 |
|
|
|||||
From the first time I saw Blade Runner and heard Rutger Hauers Roy Batty describe C-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate, Ive wondered what it would be like to see beyond the limits of human vision. What would it feel like to have eyes that could see what we can’t normally see? I envied animals who can see light frequencies in the infrared and superheroes with X-ray vision that let them see like a NASA telescope. And today, I envy five regular human beings who, after having their eye cones temporarily rewired with a laser, were able to perceive a new color outside the typical range of the human eye. They called this color oloa name derived from the binary code 010, representing the cones in the eye that are activated during its perception thanks to that rewiring. It defies any comparison to anything humans have seen because, well, nobody has seen it except these five lucky individuals. As described in new research published in the scientific journal Science Advances, the subjects of this wild experiment agreed to describe it as a blue-green of unprecedented saturation. How our eyes work Most humans see the world through three types of light-sensitive cells in the retina, called cones. These detect red, green, and blue light, allowing us to distinguish roughly one million to 10 million colors. Thats enough to spot the difference between a ripe strawberry and a bruised one, or to admire a sunsets gradient. But a rare fewalmost always womenare born with a fourth cone type. These tetrachromats can see up to 100 million colors, spotting nuances invisible to the rest of us. For example, where a trichromat sees a single shade of green grass, a tetrachromat might perceive dozens of subtle variations. Yet even among those with the genetic mutation, true tetrachromacy is rare. The brain must adapt to process this extra input, and most screens cant display these additional hues. The people in the experiment didnt gain the ability to see millions of new colors. Instead, they glimpsed one artificial hue, like a single note added to a familiar song. The effect lasted only as long as the lasers fired, requiring subjects to stare unblinkingly at a fixed point. A twitch or glance away shattered the illusion. Researchers were able to bypass biology limitations using a system called Oza nod to the emerald goggles in The Wizard of Oz. First, they mapped individual cones in participants retinas using high-resolution scans, labeling each as red, green, or blue. Then, they fired precise laser pulses100,000 times per secondat specific green-sensitive cones, while tracking minuscule eye movements 960 times per second to keep the aim steady. Normally, activating green cones also triggers neighboring red or blue ones, muddling the signal. But Ozs precision isolated the green cones, sending the brain a code it had never decoded before. The result was olo. What Olo means for humans The implications stretch far beyond novelty. By selectively activating or disabling cones, researchers could simulate eye diseases, such as macular degeneration, and test therapies in real time. For color-blind individuals, Oz might trick the brain into perceiving missing colors by rerouting signals from surviving cones. James Fong, a UC Berkeley researcher who was one of the first coauthors in the study, told LiveScience that it could even probe whether humans can learn to interpret entirely synthetic colors: It may be possible for someone to adapt to a new dimension of color. Right now, however, Oz remains a lab curiosity. The system relies on million-dollar lasers, supercomputers, and participants willing to sit motionless for hours. The experiments targeted only peripheral visiona speck the size of a fingernail at arms lengthbecause the retinas central zone, where vision is sharpest, has cones too tightly packed for current lasers to hit accurately. Scaling this to full sight would require mapping millions of cells and tracking eye movements with zero lag, which is a target quite far from what our current technology can achieve. Our method depends on specialized lasers and optics that arent coming to smartphones anytime soon, Fong told LiveScience. For now, olo exists only in flashesa fleeting crack in the door to a stranger universe.
Category:
E-Commerce
The fate of Googles vast empire is now in the hands of a federal judge in Washington, D.C., as hearings begin to determine whether the tech giant should be broken up for maintaining an illegal monopoly in search. If the court rules against Google, the outcome could send shockwaves through the tech industry. The company might be forced to divest major assetspotentially including its Chrome browser or even the Android operating system. While the government has taken similar antitrust actions in the past, it’s been more than 25 years since a household name faced a breakup of this scale. So, what happened to the companies that were split upor nearly split upunder government pressure? Lets take a look back. Microsoft In 2000, Microsoft came dangerously close to being forced to separate its Windows operating system from its Office suite after a court found it had illegally stifled competition in the personal computer market. However, the breakup order was overturned by an appeals court the following year. Still, the monopoly ruling left a lasting mark on Microsoft. The company could no longer block PC makers from distributing software from competitors, paving the way for Google and others to grow. As web browsers became increasingly central to the computing experience, that shift proved critical. AT&T The government made multiple attempts to break up AT&T, starting in 1913, but didnt succeed until 1984. The result was the dissolution of Ma Bell into several smaller regional companiesknown as the Baby Bellsincluding US West, Ameritech, Nynex, and BellSouth, which handled local calling. AT&T retained control of its long-distance network but soon faced competition, driving prices down. To put it in perspective: A three-minute coast-to-coast call in 1987 cost $3.08 (about $8.45 today). Now, long-distance calls are typically unlimited and included in your monthly plan. Those Baby Bells grew up and became a strong competitor for AT&T, too: Nynex, GTE, and Bell Atlantic merged to become Verizon, whose market cap is now roughly equal to that of AT&T. Standard Oil The John Rockefeller energy company was broken up in 1911, one of the first dissolutions of a giant monopoly. It was split into 34 different companies, including Exxon Mobile, Chevron, and BP. That breakup changed the oil industry, sparking competition that has continued through today. It also changed the landscape for antitrust, introducing the “rule of reason,” which says businesses are anticompetitive only if they work against the public interest. That’s the rule judges are considering today as they weigh whether to break up Big Tech companies. IBM IBM could have been an early cautionary tale for todays Big Tech giants. In 1969, facing a looming antitrust suit, the company chose to preemptively unbundle its hardware and software businesseseffectively treating them as separate entities. At the time, IBM commanded 70% of the computer market. This voluntary separation helped the company avoid an antitrust judgment, though it still spent years in court and tens of millions of dollars in legal battles. Missteps with subsequent product launches further eroded its market share and leadership. But the rise in competition ultimately lowered costs and helped spark the personal computer revolution. As legal scholar Tim Wu noted in 2018, Apple as we know it might never have existed without the governments prosecution of IBM. “If IBM had been completely unwatched by regulators, by enforcement, doing whatever they wanted, I think IBM would have held on and maybe wed still be using mainframes, or somethinga very different situation,” he said in an interview with Vox. American Tobacco Before Big Tobacco became a catchphrase, there was American Tobaccoa company deemed so dominant that in 1911 it was found in violation of antitrust laws. Unlike other breakups, however, the dissolution of American Tobacco had little real impact on market dynamics. The newly formed companiessuch as R.J. Reynolds and Liggett & Myerscontinued to dominate, forming an oligopoly. With just a few players controlling the industry, prices remained largely unaffected by competition. Instead, increased marketing budgets drove a rise in consumer use.
Category:
E-Commerce
Last week, news broke that the Trump administration intends to propose zeroing out Head Start in the upcoming budget. While many peoples immediate concern is rightfully for the hundreds of thousands of children and families whose lives would be upended, attacks on programs that exclusively serve low-income Americans are a popular tactic because that population votes at low rates. In this case, however, the administration has picked an atrocious target: Even setting the immorality of causing so much harm aside, you benefit from Head Start programs whether or not you or anyone you know has ever stepped foot in one. Head Start (and Early Head Start, its companion program for children younger than 3) has enjoyed bipartisan support for almost 60 years and serves multiple functions: Sites provide important opportunities for child development, offer medical screenings for kids, connect families with local resources, and can serve as community hubs. They are also a critical source of free childcare for more than 700,000 families. Who are the 700,000 Head Start families? Who are Head Start families? They consist of many of the people we called essential just five years ago: grocery store stockers, home healthcare aides, hospital custodians, even staff in the childcare programs that serve middle- and high-income families. They are rural families; in many rural counties, Head Start is literally the only childcare program around. They are military families; there is even an on-base Head Start at Fort Carson in Colorado Springs. They are agricultural workers who pick the produce that appears in your supermarket; in fact, more than 26,000 children of seasonal farm workers attend a Head Start. Imagine for a moment that Congress goes along with the administrations proposal. All of these families lives will be thrown into chaos. As anyone who has a child can tell you, theres no abundance of alternative affordable childcare options out there. Instead, people will do what they need to do, sacrificing their well-being along the way: Theyll cut back hours, work laddered shifts, find care of questionable quality that leaves them anxious and distracted. They may even drop out of the labor force altogether. Crippling system already in crisis Indeed, it may be helpful to reframe the headline here as Trump administration seeks to shutter more than 3,000 childcare programs, and then to consider just how absurd such an action would be. After all, the childcare shortage in the U.S. is already harming the stability of family life and the economy. President Donald Trump himself declared in 2019, In more than 60% of American homes, both parents work. Yet many struggle to afford childcare, which often costs more than $10,000 per year. And it’s devastating to families, frankly. Fewer choices and longer waits Whats more, the 700,000 families who will lose their childcare if Head Start goes away will not simply disappear. Instead, they will be thrust into the failed market for private childcare services, introducing yet more competition for scarce slots and scarce aid dollars. All Head Start families qualify for, but generally do not utilize, childcare subsidies available through a federal block grant program intended to serve both low- and moderate-income families (i.e., those making up to 85% of state median incomearound $82,000 for a state like Michiganor below, though states can and do set their limits lower). That subsidy program is already so underfunded it can reach only one in six eligible households. Take away Head Start, and existing waitlists and enrollment freezes will only get worse. The administrations ostensible logic for squashing Head Start requires entirely eliding the childcare role Head Start plays. The budget document states, This elimination is consistent with the Administrations goal of returning education to the States and increasing parental choice. The Federal government should not be in the business of mandating curriculum, locations, and performance standards for any form of education. Ignoring for a moment the glaring factual inaccuracies (Head Start merely requires sites to adopt some form of reasonable curriculum, not a specific one, and local agencies or groups apply to get funding for locations where they wish to host Head Start classrooms), this is a feint. There is no commensurate increase of early care and education grants to states being proposed to offset Head Start elimination, so parents will simply have fewer choices. In this respect, the educational content of Head Start is immaterial, and getting drawn into a debate over Head Starts effectiveness is a distraction. Hypothetically, the administration could apply this exact same reasoning to shutting down the hundreds of schools and child development centers that are run by the Department of Defense, all of which come with curricula and performance standards. But of course they wont propose that, because while some military families are struggling due to administration policies, such a large-scale cut would leave tens of thousands of service members with no access to care. Head Start is not a perfect program. There is a worthwhile conversation to be had about how Head Start may need to evolve if and when the nation moves toward a more comprehensive family policy that includes universal childcare and early learning alongside structural reforms that break down barriers keeping families in poverty. But this is not, in the end, really about Head Start itself. If America is to be strong and prosperous in an uncertain era, the well-being of American families must be placed front and center. There is no American familyand therefore no American businessthat would be untouched by the ripple effects of abruptly gutting Head Start, and doing so would set the country on course for a future marked by yet more scarcity. The administration must turn back.
Category:
E-Commerce
Electric vehicles have seen a lot of success in recent years, but there are still some concernsfrom range anxiety to insufficient charging infrastructurethat limit their overall adoption. Hybrids dont have those same worries, and hybrid sales have been gaining momentum as the growth of EV sales has slowed. Thats caused some carmakers to pull back on EV offerings and prioritize hybrids instead. But now a company called Horse Powertrain is offering an alternative to carmakers who are hesitant to go fully electric while still allowing them to develop EVsand keep their EV production lines. Called the Future Hybrid Concept, its essentially a way for automakers to retrofit a battery electric vehicle into a plug-in hybrid. That means automakers could have one production line that makes a variety of powertrains, both developing EVs and also offering hybrid versions. [Photo: Horse Powertrain] Horse Powertrain is a joint venture by French auto manufacturer Renault and Chinese conglomerate Geely (Geely subsidiaries include Volvo and Polestar) created to develop low-emission hybrid and combustion systems. Horse Powertrain is unveiling its Future Hybrid Concept at the Shanghai auto show this week. The Future Hybrid Concept is one compact unit that includes an internal combustion engine, an electric motor, and a transmission. This allows automakers to hybridize their existing battery electric vehicles, the company says, to meet fluctuating customer demands while also “eliminating the need for multiple platforms and production lines. The Future Hybrid Concept can bolt directly onto an EVs subframe with minor modifications, per Horse. This means that carmakers could manufacture both EVs and hybrids on one assembly line, reducing complexity. Currently, hybrids are often assembled on the same production lines as internal combustion vehicles, and EVs on another, because of the distinct components they need. Some manufacturers have found ways around this: Honda, for instance, upgraded its Ohio factories so that gas vehicles, hybrids, and EVs can be manufactured on the same lines. But for other automakers that have yet to make those upgrades, or that have prioritized EV innovation but now want to diversify their offerings, Horse Powertrain says its retrofit concept can fit into existing operations. It would also eliminate most of the tooling and unique assembly steps hybrids need, the company says, so that manufacturing lines can be simplified. Through our innovation, we can deliver a full hybrid powertrain system that seamlessly integrates onto a battery electric vehicle platform, Matias Giannini, CEO at Horse Powertrain, said in a statement. The Future Hybrid Concept system includes an onboard charger, and could work with a variety of fuels, including gas, ethanol, methanol, and other synthetic fuels. The first vehicles using Horse Powertrains Future Hybrid Concept are expected to be on the road as early as 2028. Horse Powertrain already has 17 production plants and five R&D centers across Europe, Asia, and South America, and expects to produce 5 million powertrain engines annually.
Category:
E-Commerce
For decades, huge swaths of Brazils Cerrado ecosystem have been used to support the global demand for burgers. Forests and grasslands were replaced by pastures along with farms growing soy to feed cattle. But a major restoration project is now underway on an area nearly twice as large as Manhattan. If you fly over one part of southwestern Brazil, youll see a patchwork of dozens of square plots where a local university is studying different methods of helping native plants regrow on former cattle pastures. On more than 25,000 acres, along rivers and the edge of remaining pieces of forest, new vegetation has been growing quickly over the past two years. Wildlife cameras track the native species that are returning, from puma to an endangered species of rabbit. The environmental group Conservation International is working on the project with an unlikely set of partners: a forestry company and the tech giant Apple. [Photo: TIG] Why Apple is investing in forests The project is one piece of Apples climate strategy. When we look at the global climate science, its clear that we have to cut emissions as quickly as possible, but we also have to end deforestation and rapidly scale up carbon removal in order to stay within 1.5 degrees [of global temperature rise], says Chris Busch, director of environmental initiatives at Apple. The companys first priority is reducing its own emissions. Through tactics like using recycled rare earth elements in iPhones and helping suppliers shift to renewable energy at factories, it has already cut its emissions by 60% compared to 2015. By 2030, its aiming to hit 75%. But for the remaining 25%, Busch says, We just don’t have a clear line of sight to how to avoid those emissions at scale today within our value chain. So that is where nature comes in to play a role for us. There are several ways to take CO2 out of the atmosphere, including nascent technology like direct air capture. But Apple knew that in order to reach its short-term goals for 2030, it would need to lean on natures ability to capture carbon because no other approach was ready to scale up quickly enough. At the same time, the company recognized that there werent enough nature-based carbon credits available to buyand restoration and preservation projects often struggle to prove that they actually have as much benefit as they claim. In 2021, Apple committed $200 million to the Restore Fund, a new fund established with Conservational International and Goldman Sachs, to help carbon removal grow more quickly and to focus on creating quality projects. (In 2023, it pledged an additional $200 million for a second fund within the program.) One of the first investments, in 2022, was Project Alpha in Brazil. Restoration and planting started in 2023. It’s the first step in a larger effort that will eventually restore 741,000 acres of degraded land across Brazil, Uruguay, and Chile. A biodiversity hot spot The Cerrado ecosystem, which originally sprawled over more than a million square miles in Brazil with a mix of dense forests, grasslands, and wetlands, is a biodiversity hot spot. Many of its 1,600-plus species of animals, and 10,000 species of plants, can’t be found anywhere else. It’s also quickly disappearing. “It’s faced a rate of loss that’s fairly extreme,” says Will Turner, senior vice president at Conservation International’s Center for Natural Climate Solutions. “Well over half of the native Cerrado vegetation has been destroyed, predominantly due to agriculture.” The restoration project is focusing on an area that was converted for grazing in the 1990s, and bought the land from cattle farmers. As grasslands were replaced by pasture, they were planted with invasive grasses to feed cattle. The grass chokes off the growth of native plants. Because it’s spread so much, the non-native grass makes restoration expensive and challenging. That’s why the project took a new approach: Instead of focusing solely on restoration, it’s happening in combination with carefully managed forestry. [Photo: TIG] Why an environmental group wanted to partner with a forestry company BTG Pactual Timberland Investment Group (TIG), the forestry partner on the project, is planting tree farms on half of the former grazing land, and managing restoration on the other half. In some ways, the solution seems counterintuitive: The tree farms will grow eucalyptus, a non-native species from Australia. In other parts of Brazil, environmental groups have derided eucalyptus plantations, arguing that they’re destructive. But the trees can thrive in degraded soil where other species struggle to grow. They also grow quickly, taking up large amounts of CO2. Since deforestation reduces rainfall, planting new trees can also help with the hydrological cycle. And as global demand for wood continues to grow, the new plantationswhich are FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certifiedcan potentially help avoid deforestation of native trees in places like the Amazon rainforest. Some critics argue that eucalyptus overuses groundwater, but Conservation International says that’s often caused by poor management. If a eucalyptus plantation is managed well, the nonprofit says, recent research suggests it will use the same amount of water as a native forest. (The forestry company is also screening out locations that have insufficient water availability and monitoring water security for others in the area.) When TIG bought grazig land from farmers, it carefully tracked where the cattle were moved, making sure that the process didn’t lead to new land being cleared elsewhere. (The company agreed to this, along with other sustainability critera, as part of the project.) Then, with guidance from Conservation International, it began “assisted natural regeneration,” taking steps to help native vegetation regrow. In some areas, it’s also planting seeds or seedlings. Having the forestry company on the site also means that its crew can protect the restored areas from encroachment from other farmers or fight wildfires if needed. The forestry company will earn carbon credits both as its trees capture CO2 and as native vegetation is being restored. Apple also has a stake in the project. “What we’re aiming to do is generate a financial return as an investor in those projects, but also a carbon return,” says Busch. “Part of the return that we get on that investment is carbon credits.” Third-party auditors will monitor the project before the carbon credits are issued. Apple is also helping with some of the monitoring technology, including testing ways to use the iPhone’s lidar scanner to measure the diameter of trees. Without the forestry part of the project in place, Conservation International says it’s unlikely that any restoration would have happened in the area at all. Including forestry makes the restoration financially viable. And it helped it happen at a large scale: The project will increase the restoration across the entire Cerrado region by 50%. “At the end of the day, what we think is really important is figuring out how to get to scale in terms of restoration and carbon sequestration quickly,” says Apple’s Busch. “That needs to be funded somehow. The conservation side of the operation is truly [financially] sustainable because it can be funded by the business side.”
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] next »