concerned citizens can also interact with Ion directly by using a provided web portal if they're really eager to get their point across.
Call for Transparency
The process that Ion uses to pick out social media posts, categorize them, and then formulate policies is about as transparent as its steely, mirrored exterior — that is to say, not very transparent at all.
For critics, that's something to worry about. If Ion's workings aren't transparent, how can its citizens, whom it practically surveils, know it isn't being biased? Could it single those with dissenting opinions out and glean their real identities?
In short, it's a thorny, ethical nightmare waiting to unfold.
"Romanians should be informed and explained how this AI tool selects important posts, and on what criteria," demanded Kris Shrishak, an expert on AI regulation at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, in an interview with the WaPo. "This should be explained to the public."
Besides, how good are AIs at gauging human opinions, wants, desires, and feelings? If Microsoft's Bing AI chatbot is any indicator, probably not very.
More on AI: Bank of America Obsessed With AI, Says It's the "New Electricity"
The post Prime Minister of European Country Names AI as Advisor appeared first on Futurism.





Grody Byproducts
There's nothing quite like ocean spray gently caressing your face as you take a beachside stroll. But unfortunately, your face may be getting battered with sewage bacteria in the process.
According to a new paper published in the journal Environmental Sciences & Technology, ocean spray samples from San Diego's Imperial Beach contained bacteria from sewage spillover — and those bacteria end up in the air people near the beach breathe, too.
There are real health risks associated with bacteria that come from sewage runoff as they are more likely to include pathogens such as E. Coli, salmonella, and the infamous, gastrointestinal issues-inducing norovirus.
It's still unclear, however, if bacteria found by the researchers are actually making people sick in the area.
"Are they potentially infectious? Some are pathogens and some are not," Prather told The Guardian. "That's something we're working on now."
Feel the Ocean
To put it plainly, this stuff is pretty gross — and it may be getting into the lungs of folks who live near coastal waters, especially those who swim in them.
"Once pollutants become airborne that just means so many more people can be exposed to those pollutants," explained Kim Prather, the principal investigator on the study out of UC San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography, in an interview with the city's Union-Tribune newspaper. "It extends well beyond just people going to the beach or getting in the water."
Tijuana Syndrome
In their research, the team was able to link the bacteria to the Tijuana River just over the border in Mexico using air and water samples in and around the river and beach respectively.
They made a shocking discovery: the river sewage runoff could account for up to a whopping 76 percent of the bacteria at Imperial Beach.
While there's already an established body of work about airborne oceanic bacteria in general, this study is the first of its kind to establish a link to a known sewage source, UC San Diego professor and paper co-author Robert Knight told the Union-Tribune.
"It was a complete shock to find how much of microbes in the air were traceable back to sewage," Knight told the newspaper. "We had no idea that effect would be so strong."
With this seemingly strong link established in their research, the UCSD team plans to take DNA samples of lifeguards and surfers to see if they can gauge if there's a measurable impact to respiratory health as well.
"Now that we know this is a real phenomenon," Knight added, "we need to find out what are the impacts to human health."
More on gross byproducts: Residents Blame Horrid Black Fungus on Whiskey Facility
The post The Refreshing Spray of the Ocean Is Loaded With Sewage Bacteria, Scientists Find appeared first on Futurism.



- The bill is meant to streamline and update D.C.'s criminal code; the city council passed it unanimously, despite Mayor Muriel Bowser's opposition.
Give President Joe Biden democracy, self-rule, and statehood for Washington, D.C. But not yet.
Yesterday, Biden announced that he would not veto Congress's override of a new criminal code for D.C. passed by its city council. "I support D.C. Statehood and home-rule—but I don't support some of the changes D.C. Council put forward over the Mayor's objections—such as lowering penalties for carjackings," Biden tweeted. "If the Senate votes to overturn what D.C. Council did—I'll sign it."
If you support self-rule for jurisdictions only so long as they do not make choices you oppose, you do not actually support self-rule. The bill is meant to streamline and update D.C.'s criminal code; the city council passed it unanimously, despite Mayor Muriel Bowser's opposition. Bowser said she agreed with "95 percent" of the bill, excepting some of its lower maximum penalties for certain crimes and its expansion of jury trials to include misdemeanors, arguing that the latter would overburden the system.
[Anne Applebaum: A real place deserves real rights]
The changes to the city's criminal code are, as Slate's Mark Joseph Stern writes, much less dramatic than advertised. For example, the bill "lowers penalties for carjacking" in the sense that it changes the maximum sentence from a never-imposed 40 years to 24, which is still a very long time, and to which years can be added based on other potential offenses associated with the same crime. Some Senate Democrats are expected to vote to overturn the D.C. law, an indication of just how seriously they take their own rhetoric about democracy. One need not believe that the changes are a good idea to find this appalling. That's how democracy works: Sometimes the people make the wrong choice. The virtue of the system is that they make it, and it is not made for them.
Unfortunately, this is just the latest episode in a long history of the federal government's contempt for D.C.'s right to govern itself. In the 1870s, the city became a haven for the newly emancipated after the Civil War, and extended suffrage rights to all regardless of race. But as Reconstruction ended, the city became the fiefdom of outright white supremacists who plundered it for profit and exploited its Black residents. In 1890, the former Confederate general, plantation owner, and Democratic senator John Tyler Morgan of Alabama took to the Senate floor to explain why D.C. could not be allowed to govern its own affairs.
Now, the historical fact is simply this, that the negroes came into this District from Virginia and Maryland and from other places; I know dozens of them here now who flocked in from Alabama … They came in here and they took possession of a certain part of the political power of this District. There was but one way to get out—so Congress thought, so this able committee thought—and that was to deny the right of suffrage entirely to every human being in the District and have every office here controlled by appointment instead of by election … in order to get rid of this load of negro suffrage that was flooded in upon them.
As the reporters Tom Sherwood and Harry Jaffe wrote in Dream City, their history of Washington, D.C., "It's impossible to dismiss the fact that raw discrimination against blacks was for years at the root of Congress's relationship with the District of Columbia."
Although the Constitution grants Congress power over the seat of government, the long-standing hostility toward the very idea of home rule in D.C. stems from the belief that Black people are incapable of governing themselves. In most cases, the rationales for denying representation to residents of the capital of a nation ostensibly founded on the idea that taxation without representation is tyranny have shifted to become more partisan than overtly racist, but some of them remain essentially Morganist. In 2009 Tucker Carlson said D.C. was not "ready for democracy," because it had elected Marion Barry as mayor. Barry was an extremely common American type—a corrupt ethnic-machine politician who was simultaneously an effective practitioner of patronage politics. But he was also Black; the alchemy of racism ensures that the flaws that transform Irish machine politicians into beloved and colorful characters turn Black machine politicians into proof of Black inferiority.
This argument, though, has persisted even as the city's Black majority has become a plurality: D.C. cannot be allowed to govern itself, because its voters might make decisions that its overlords do not like. In some states, legislators who could not count to 20 without taking off their shoes make a show of passing idiotic and cruel legislation that violates their constituents' most basic rights, but no one ever suggests that the voters who elected them be denied democratic self-determination as a result. The people of Washington, D.C., have no less a right to govern their own affairs than the people of Texas or Florida.
[Read: D.C. statehood is more urgent than ever]
Far from proving that D.C. cannot govern itself, Congress's interference with the city illustrates the necessity of D.C. statehood, even as it exposes the underlying reasons that the dream of statehood remains remote. Without real federal representation, there is no one to stand up for the city's interests in Congress, and those who make decisions about the District's affairs are accountable to constituents elsewhere, who have no reason to defend the city's interests or autonomy. The Republican commitment to "local control" is entirely superficial; I grew up in D.C. and live in Texas, and it is very clear to me that the principle applies only to GOP-run jurisdictions, which are mysteriously always deemed fit for self-governance.
The ease with which the Democratic supporters of D.C. statehood have been manipulated into parroting the arguments of pundits and politicians who support disenfranchisement is pathetic, but unsurprising: Because D.C. residents are disenfranchised, it costs Democrats nothing to look tough on crime by disregarding home rule. After all, what are DC residents going to do, send a Republican to the Senate?
D.C. deserves statehood because its residents, who outnumber those of Wyoming and Vermont, have their own political and cultural identity and have the same right as every other American to determine their own fate. The city's residents should be able to govern themselves without interference from politicians looking to burnish their reputations with their performative contempt for the people who actually live and work there.
To those who say that D.C. statehood is simply a matter of naked partisan interest (as if the opposition to it is not), I would say that is also the reason we have two Dakotas. It was only a month ago that the Biden administration put out a statement urging Congress to "respect the District of Columbia's autonomy to govern its own local affairs." Until D.C. has the shield of statehood and federal representation, neither party has any reason to listen.


Tunnel Vision
Researchers have discovered a 30-feet-long unfinished corridor not far from the main entrance to the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, Reuters reports — a breathtaking revelation, especially given the fact that we've been scanning the 4,500-year-old structure with infrared rays since 2015.
As detailed in a new article published in the journal Nature this week, the discovery made by the international research project Scan Pyramids could shed light on how the 479-foot-tall pyramid was constructed, and why the corridor is flanked by a massive limestone structure.
The corridor is only roughly 23 feet away from the pyramid's main entrance, which is crowded by tourists around the clock.
Most tantalizingly, we still don't know where the newly discovered tunnel even leads to.
"We're going to continue our scanning so we will see what we can do… to figure out what we can find out beneath it, or just by the end of this corridor," said Mostafa Waziri, head of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, as quoted by Reuters.
Pretty Stoned
Researchers believe the corridor may have been built to redistribute the pyramid's weight around the main entrance. It was discovered using a tiny endoscope, using cosmic-ray radiography.
Many questions remain about the corridor's purpose, though.
"There are two large limestones at the end chamber, and now the question is what's behind these stones and below the chamber," Christian Grosse, Professor of Non-destructive Testing at the Technical University of Munich, told NPR.
The news comes after a giant void almost 100 feet in length was discovered by Scan Pyramids researchers back in 2017, the largest to have been discovered in the ancient structure in over a century.
This latest discovery could potentially force us to reevaluate what we know about how the giant structure was constructed many thousands of years ago — something that scientists still don't fully agree on, and a fascinating puzzle given its immense size and the ancient technology its builders had to rely on.
READ MORE: Hidden corridor discovered in Great Pyramid of Giza [Reuters]
More on the pyramids: Scientists Discover Egyptian Secret to Making the Pyramids
The post Scientists Scan Great Pyramid, Discover Hidden Corridor appeared first on Futurism.

Forever After
As if we needed more shit to deal with.
Published in the American Chemical Society's journal Environmental Science & Technology this week is a new study suggesting that the toilet paper we use is full of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), toxic "forever" chemicals that don't break down in landfills and therefore, well, last forever.
In recent years, PFAS — which, along with TP, are also found in the coating of nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, and in some cosmetic and cleaning products — have made headlines as scientists discover more about how harmful they can be for both humans and the environment.
As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention note in an advisory, recent studies have linked high levels of PFAS consumption with increased cholesterol and blood pressure levels, increased risk of kidney or testicular cancer, decreased vaccine response in children, and more.
In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency is, per the Associated Press, considering issuing restrictions on them.
Toilet Paper USA
Bringing it back around to the TP of it all, this new study is adding more fuel to the anti-PFAS fire after researchers at the University of Florida found that a specific type of these forever chemicals, known as disubstituted polyfluoroalkyl phosphates (diPAPs), are uber-common in both wastewater and in toilet paper, strongly suggesting a link between the two.
In the US and Canada, the ACS journal paper notes, toilet paper appears to result in four percent of the diPAP contamination in wastewater sludge — and that number is even higher in Europe, where it contributes to 35 percent of the "forever" chemicals in Swedish wastewater and up to a whopping 89 percent in France.
While these findings are indeed troubling, the CDC and other regulatory bodies have warned that more research needs to be conducted to figure out both how serious PFAS contamination really is and how best to handle it.
Even the EPA's potential regulation will focus more on removing the chemicals from water than on banning their use completely — and that process alone, critics told the AP, could cost billions of dollars.
In the meantime, it's clear enough that these chemicals are bad news, and it's up to the industry to self-regulate while the government catches up — though as we've learned from Big Oil, that process can take even more time.
More on toxic chemicals: Locals Near Ohio Toxic Train Crash Say They're Experiencing Weird Symptoms
The post Scientists Discover That Toilet Paper Contains Toxic "Forever" Chemicals appeared first on Futurism.

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract



The grasslands of India and elsewhere do not need to have economic value to be worth studying and preserving

Intelligence reports supporting the lab-leak theory for COVID are not based in science



Nature, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00548-6
The antiviral ensitrelvir, which is not approved in the United States, shortens symptoms in people with mild
Nature, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00629-6
Multi-year project in Ukraine aims to uncover the health effects of chronic radiation exposure.
Popped
As if having the planet drown in a giant pile of plastic pollution wasn't enough.
The company behind Funko Pop collectibles, those small figurines that vaguely represent celebrities and fictional characters and which you likely ignore at your local GameStop, vastly over-estimated demand and is dumping $30 million worth of figurines in a landfill, Kotaku reports.
Funko had a disastrous earnings call earlier this week, causing its stock price to crater on Thursday, dropping by a stunning 25 percent in after-hours trading on Wednesday.
The company announced that it was sitting on a massive pile of unsold inventory, which increased 48 percent year over year.
"This includes inventory that the Company intends to eliminate in the first half of 2023 to reduce fulfillment costs by managing inventory levels to align with the operating capacity of our distribution center," a press release reads. "This is expected to result in a write down in the first half of 2023 of approximately $30 to $36 million."
In other words, considering each Funko Pop figurine averages around $8 to $11, they're dumping millions of figurines into the garbage.
PVC Pollution
The company was already facing financial turmoil last year, with its distribution center in Arizona overflowing with inventory to the point it had to rent shipping containers to store them all.
By November, the venture's stock had already cratered after it slashed its financial outlook for the rest of the year, Kotaku reports.
While some Funko Pop models have propped up a considerable speculators' market — two recent golden figurines sold for $100,000 in cash — the reality is that their value is unlikely to last forever, damning them to slowly decompose in landfills.
The figurines are made of polyvinyl chloride, better known as PVC, a petroleum-derived chemical that's made using vinyl chloride — a substance that may sound familiar, because it was all over the news last month following the disastrous train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, which released copious amounts of the stuff into the surrounding environment and waterways.
READ MORE: Over $30 Million Worth Of Funkos Are Headed To The Landfill [Kotaku]
More on plastic pollution: Chevron's Jet Fuel Made From Plastic Very Likely to Cause Cancer, EPA Documents Say
The post They're Dumping $30 Million of Funko Pops Directly Into a Landfill appeared first on Futurism.

Researchers have found evidence of horseback riding in skeletal remains of people who lived about 5,000 years ago, adding to a body of research on when people first started using horses to get around.
(Image credit: Alan Crowhurst/Getty Images)

In the spring of 1986, in their rush to flee the radioactive plume and booming fire that burned after the Chernobyl power plant exploded, many people left behind their dogs. Most of those former pets died as radiation ripped through the region and emergency workers culled the animals they feared would ferry toxic atoms about. Some, though, survived. Those dogs trekked into the camps of liquidators to beg for scraps; they nosed into empty buildings and found safe places to sleep. In the 1,600-square-mile exclusion zone around the power plant, they encountered each other, and began to reproduce. "Dogs were there immediately after the disaster," says Gabriella Spatola, a geneticist at the National Institutes of Health and the University of South Carolina. And they have been there ever since.
Spatola and her colleagues are now puzzling through the genomes of those survivors' modern descendants. In identifying the genetic scars that today's animals may have inherited, the researchers hope to understand how, and how well, Chernobyl's canine populations have thrived. The findings could both reveal the lasting tolls of radiation and hint at traits that have helped certain dogs avoid the disaster's worst health effects. The fates of dogs—bred and adapted to work, play, and lounge at our side—are tied to ours. And the canines we leave behind when crises strike could show us what it takes to survive the fallout of our gravest mistakes.
One of the key canine groups the team is focusing on is based at what's left of the power plant itself, and has likely weathered the highest levels of radiation of any dog population in the exclusion zone. The researchers are working to compare the genomes of those dogs with those of others living farther out, in Chernobyl City, a quasi-residential region about nine miles away that was evacuated after the blast, and in Slavutych, a less contaminated city roughly 30 miles out, where many power-plant workers settled after leaving their post.
The spatial differences are essential to the study's success. The region's landscape is "a patchwork of different radioactivity levels," says Timothy Mousseau, a biologist at the University of South Carolina who's been studying Chernobyl's wildlife for more than 20 years, and is co-advising Spatola's work. Which means that geographically distinct packs of dogs could, in theory, have distinct exposure histories, and distinct genetic legacies to show for it. The team's work is just beginning. But in the hundreds of blood samples that Spatola and her colleagues have analyzed from dogs in all three groups, they've already found evidence that the reactor-adjacent canines are different in at least some ways.
The animals that the team sampled in Chernobyl City and Slavutych, the researchers found, look a lot like dogs you'd find elsewhere. They've been born of mixtures of modern breeds: mastiffs, pinschers, schnauzers, boxers, terriers. But the power-plant population seems more stuck in the past. The dogs there are far more inbred, and still skew heavily German shepherd—a breed that has a long history in the region, a hint that the animals have largely kept to their ancestral roots, says Elaine Ostrander, a geneticist at the National Institutes of Health and another of Spatola's co-advisers. This pack might represent something like "a time capsule" from the disaster's worst days, says Elinor Karlsson, a genomics expert at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. Perhaps this lineage of dogs has been stewing in the plant's radiation for a dozen generations or more. Some may even have inherited mutations caused by the explosion itself.
The long-ranging consequences of their exposures, though, aren't yet clear. Repeated, heavy doses of radiation—which can mutate DNA, seed cancers, and irreparably damage the structural integrity of cells—can be, without question, "extremely detrimental to life," says Isain Zapata, a biomedical researcher at Rocky Vista University. And over the decades, a wealth of studies has revealed serious health effects among some local animals: Birds have been found with tumors and unusually small brains; bank voles have battled cataracts and produced wonky, underperforming sperm. Even bees seem to struggle to reproduce. Still, not all creatures are equally susceptible to radiation; many have also avoided the region's most saturated zones. And in some parts of the exclusion zone, some of them appear to be flourishing on terrain now largely devoid of humans and their polluting, disruptive ways. In this landscape of possibilities, it's hard to say where the dogs of Chernobyl might fall: Domestic canines depend heavily on us, and may suffer more than other animals when we leave. But that dependence also means that dogs are also less likely to chow down on wild, radiation-contaminated food, and may be well positioned to take advantage of the ruins we leave behind—and to mooch more when we start to creep back.
[Read: The creatures that remember Chernobyl]
What the team finds next will be telling. Scientists have already spent decades scrutinizing canine genomes; a reference book for what's "typical" already exists, which makes detecting "when something's unusual" much easier, Karlsson told me. The researchers might uncover mutations and sickness in the power-plant pack—a sign that the dogs' genomes have been walloped by years of radiation, as those of some other animals apparently have. But Karlsson also thinks the team could find the opposite: hints of genetic traits that have kept the dogs alive under harsh conditions, such as a higher resistance to cancer. That, in turn, could bode well for us. Canine and human genomes are quite similar, and "domestic dogs have been a model for human cancer for a very long time," says Shane Campbell-Staton, an evolutionary biologist at Princeton who studies Chernobyl's wolves. Perhaps these dogs did not bend under pressure, but instead thrived.
One of the trickiest parts of the project will be figuring out which differences among the studied dog groups are attributable to radiation, rather than the ways in which the Chernobyl disaster completely remodeled the region and its ecosystems. Populations of plants, insects, birds, and mammals ebbed and flowed, affecting the availability of resources and the presence of predators. Humans came and left, sometimes bringing food, medical care, or more dogs. Generations of animals replaced each other, and populations mingled and mixed. Olena Burdo, a radioecologist at the Kiev Institute for Nuclear Research, has worked for years to try to parse these many variables in her work with bank voles. In the wild, it's usually easy to tell that differences between populations exist, she told me. It's just not always possible to pinpoint why.
Without perfect record-keeping of individual canines, the team can't prove that the modern dogs they're sampling are directly descended from 1980s dogs, either. Burdo told me she suspects that at least some of the power-plant dogs may be more transient than the researchers think. If the three dog populations under study are loose, amorphous, and constantly turning over, the researchers will have a tough time determining the effects of higher- or lower-dose radiation exposure through generations. The power-plant dogs—the purported high-radiation cohort—may not really be a lineage born of the facility's buildings after all.
But Ostrander is fairly convinced that the power-plant population has largely kept to itself. Life among the abandoned buildings is actually quite plush. Workers toss the dogs leftovers; tourists cheerfully sneak them snacks. And in recent years, veterinarians have banded together to provide the dogs medical care, vaccinations, and spay-and-neuter services. Beyond that, the canines may not need much. The pack seems to have grown more aloof and self-sufficient over the years, Spatola told me, and may even be behaviorally reverting to some of its wilder, wolfish roots. Left to fend for themselves when the reactor blew, this population of dogs—which started out as pets—has been transformed, perhaps by radiation, perhaps by human fallibility, into something less familiar, more strange, and entirely its own.
- He and his former business partner David Warthen eventually sold Ask Jeeves to Barry Diller and IAC for just under $2 billion.
It was a simpler time. A friend introduced us, pulling up a static yellow webpage using a shaky dial-up modem. A man stood forth, dressed in a dapper black pinstriped suit with a red-accented tie. He held one hand out, as if carrying an imaginary waiter's tray. He looked regal and confident and eminently at my service. "Have a Question?" he beckoned. "Just type it in and click Ask!" And ask, I did. Over and over.
With his steady hand, Jeeves helped me make sense of the tangled mess of the early, pre-Google internet. He wasn't perfect—plenty of context got lost between my inquiries and his responses. Still, my 11-year-old brain always delighted in the idea of a well-coiffed man chauffeuring me down the information superhighway. But things changed. Google arrived, with its clean design and almost magic ability to deliver exactly the answers I wanted. Jeeves and I grew apart. Eventually, in 2006,
disappeared from the internet altogether and was replaced with the more generic Ask.com.
Many years later, it seems I owe Jeeves an apology: He had the right idea all along. Thanks to advances in artificial intelligence and the stunning popularity of generative-text tools such as ChatGPT, today's search-engine giants are making huge bets on AI search chatbots. In February, Microsoft revealed its Bing Chatbot, which has thrilled and frightened early users for its ability to scour the internet and answer questions (not always correctly) with convincingly human-sounding language. The same week, Google demoed Bard, the company's forthcoming attempt at an AI-powered chat-search product. But for all the hype, when I stare at these new chatbots, I can't help but see the faint reflection of my former besuited internet manservant. In a sense, Bing and Bard are finishing what Ask Jeeves started. What people want when they ask a question is for an all-knowing, machine-powered guide to confidently present them with the right answer in plain language, just as a reliable friend would.
[Read: AI search is a disaster]
With this in mind, I decided to go back to the source. More than a decade after parting ways, I found myself on the phone with one of the men behind the machine, getting as close to Asking Jeeves as is humanly possible. These days, Garrett Gruener, Ask Jeeves's co-creator, is a venture capitalist in the Bay Area. He and his former business partner David Warthen eventually sold Ask Jeeves to Barry Diller and IAC for just under $2 billion. Still, I wondered if Gruener had been unsettled by Jeeves's demise. Did he, like me, see the new chatbots as the final form of his original idea? Did he feel vindicated or haunted by the fact that his creation may have simply been born far too early?
The original conception for Jeeves, Gruener told me, was remarkably similar to what Microsoft and Google are trying to build today. As a student at UC San Diego in the mid-1970s, Gruener—a sci-fi aficionado—got an early glimpse of ARPANET, the pre-browser predecessor to the commercial internet, and fell in love. Just over a decade later, as the web grew and the beginnings of the internet came into view, Gruener realized that people would need a way to find things in the morass of semiconnected servers and networks. "It became clear that the web needed search but that mere mortals without computer-science degrees needed something easy, even conversational," he said. Inspired by Eliza, the famous chatbot designed by MIT's Joseph Weizenbaum, Gruener dreamed of a search engine that could converse with people using natural-language processing. Unfortunately, the technology wasn't sophisticated enough for Gruener to create his ideal conversational search bot.
So Gruener and Warthen tried a work-around. Their code allowed a user to write a statement in English, which was then matched to a preprogrammed vector, which Gruener explained to me as "a canonical snapshot of answers to what the engine thought you were trying to say." Essentially, they taught the machine to recognize certain words and provide really broad categorical answers. "If you were looking for population stats for a country, the query would see all your words and associated variables and go, Well, this Boolean search seems close, so it's probably this." Jeeves would provide the answer, and then you could clarify whether it worked or not.
"We tried to discern what people were trying to say in search, but without actually doing the natural-recognition part of it," Gruener said. After some brainstorming, they realized that they were essentially building a butler. One of Gruener's friends mocked up a drawing of the friendly servant, and Jeeves was born.
Pre-Google, Ask Jeeves exploded in popularity, largely because it allowed people to talk with their search engine like a person. Within just two years, the site was handling more than 1 million queries a day. A massive Jeeves balloon floated down Central Park West during Macy's 1999 Thanksgiving parade. But not long after the butler achieved buoyancy, the site started to lose ground in the search wars. Google's web-crawling superiority led to hard times for Ask Jeeves. "None of us were very concerned about monetization in the beginning," Gruener told me. "Everyone in search early on realized, if you got this right, you'd essentially be in the position of being the oracle. If you could be the company to go to in order to ask questions online, you're going to be paid handsomely."
[Read: The open secret of Google Search]
Gruener isn't bitter about losing out to Google. "If anything, I'm really proud of our Jeeves," he told me. Listening to Gruener explain the history, it's not hard to see why. In the mid-2000s, Google began to pivot search away from offering only 10 blue links to images, news, maps, and shopping. Eventually, the company began to fulfill parts of the Jeeves promise of answering questions with answer boxes. One way to look at the evolution of big search engines in the 21st century is that all companies are trying their best to create their own intuitive search butlers. Gruener told me that Ask Jeeves's master plan had two phases, though the company was sold before it could tackle the second. Gruener had hoped that, eventually, Jeeves could act as a digital concierge for users. He'd hoped to employ the same vector technology to get people to ask questions and allow Jeeves to make educated guesses and help users complete all kinds of tasks. "If you look at Amazon's Alexa, they're essentially using the same approach we designed for Jeeves, just with voice," Gruener said. Yesterday's butler has been rebranded as today's virtual assistant, and the technology is ubiquitous in many of our home devices and phones. "We were right for the consumer back then, and maybe we'd be right now. But at some point the consumer evolved," he said.
I've been fixated on what might've been if Gruener's vision had come about now. We might all be Jeevesing about the internet for answers to our mundane questions. Perhaps our Jeevesmail inboxes would be overflowing and we'd be getting turn-by-turn directions from an Oxford-educated man with a stiff English accent. Perhaps we'd all be much better off.
Gruener told me about an encounter he'd had during the search wars with one of Google's founders at a TED conference (he wouldn't specify which of the two). "I told him that we're going to learn an enormous amount about the people who are using our platforms, especially as they become more conversational. And I said that it was a potentially dangerous position," he said. "But he didn't seem very receptive to my concerns."
Near the end of our call, I offered an apology for deserting Jeeves like everyone else did. Gruener just laughed. "I find this future fascinating and, if I'm honest, a little validating," he said. "It's like, ultimately, as the tech has come around, the big guys have come around to what we were trying to do."



![]() |
submitted by /u/Zee2A [link] [comments] |











Archaeologists have found a handful of human skeletons with characteristics that have been linked to horseback riding and are a millennium older than early depictions of humans riding horses

Fires in North America and Eurasia spewed record-shattering amounts of CO2 in 2021




Archaeologists have found a handful of human skeletons with characteristics that have been linked to horseback riding and are a millennium older than early depictions of humans riding horses

Nature, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00620-1
A rising number of images by the famed telescope include satellite trails — a trend that will ultimately affect its science.
Nature, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00672-3
Vega C launch failure, tracked to a Ukraine-made part, could further delay a handful of missions.

- Remember, CNET's editor-in-chief Connie Guglielmo — who in a grim punchline is stepping down to become the company's VP of AI content strategy — defended the tech after a public outcry as a bid to free up journalists to do more interesting work.

The full scope of CNET's layoffs after its disastrous foray into AI-powered journalism is coming further into focus — and frankly, things don't look too good.
According to internal correspondence Futurism obtained, CNET — which has maintained that the job cuts have absolutely nothing to do with their misfired AI, actually — gutted 50 percent of its news and video staff in the most recent culling.
That's a striking number, especially in light of the fact that CNET's owner, Red Ventures, very much appears like it's planning to start up its mystery AI machine once again.
Remember, CNET's editor-in-chief Connie Guglielmo — who in a grim punchline is stepping down to become the company's VP of AI content strategy — defended the tech after a public outcry as a bid to free up journalists to do more interesting work.
"The goal: to see if the tech can help our busy staff of reporters and editors with their job to cover topics from a 360-degree perspective," she wrote in January. "Will this AI engine efficiently assist them in using publicly available facts to create the most helpful content so our audience can make better decisions? Will this enable them to create even more deeply researched stories, analyses, features, testing and advice work we're known for?"
That clearly didn't work out so well, with the site's news operation now cut off at the knees. In an email to Futurism, CNET neither confirmed nor denied the 50 percent figure.
"Out of respect of those leaving the CNET Group," a CNET spokesperson wrote in an email, "we will not be sharing specific details of yesterday's reorganization."
And according to a source familiar with the matter, CNET isn't the only Red Ventures publication to be hit with massive editorial layoffs. ZDNET, another Red Ventures-owned tech outlet, lost 35 percent of its editorial staff. And to that end, we wouldn't be surprised to learn that Red Ventures were rolling its editorial AI system out over at ZDNET, too.
"Today's decision," a CNET spokesperson told Variety, "was not a reflection of the value or performance of our team members, the use of emerging technologies, or our confidence in the CNET Group's future."
In other words: "AI who?"
"To prepare ourselves for a strong future, we will need to focus on how we simplify our operations and our tech stack," Carlos Angrisano, president of financial services and the CNET Group at Red Ventures, wrote in a Thursday morning email to CNET staff, according to a report from The Verge, "and also on how we invest our time and energy."
Per the Verge, Angrisano's email additionally noted that the reorganization was part of a broader effort to focus on "consumer technology, home and wellness, energy, broadband, and personal finance" — indeed, an effort that CNET echoed in their statement to us, explaining that such are "categories where the CNET Group has a high degree of authority, relevance, differentiation and where we can make a large difference in the lives of our audience."
"We believe success in these focus areas will set the groundwork for future expansion," the statement continued, "and create the right conditions for a high-growth, sustainable business."
According to a current staffer, that makes perfect sense. Those content categories, they told the Verge, are where the SEO-hound that is Red Ventures is likely to bring in the most affiliate-link cash — even if the quality of the work suffers.
"But those sections are shadows of what they once were, particularly home," said the staffer, per the report. "If you want to do that section the right way, you don't sell off your Smart Home, get rid of its video team and cripple your editorial staff."
And as for "making a large difference in the lives" of its audience, let's hope that the information that CNET is publishing is actually right this time — otherwise, while the difference that the company makes is still bound to be a big one, it's also bound to be a bad one.
At the end of the day, we understand that everyone's got a bottom line. But there's a difference between bottom lines and rock bottoms, and if you have to stoop this far to ensure that your bottom line is taken care of, it's worth wondering if the road taken was worth it.
More on CNET cuts: CNET Says It's a Total Coincidence It's Laying off Humans after Publishing AI-Generated Articles
The post CNET's Post-AI Layoffs Apparently Gutted 50 Percent of Its News and Video Staff appeared first on Futurism.

Members of Gen Z are entering the workforce with certain types of technological know-how, from navigating the depths of the internet and using apps to editing photos on their smartphones.
But when it comes to using a scanner or printer — or even a file system on a computer — things become a lot more challenging to a generation that has spent much of their lives online, The Guardian reports, a counterintuitive result of workplaces still relying on technologies that were around long before they were born.
"There is a myth that kids were born into an information age, and that this all comes intuitively to them," Sarah Dexter, an associate professor of education at the University of Virginia, told the newspaper. "But that is not realistic. How would they know how to scan something if they've never been taught how to do it?"
For instance, 25-year-old New Yorker Garrett Bemiller admitted to The Guardian that he was stumped by a photocopy machine at his office.
"It kept coming out as a blank page, and took me a couple times to realize that I had to place the paper upside-down in the machine for it to work," he said.
Educators have already found that the latest generation of students is struggling with wrapping their minds around the concept of file folders and directories. Even astrophysics students had a hard time with the concept, as The Verge reported back in 2021.
After all, why dig around for a while when you can just use your computer's search functions? A quick Google search can easily get you to the answer you are looking for in a fraction of a second.
It's become such a commonplace discussion these days that tech company HP went as far as to give the phenomenon a name: "tech shame."
HP found that young people are ten times more likely to feel "tech shame" as compared to older colleagues, according to a November survey, the result of a basic misjudgment.
"The assumption is that because Gen Z and even millennials spend a considerable amount of time on technology that they are technology savvy," Debbie Irish, HP's head of UK and Ireland human resources, told WorkLife last year. "This is a huge misconception. Sadly, neither watching TikTok videos nor playing Minecraft fulfills the technology brief."
There's plenty of evidence that
don't feel adequately prepared for office life. Last year, a LaSalle Network survey found recent graduates simply didn't possess the technical skills to successfully enter the workforce.
Then there's social media, which has set a high bar for accessibility.
"It takes five seconds to learn how to use TikTok," content creator Max Simon, who makes TikTok videos about corporate life, told The Guardian. "You don't need an instruction book, like you would with a printer."
"Content is so easy to access now that when you throw someone a simple curveball they'll swing and they miss," he added, "and that's why Gen Z can't schedule a meeting."
But for tech-savvy Gen Zers, the situation is quite different. They're still far more adaptable than their older colleagues and will frequently be tapped for help themselves.
That kind of trial and error and Google-assisted problem-solving has long gone over the heads of the older generations, which will only deepen the divide.
Besides, why are we still using scanners and printers in the year 2023? Perhaps employers should finally get with the times and say goodbye to that ancient tech.
READ MORE: 'Scanners are complicated': why Gen Z faces workplace 'tech shame' [The Guardian]
More on Gen Z: Gen Z Kids Apparently Don't Understand How File Systems Don't Work
The post Gen Z Is Apparently Baffled by Basic Technology appeared first on Futurism.





Laptop manufacturers have focused on making systems thinner over the years. A pair of DIY YouTubers became unhappy with that trend and decided to go in the opposite direction. Just for fun and to see what it would look like, they built a monstrous 43-inch gaming laptop from scratch. The finished product looks like you'd expect a gaming laptop to look with LED lighting and a huge display. However, it's not the most practical computer, weighing 100 pounds.
The heart of the laptop is a 43-inch TV that was screwed into a plywood frame via its VESA mount. That type of wood was also used for the computer's base and is what makes the thing so darn heavy. Aluminum "arms" along the edges connect to custom-made hinges to allow it to open and close. The notebook shell is two inches deep, which was the primary limitation on what hardware could power it. The display also needed a power source, so they outfitted it with three batteries: one runs the display, one powers the computer, and the third is for the LEDs.
With the shell constructed, they did a dry run to see if it would boot and offer enough power to run games. Surprisingly, the portable batteries worked fine, with the host saying the system consumes around 260W under full load. Powering the monstrosity is an
NUC 11, according to HotHardware. This mini PC features a quad-core Intel Core i7-1165G7 Tiger Lake processor and an RTX 2060 GPU. Despite being only 1.65 inches tall, the NUC still has a decent amount of power. Its CPU even has a maximum boost clock of 4.7GHz. Plus, it has a Turing GPU and can handle light ray tracing.
With everything running smoothly, it was just a matter of custom printing 3D brackets to hold the parts in place. Then they had to polish it up to make it aesthetically pleasing. Finishing it off is a massive keyboard of unknown providence. However, it's proportional to the rest of the notebook and fits right in. There's also a built-in trackpad and tiny windows on the deck to let them monitor the batteries tucked inside.

The guts include three batteries, an Intel NUC, and a giant keyboard.
On the one hand, the project was a success, but it would be interesting to see if they could make it lighter by using more plastic instead of wood. However, that might not be rigid enough to keep the chassis from flexing. As the hosts note, you must put a pad on your legs to use it as a laptop. Also, its size requires two people to open the panel, so it's not practical.
The project is reminiscent of the world's biggest Xbox Series X. That was equally ridiculous as it was almost 7 feet tall and weighed over 250 pounds. Still, it was a legit Xbox and got certified by the Guinness Book of World Records. As far as we can tell, the 43-inch laptop has not been awarded any "world's largest" certifications. The couple says you can buy the "BFL laptop" for three easy payments of $999, although it's just a parody ad.
Now read:














Nature Communications, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34915-0
Author Correction: Multiscale variations of the crustal stress field throughout North America
Nature Communications, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/s41467-022-35611-9
The trifluoromethyl anion rapidly decomposes into difluorocarbene (:CF2) and fluorine ion, limiting its applicability in synthesis. Here, the authors report a strategy to generate and use the short-lived CF3- intermediate from stable CF3H gas via fast biphasic mixing in precisely customized flow dissolvers.


Nature, Published online: 03 March 2023; doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00635-8
Booming exploration and commercial activity could ruin the quiet environment of the lunar far side.




BofA AIs
The financial industry's response to artificial intelligence has been all over the place. Now, Bank of America is weighing in very much on the side of the bots.
In a note to clients viewed by CNBC and other outlets, BofA equity strategist Haim Israel boasted that AI was one of its top trends to watch — and invest in — for the year, and used all kinds of hypey language to convince its clients.
"We are at a defining moment — like the internet in the '90s — where Artificial Intelligence (AI) is moving towards mass adoption," the client note reads, "with large language models like ChatGPT finally enabling us to fully capitalize on the data revolution."
Taking the comparison further, Israel added that software like OpenAI's game-changing ChatGPT will become an essential commodity.
"If data is the new oil," the strategist predicted, "then AI is the new electricity."
Hot and Cold
With AI at the apparent forefront of its trend forecasting, the financial institution highlighted multiple big tech stocks in a separate list of stocks to watch — but BofA's apparent pro-AI obsession does not seem to be shared by some of its competitors.
Just last week, JP Morgan went so far as to ban employees from using ChatGPT at work, citing "compliance concerns" per CNN's reporting.
Though its stance wasn't as strict as its compatriot's, Morgan Stanley reportedly is also concerned with the downsides of AI, too.
"When we talk of high-accuracy task," Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a note viewed by Insider last week, "it is worth mentioning that ChatGPT sometimes hallucinates and can generate answers that are seemingly convincing, but are actually wrong."
With AI making massive waves in the finance industry and everywhere else, it's not surprising that big banks are responding in different ways — though to be honest, these disparate reactions does suggest serious ambiguity in the new space.
More on ChatGPT and banks: Journalist Clones His Voice and Uses It to Break Into His Own Bank Account
The post Bank of America Obsessed With AI, Says It's the "New Electricity" appeared first on Futurism.













- Undaunted, this week, the European Space Agency announced a joint effort to establish a timekeeping standard for the moon.

Frosty New Cleaning Spray Could Rid Space Suits of Moondust
In the most recent edition of Acta Astronautica, researchers from Washington State University report that a liquid nitrogen spray can rid space suits of moondust. Moondust is just like Mars dust: viciously sharp little shards of regolith that find their way inside everything. They're like packing peanuts or cursed space glitter. Worse than packing peanuts, moon dust is made of ultra-fine particles with the consistency of ground fiberglass.
"Moondust is electrostatically charged, abrasive and gets everywhere, making it a very difficult substance to deal with," said Ian Wells, first author of the report. "You end up with a fine layer of dust as a minimum just covering everything."
But the dust doesn't just cover everything. It does a great job wrecking everything it touches. Apollo astronauts tried to use brushes to clear their suits of the dust, but it was worse than nothing, clearing next to no dust and damaging the suits in the process. The grit destroyed seals in their space suits and caused the astronauts themselves to suffer from 'lunar hay fever.' Worse yet, experts believe longer exposure to moondust could cause a lunar 'black lung' syndrome. Since NASA is actively working to establish a long-term human presence on the moon, it's important to mitigate this threat. And that's where the liquid nitrogen comes in.

Astronaut Barbie gets really real. At least those plastic earrings are non-conductive. (Credit: WSU)
WSU researchers made one-sixth scale models of space suits, using Barbies to model them while they covered the suits in moondust. The researchers discovered that a spray of liquid nitrogen caused the moondust to "bead up and float away on the nitrogen vapor." Poetically, it's a phenomenon called the Leidenfrost effect. Here on Earth, you may have seen it in the way touchless car washes are gentler on a vehicle's finish than the kind that uses brushes. In the frigid vacuum on the lunar surface, liquid nitrogen might be the best way to clean that wretched dust off our next-gen space suits.
Cool.
'KaRIn' Instrument Knocks Out NASA's SWOT Satellite
Launched in December, the sea-gazing SWOT (Surface Water and Ocean Topography) satellite is a collaboration between space agencies of America, Canada, the UK, and France. According to NASA, it will take high-resolution measurements of the height of water in the world's oceans and freshwater bodies. That is — if it ever boots up again.
Once in orbit, the spacecraft started commissioning activities: the six-month "checkout period" before its scientific mission begins. This includes turning on all the satellite's science instruments, among them the main science instrument, the Ka-band Radar Interferometer (KaRIn). Engineers fully powered on the instrument in mid-January 2023, and everything looked great. The satellite sent back telemetry just fine — for a week. Then, one of the KaRIn instrument's subsystems shut down with no explanation. Naturally, it brought down the entire satellite and left the whole system pinwheeling.
In a statement, NASA officials said that mission engineers are "working systematically to understand the situation and to restore operations, performing diagnostics and working with a test bed that simulates the KaRIn instrument on Earth." The agency expects the satellite to finish its commissioning period in June, as originally scheduled, for the beginning of science operations in July.
IBEX Spacecraft Lapses Into Paralyzed 'Contingency Mode'
NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) spacecraft is suffering from a planned computer reset that went awry. Flight computer resets have happened before. However, NASA officials said, this time the IBEX team lost the ability to command the spacecraft altogether during what should have been a routine recovery after power cycling the computer.
The spacecraft's flight software still is running, and its onboard systems appear to be functional. However, while uplink signals are reaching IBEX, it's not processing the commands it receives. The team also was unsuccessful in regaining control by power cycling and resetting hardware and software systems on the ground.
However, all is not lost. Even if NASA mission techs can't regain control of the computer, IBEX will perform an autonomous reset and power cycle on March 4. This affords another opportunity to get the spacecraft back to its primary mission: studying the boundary where our sun's solar wind gives way to the interstellar medium.
European Space Agency Moves to Establish a Lunar Time Zone
With multiple space agencies trying to establish a long-term human presence on the moon, it's important to be able to synchronize our various clocks. But timekeeping on the Moon is a fiddly thing, not unlike Star Trek's system of 'stardates,' which change depending on where you are in the galaxy. ExtremeTech's Adrianna Nine writes, "Clocks on the Moon run faster than what we consider normal here on Earth, gaining about 56 microseconds daily. This itself isn't consistent; how much faster these clocks run depends on their exact position on the Moon, causing organizations to wonder whether the Moon's time zone should be kept independent from Earth."
Undaunted, this week, the European Space Agency announced a joint effort to establish a timekeeping standard for the moon. The common framework, LunaNet, will encapsulate "mutually agreed-upon standards, protocols, and interface requirements allowing future lunar missions to work together."
Archaeologists Find Gate Room Hidden Chamber Inside Great Pyramid of Giza
After years of painstaking work, scientists have used muon tomography to confirm the presence of a previously unknown chamber hidden behind the chevron blocks on the north face of the Great Pyramid of Giza. Thanks to the unique powers of the imaging method, scientists have now successfully mapped the space, and it appears to end in an upward-sloping corridor. They've even taken photos of it with an endoscopic imaging tool. Here's what you'd see if you peered down the corridor:
The scientists write:
Among these discoveries, a corridor-shaped structure has been observed behind the so-called Chevron zone on the North face, with a length of at least 5 meters. A dedicated study of this structure was thus necessary to better understand its function in relation with the enigmatic architectural role of this Chevron.
Muon imaging is ideal for investigating the Great Pyramid because it allows scientists to peer straight through solid rock. In this way, scientists can detect empty spaces that we otherwise wouldn't be able to find without dismantling the monument.
The scientists behind the study do not attempt to explain how the void was made or what its purpose might have been. However, fans of sci-fi may have some ideas. To quickly recap, we've discovered a mysterious space behind a chevon-shaped opening deep inside an Egyptian pyramid. There's an obvious explanation for this:
Reports of glowing-eyed "researchers" with imperious attitudes and strangely deep voices could not be confirmed at this time.
Launches and Landings
Three rockets may get their first taste of vacuum this month, one of them 3D-printed. ULA is going through last-minute tests before the inaugural flight of its Vulcan Centaur this spring. SpaceX is forging ahead with its next-gen Starlink satellites — and the company sent Crew-6 to the International Space Station in a striking midnight launch.
Relativity Space Schedules 'GLHF' Terran 1 Launch
Right now, Relativity Space's Terran 1 rocket is scheduled to lift off as early as March 8 (Wednesday) from Cape Canaveral. The methane-fueled rocket is mostly 3D-printed. Its mission, called "GLHF" (for "Good Luck, Have Fun"), is a test flight, which means it won't have an official payload — just sensors.
Relativity is working toward building another fully reusable rocket that will succeed Terran 1. The company is also collaborating with Impulse Space, trying to beat Elon Musk's SpaceX to Mars in their own miniature 'space race.'
JAXA Makes a Second Pass at H3 Rocket Launch
Japan's H3 satellite launcher may also make its first flight in March. The rocket was scheduled to launch in February, carrying an Earth-imaging satellite. However, things went pear-shaped during a Feb. 17 launch attempt when the rocket's side boosters failed to ignite. Spokespeople from the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) say that despite the launch failure, the rocket wasn't damaged. The agency intends to make another launch attempt next Friday (March 10).
SpaceX Starship Rocket Could Take Flight Within Weeks
SpaceX recently held a test fire of its simply-named Starship. During the test, 31 of its 33 Raptor engines fired, which Elon Musk says is entirely within the mission's margin of error. (Later, Musk said the engines had run at just half their expected thrust.) However, the FAA hasn't yet published its concurrence with Musk's opinions. SpaceX still needs to get the FAA's blessing in the form of a launch license before sending Starship to space.

Starship launches may cost as little as $2 million, which is 1,000 times less than the SLS. (Credit: SpaceX)
Gary Henry, senior advisor for national security space solutions at SpaceX, spoke to the issue during a panel discussion last week. "We hope to secure that license in the very near future," he said, for a launch attempt "probably in the month of March."
ULA Announces Target Date for Vulcan Centaur Launch
In a media briefing, ULA Chief Executive Tory Bruno announced a date for the long-awaited inaugural flight of the company's Vulcan Centaur rocket. Mission teams are running through a final series of tests of the rocket before its takeoff from Cape Canaveral's Space Launch Complex 41 'no earlier than' May 4.
Based on that window, we are targeting #VulcanRocket's first launch in May. We will continue to work our launch manifest with our customers to determine upcoming launch dates.
— ULA (@ulalaunch) February 23, 2023
ULA says the date depends on the outcome of these last tests of the rocket and its main engines. However, it's also constrained by launch windows for the rocket's payloads. In addition to Astrobotic's Peregrine lunar lander, the rocket will deploy a pair of prototype satellites for Amazon's upcoming Project Kuiper broadband constellation. It will also carry to orbit the remains of four U.S. presidents (Washington, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Reagan) and other luminaries, including cast and crew from Star Trek, for space memorial company Celestis.
Good luck, folks. May the Fourth be with you.
Replacement Soyuz Docks With International Space Station
Finally! After weeks of scheduling bedlam, a replacement Soyuz capsule has arrived at the International Space Station.
In September, NASA astronaut Frank Rubio and Roscosmos cosmonauts Sergey Prokopyev and Dmitri Petelin flew to the ISS in a Soyuz capsule, MS-22. However, in mid-December, the capsule sustained a direct micrometeoroid strike to its external coolant loop. The impact destroyed the coolant system and left the capsule unfit to carry home the people it had carried to space.
Russia immediately set about launching a replacement Soyuz as fast as it could. But assorted problems, including a subsequent micrometeoroid impact to another Russian spacecraft (the Progress-82 cargo freighter docked to a different Russian module), ended up delaying that launch until last week.
The new capsule, Soyuz MS-23, will replace MS-22 as the ride home for Petelin, Prokpyev, and Rubio. However, for those watching the dates, the trio will be in orbit until this coming September — about double their expected stay.
Dazzling Midnight Launch Sends SpaceX Crew 6 to the International Space Station
After launching very early Thursday, the SpaceX Dragon capsule Endeavour docked with the ISS at 1:40 this morning, Eastern time.
The capsule is carrying the four members of SpaceX Crew-6: NASA astronauts Stephen Bowen and Warren Hoburg, along with Emirati Sultan Alneyadi and cosmonaut Andrey Fedyaev.
Liftoff! Dragon takes flight!#Crew6 launched at 12:34am ET (0534 UTC) March 2, lighting up the skies as the crew heads to orbit in the @SpaceX Dragon Endeavour spacecraft. pic.twitter.com/lEgqJmRu76
— NASA (@NASA) March 2, 2023
After Endeavour separated from its Falcon 9 rocket, an elated Hoburg radioed back to Earth: "Just want to say, as a rookie flyer, that was one heck of ride. Thank you!"
Hoburg added, "It's an absolute miracle of engineering, and I just feel so lucky that I get to fly on this amazing machine."
In a blog update, NASA did a complete roll call of the people currently aboard the station. The agency writes: "Crew-6 joins the Expedition 68 crew of NASA astronauts Frank Rubio, Nicole Mann, and Josh Cassada, as well as cosmonauts Anna Kikina, Dmitri Petelin, and Sergey Prokopyev, and JAXA astronaut Koichi Wakata." Until Crew-5 departs, there will be eleven people on the space station.
JWST Sees the Same Supernova 3 Times Through the Same Gravitational Lens
The James Webb space telescope is seeing triple — and that's a good thing. Thanks to gravitational lensing, the telescope has seized a rare opportunity to see the same supernova at three different times in its history, all in the same frame.
Gravitational lensing allows astronomers to take advantage of how massive objects like black holes and neutron stars 'bend' light by dragging in passing photons. Consequently, different photons from the same event can have paths of different lengths. This means they take different amounts of time to get to our telescopes — even though they're all traveling at the same speed. That lets an observer see through the same window into the life of a celestial object at different times in its history.
Triples is best.
This Webb image features a special galaxy that appears 3 times. Why? There's a galaxy cluster here whose mass and gravity are so great that time and space around it gets warped. This magnifies, multiplies, and distorts galaxies behind it: https://t.co/ftRTPC4bDr pic.twitter.com/fzTjUGc5UO
— NASA Webb Telescope (@NASAWebb) February 28, 2023
Now, between the telescope and the galaxy — which is River, and which is the Doctor?
Hubble Spies Cosmic Collision, 'Jellyfish Galaxy'
Not to be outdone by Webb and its fancy new mirrors, Hubble has been hard at work indeed. Recently, the telescope spied an epic cosmic collision of three separate galaxies…

A trio of merging galaxies in the constellation Boötes takes center stage in this image. (Credit: NASA/ESA)
…and a galactic seascape including a 'jellyfish galaxy' floating next to Cetus, the constellation of the Great Sea-Monster:
📸 The NASA/ESA @HUBBLE_space Telescope has captured a Jellyfish galaxy, JO201, moving through space and being slowly stripped of gas. This gas trails behind the galaxy illuminated by clumps of star formation, giving it its jellyfish-like appearance.
👉https://t.co/xdy00Oq690 pic.twitter.com/UxfnItDQMk
— ESA (@esa) February 27, 2023
Skywatchers Corner
March though it may be, it's still cold out there and squelchy wherever it isn't icy. So this week, instead of sending you outside, I wanted to show you a time-lapse image of a planetary conjunction from last week, whose surpassing beauty stopped me in my tracks.
Over the winter, Jupiter and Venus have been slowly drifting together. Last Wednesday, the Moon slipped between the two planets in their close approach for just one night. This Wednesday, Jupiter and Venus entered conjunction, visible in the evening sky less than a degree apart. In a stunning ten-day photo collage titled "10 Days of Nearness," astrophotographer Soumyadeep Mukherjee of Dhanbad, India, captured the planets' graceful arc of approach against the rich pastels of the gathering dusk.

The Moon joins Venus and Jupiter in the second panel from left. Credit and copyright Soymyadeep Mukherjee, 2023, via Space.com
Mukherjee told Space.com that he's part of a group known as Astronomads Bangla, which "works towards popularizing astrophotography in India." H/t to Space for boosting the signal and to Mr. Mukherjee himself for the work of celestial art. For more, check out his portfolio on Instagram.
Feature image credit: NASA/Joel Kowsky
Now Read:










The "world's first" entirely AI-generated news site is here. It's called NewsGPT, and it seems like an absolutely horrible idea.
The site, according to a press release, is a reporter-less — and thus, it claims, bias-free — alternative to conventional, human-created news, created with the goal of "[providing] unbiased and fact-based news to readers around the world."
"For too long," Alan Levy, NewsGPT's CEO, said in the release, "news channels have been plagued by bias and subjective reporting. With NewsGPT, we are able to provide viewers with the facts and the truth, without any hidden agendas or biases."
Okay. While we understand that a lot of folks out there are frustrated with the modern news cycle, there are about a million problems with what this guy is doing, the least of which being that there are some glaring transparency problems here — which is pretty incredible, given everything that he claims to be railing against.
First and foremost, while its title suggests that it might be using a version of OpenAI's GPT — the Large Language Model (LLM) that powers OpenAI's viral ChatGPT chatbot — Levy fails to ever actually disclose which AI program he's using to power NewsGPT. All the release says is that NewsGPT is powered by "state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms and natural language processing technology" that's allegedly "able to scan relevant news sources from around the world in real-time."
"It then uses this data," the press release reads, "to create news stories and reports that are accurate, up-to-date, and unbiased."
Great. Sure. But again: what is it? It matters! AI software doesn't just spring into existence. Models are conceptualized, built, and programmed by humans, and disclosing which humans are making the underlying tech seems like it should be pretty important to Levy's alleged mission.
When Futurism reached out to NewsGPT for comment, all a spokesperson said was that they're using a "combination of AI programs," which doesn't answer the question (they also bragged that "part of this email is written by AI," without specifying which part.)
Speaking of the underlying tech, we're not just concerned about who's building it. From ChatGPT to Bing Search to CNET's mystery AI journalism machine, language-generating AIs are notorious for the penchant to hallucinate — or, in other words, just make shit up. They don't know what words mean, they just predict what might come next in a sentence, even making up phony sources and numbers to support BS claims.
For its part, NewsGPT did admit to us that machine hallucinations "might" happen. But as they seem to frame it, machine hallucination isn't that big of a deal. It's only "fact-based" news, right?
"There are no human fact-checkers. Our news stories are generated 100 percent by AI. We are aware that 'AI hallucinations' might happen and that AI is far from a perfect technology," the company told us over email. "We are committed to learning fast and improving all the time to deliver the best AI news we can."
To that end, when it comes to, dunno, news, sources are extremely important. With the exception of an occasional in-text mention of where a specific figure may have come from, NewsGPT's articles overwhelmingly fail to link back to any of its references, offering alleged facts and figures, which have to come from somewhere — unless, of course, the machine makes them up — without mention of its origin.
Seems like an issue. But to NewsGPT, that, too, is just a growing pain.
"NewsGPT and AI are in hyper-growth phases," the firm said. "We are currently developing an AI 'best practice system' regarding sources and links."
But to that point, gotta say: if the tech is just scraping, paraphrasing, and regurgitating news found from other "relevant news sources" without giving credit, isn't that just… plagiarism? Of the human journalists that Levy says no one can trust? Who write for the companies that Levy says have "hidden agendas and biases"?
"By using the process of generative modeling, NewsGPT generates new and original stories," adding that their still-unspecified "AI model also looks for text that matches existing content too closely and actively tries to rectify this."
Sure. Again, though: we'll believe it when we see it. But considering that AI leaders at OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google haven't quite figured that piece out — or figured out any of these issues, really — we won't hold our breath.
We'd also be remiss not to mention that while human bias exists, machine bias certainly does too. Though Levy effectively markets NewsGPT as a faceless, apolitical ghost reporter, capable of finding and delivering only the facts, LLMs and similar tools are a mirror to humanity — often the worst parts of it — and not the antidote that folks like Levy promise it to be; the AI industry has yet to create a system that isn't riddled with deeply embedded bias.
At the end of the day, when it comes to news and journalism, generative AI programs may one day prove to have some helpful assistive qualities (Wired's approach, released this week, is notably respectable.) But as it stands, we've yet to see a miracle system that can safely and reliably deliver accurate and unbiased journalism without human intervention — and even with human involvement, these programs have failed time and again, a result of their own flaws as well as our own.
Anyway. Please don't get your news from NewsGPT.
More on AI journalism: CNET Hits Staff With Layoffs After Disastrous Pivot to AI Journalism
The post Guy Launches News Site That's Completely Generated by AI appeared first on Futurism.

Humbling the Hubble
The poor ol'
is already being overshadowed by its glorious successor, the James Webb. And now, seemingly unable to catch a break after thirty years of loyal service, the Hubble's having some trouble peering through an increasingly crowded sky.
According to a new study published in the journal Nature Astronomy, more and more images captured by Hubble are being tainted by satellites in orbit, which have drastically shot up in number since the telescope launched in 1990.
"We're going to be living with this problem. And astronomy will be impacted," Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who was not involved in the study, told The New York Times.
"There will be science that can't be done," he added. "There will be science that's significantly more expensive to do. There will be things that we miss."
The Big Culprit
Many of these troublesome satellites are launched by a host of private companies. But the ones that draw the most ire belong to SpaceX, whose Starlink satellites are renowned for their bright, linear formations in the sky.
From 2009 to 2020, the odds of a satellite appearing in a Hubble image sat at 3.7 percent. But just one year later in 2021, that number dramatically shot up to 5.9 percent. The culprit for the increase, naturally, were the many Starlink satellites launched over that time period. Since the study's cutoff in 2021, the amount of Starlink satellites in orbit has more than doubled to over 3,500.
When astronomers decried the Starlink satellites for obstructing ground-based telescopes, SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk, callously suggested that they simply "move telescopes to orbit."
But even if astronomer's were able to abide Musk's suggestion, which would be ridiculously expensive and wasteful, it still wouldn't solve the problem. Hubble, obviously, has always been in orbit over 300 miles above Earth, and if it's getting affected there, how far must astronomers across the globe go to accommodate Starlink's satellites?
"Not only do you have to put your telescopes in space, but you also have to put them above all the other traffic," McDowell said.
Invasion of the Satellites
Right now, the interference is only minor, and in most cases can be "readily removed using standard data reduction techniques, and the majority of affected images are still usable," a NASA spokesperson told NYT.
In years to come, though, that will almost certainly change. The study estimates that there could be up to 100,000 satellites encircling the planet by the 2030s. Starlink on its own wants to reach 42,000 in orbit.
"When will Hubble not be useful anymore?" asked study co-author Mark McCaughrean, an astronomer at the European Space Agency. "That might be 10 or 20 years away, but it's not inconceivable that there's a point at which you say, 'Let's not bother anymore.'"
More on space: Large, Mysterious Object Getting Sucked Into Milky Way's Supermassive Black Hole
The post Elon Musk's SpaceX Satellites Are Messing Up the Hubble Space Telescope appeared first on Futurism.