James' World 2

Click the link below the picture

.

In late August, Bloomberg reported rumors that electric automaker Tesla plans to reveal its forthcoming autonomous robotaxi — expected to be called the Cybercab — on Oct. 10 at the Warner Bros. studio lot in Burbank. This vehicle will reportedly be purpose-built to function solely as a self-driving cab. As such, it will not contain an accelerator, brake pedals, or a steering wheel, and will be hailed via a special Tesla app. A week or so ago, sources shared an image of a small, canary-yellow vehicle trolling the Warners lot, tailed by Tesla production vehicles, leading some to suggest it was a camouflaged robotaxi.

Overstatements, obfuscations, and broken promises regarding the unveiling and production of future Tesla products — a “semi” tractor-trailer, a new sporty roadster, an entry-level vehicle, this robotaxi — are so frequent as to be standard operating procedure. Since Tesla entirely eliminated its public relations department four years ago, The Hollywood Reporter can’t confirm that this event (already postponed once this year) will occur at all.

But, if it does move forward, the global launch of a new Tesla at Warners is certain to raise eyebrows in Hollywood and draw scrutiny toward the chummy relationship between the carmaker’s increasingly controversial CEO, Elon Musk, and Warners’ embattled chief executive, David Zaslav. (Warner Bros. declined to comment on the rumored robotaxi reveal.) As Musk has continued his trajectory into the MAGA-verse — pledging allegiance to right-wing conspiracies, amplifying racist and antisemitic messages, disparaging trans people, including his own daughter, and endorsing Donald Trump — his stock in Hollywood, and that of his brand, has plummeted.

“Elon is very outspoken, and his political views are not as popular in the entertainment industry,” says Debbie Levin, CEO of the Environmental Media Association (EMA), which promotes messages, actions, and products to create positive environmental change in Hollywood.

The brand’s current diminished status in Hollywood is particularly notable when compared to a decade ago, when Tesla products began penetrating the industry. “The Tesla became the ‘It’ car in terms of electrification,” Levin says. “If you could spend $100,000 on a car, that was sort of the way to go to show that you care about the environment.”

As the brand expanded, Southern California — long at the forefront of vehicular trends — became one of its largest markets. “When you’re in Hollywood, driving around the studios, that’s pretty much all you see,” says Ed Kim, president and chief analyst of Auto Pacific, a SoCal-based mobility research firm. “It’s Teslas everywhere.”

Shifts are now occurring in local consumer interest and purchase behavior. “Certainly, we have seen sales drop significantly at Tesla this year,” Kim says, citing a nearly 25 percent drop in sales in the Golden State this quarter alone. This is notable not just because the brand is losing market share as established luxury automakers like Audi, BMW, and Mercedes, and compelling upstarts like Polestar, Lucid, and Rivian, diversify their EV offerings, but because, in an expanding EV marketplace, Tesla is shrinking. “Despite all the headlines, EV sales are still growing. They’re just not growing at the same speed that they were before. But Tesla is actually losing sales,” Kim says. “In fact, Tesla is one of the few EV makers that has been losing volume, not just losing market share.”

This decline can be correlated with Musk’s recent rightward turn and related online antics. “Rejection of Tesla recently spiked and continues among Democrats. They want nothing to do with Tesla,” says Alexander Edwards, president of Strategic Vision, a Southern California-based consultancy that conducts hundreds of thousands of in-depth psychographic surveys with new car buyers annually. “And there are no hidden Republicans that are buying these. That just doesn’t exist.”

.

“Tesla is one of the few EV makers that has been losing volume, not just losing market share,” says automative analyst Ed Kim. THR Illustration; images: David Livingston/Getty Images, Adobe Stock

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Megan Rumney, an executive with a financial-services firm in Severna Park, Md., an affluent Baltimore suburb, decided to buy her older son a smartphone. She made the purchase with the understanding that she would use it to track his location and social media use. Rumney was hesitant to do so for the fifth grader but admits she felt a lot of social pressure and eventually gave in. All of her friends were getting their children a smartphone, and Rumney didn’t want her son to feel left out; his friends almost exclusively communicate using their devices. Still, she was concerned about the risks of social media and cyberbullying.

At the time, Rumney thought this was a good compromise. It allowed her son, Harrison, now age 14, to ride his bike to school, sporting events, and friend’s houses, giving him some sense of autonomy. A few years later she got her younger son Weston, now age 11, an Apple Watch for much the same reason. At times, though, tracking has become a burden of sorts.

When her kids aren’t with her, she uses apps such as Life360 and her younger son’s Apple Watch to track their location. Rumney says that once you have the technology, it’s hard not to use it all the time. “It’s good to know where they are and be able to get in touch with them, but it’s also a double-edged sword,” she says.

Rumney says she likes knowing where her kids are but doesn’t like her family’s overreliance on devices. She adds that she’s just not sure that being able to track Harrison was worth him having a phone that he spends so much time on, and she doesn’t know how this type of monitoring will affect him emotionally down the line. “If I could do it all again, I’m not sure, I would,” Rumney says. In fact, she’s held off on getting her younger son his own smartphone.

About half of parents in the U.S. say they monitor their adolescents’ movements via location-tracking apps, according to a study published in June 2023 in the Journal of Family Psychology. An additional 14 percent of parents who participated in the study claimed to use a tracking app while their child reported that they weren’t being surveilled, indicating that the monitoring was done unbeknownst to the child.

Experts worry that tracking teens’ locations can turn into a slippery slope that can at times hinder a teen’s relationship with their parents and harm their developing sense of autonomy, as well as create a false sense of security.

With so many things for parents to worry about, from school shooters to fentanyl overdoses and child trafficking, it’s no surprise that they look to location monitoring apps such as Find My iPhone and Life360, which use GPS, as well as the location of nearby Wi-Fi networks and cellular towers, to track and keep their children safe, says Sophia Choukas-Bradley, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh, whose research focuses on the mental health and well-being of adolescents and emerging adults. “With that said, for adolescents, this is a stage of life when kids are seeking autonomy and independence from their parents,” she says, “and a time when privacy feels really important to kids for good developmental reasons.”

Choukas-Bradley adds that part of teenagers’ normal development has to do with the urge for privacy and the ability to maneuver their first romantic relationships or hold their own with peers while just hanging out. This stage of seeking independence during the teen years remains crucial to them for fostering a sense of personal responsibility, learning to make their own decisions, and establishing their own system of values. “There’s some tricky gray areas with regards to what tracking kids can tell parents and what that does to a kid’s sense of autonomy and privacy,” she says. Research published in the August 2019 issue of the International Journal of Adolescence and Youth found that some children understood their parents’ concerns for their safety, but at the same time, many felt that their parents often went too far by contacting them constantly in ways that felt meddlesome.

When parents’ scrutiny is overly intrusive, teens’ natural tendency is to rebel. “This can lead to feelings of resentment, which may strain the relationship,” says Judy Ho Gavazza, an associate professor of psychology at Pepperdine University.

A study published in November 2020 in the journal Computers in Human Behavior found that perceptions of privacy invasion are associated with rebellious responses. Teens devise ways to evade their parents by turning off their phone, letting their battery go dead, or refusing to respond to text messages. (Friction over tracking happens less with preteens, who need more supervision and expect less privacy.)

.

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

.

Bart Starr, Jr.

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Since the COVID pandemic began, claims that the disease poses only minimal risk to children have spread widely, on the presumption that the lower rate of severe acute illness in kids tells the whole story. Notions that children are nearly immune to COVID and don’t need to be vaccinated have pervaded.

These ideas are wrong. People making such claims ignore the accumulating risk of long COVID, the constellation of long-term health effects caused by infection, in children who may get infected once or twice a year. The condition may already have affected nearly six million kids in the U.S. Children need us to wake up to this serious threat. If we do, we can help our kids with a few straightforward and effective measures.

The spread of the mistaken idea that children have nothing to worry about has had some help from scientists. In 2023 the American Medical Association’s pediatrics journal published a study–which has since been retracted—reporting the rate of long COVID symptoms in kids was “strikingly low” at only 0.4 percent. The results were widely publicized as feel-good news, and helped rationalize the status quo, where kids are repeatedly exposed to SARS-COV-2 in underventilated schools and parents believe they will suffer no serious harm.

In January 2024, however, two scientists published a letter with me explaining why that study was invalid. Some of the errors made it hard to understand how the study survived peer review. For example, the authors claimed to report on long COVID using the 2021 World Health Organization definition, but didn’t properly account for the possibility of new onset and fluctuating or relapsing symptoms, even though that definition and the subsequently released 2023 pediatric one emphasize those attributes. Any child with four symptom-free weeks—even nonconsecutive ones—following confirmed infection was categorized by the study authors as not having long COVID.

In August, the authors of the study retracted it. They did not admit to the errors we raised. But they did admit to new errors, and said these mistakes meant they understated the rate of affected children.

And that rate, according to other research, is quite high. The American Medical Association’s top journal, JAMA, in August, published a key new study and editorial about pediatric long COVID. The editorial cites several robust analyses and concludes that, while uncertainty remains, long COVID symptoms appear to occur after about 10 percent to 20 percent of pediatric infections.

If you’re keeping score, that’s as many as 5.8 million affected children in the U.S.—so far. And we know studies and surveys of adults have found that repeat infections heighten the risk of long-term consequences.

The JAMA study comparing infected and uninfected children found that trouble with memory or focusing is the most common long COVID symptom in kids aged six to 11. Back, neck, stomach, and head pain were the next most common symptoms. Other behavioral impacts included “fear about specific things” and refusal to go to school.

Adolescents aged 12 to 17 reported different leading symptoms. Change or loss in smell or taste was most common, followed by body pains, daytime tiredness, low energy, tiredness after walking, and cognitive deficits. The study noted that symptoms “affected almost every organ system.” In other words, these symptoms reflect real physiological trauma. For example, SARS-COV-2 can cause or mediate cardiovascular, neurological, and immunological harm, even increasing the relative risk of new onset pediatric diabetes when compared with other lesser infections.

.

SergeyChayko/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Some content on this page was disabled on April 15, 2025 as a result of a DMCA takedown notice from Guardian Media Group. You can learn more about the DMCA here:

https://wordpress.com/support/copyright-and-the-dmca/

Click the link below the picture

.

Fifteen years ago, cosmologists were flying high. The simple but wildly successful “standard model of cosmology” could, with just a few ingredients, account for a lot of what we see in the universe. It seemed to explain the distribution of galaxies in space today, the accelerated expansion of the universe, and the fluctuations in the brightness of the relic glow from the big bang—called the cosmic microwave background (CMB)—based on a handful of numbers fed into the model. Sure, it contained some unexplained exotic features, such as dark matter and dark energy, but otherwise everything held together. Cosmologists were (relatively) happy.

Over the past decade, though, a pesky inconsistency has arisen, one that defies easy explanation and may portend significant breaks from the standard model. The problem lies with the question of how fast space is growing. When astronomers measure this expansion rate, known as the Hubble constant, by observing supernovae in the nearby universe, their result disagrees with the rate given by the standard model.

This “Hubble tension” was first noted more than 10 years ago, but it was not clear then whether the discrepancy was real or the result of measurement error. With time, however, the inconsistency has become more firmly entrenched, and it now represents a major thorn in the side of an otherwise capable model. The latest data, from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), have made the problem worse.

The two of us have been deeply involved in this saga. One (Riess) is an observer and co-discoverer of dark energy, one of the last pieces of the standard cosmological model. He has also spearheaded efforts to determine the Hubble constant by observing the local universe. The other (Kamionkowski) is a theorist who helped to figure out how to calculate the Hubble constant by measuring the CMB. More recently he helped to develop one of the most promising ideas to explain the discrepancy—a notion called early dark energy.

One possibility is that the Hubble tension is telling us the baby universe was expanding faster than we think. Early dark energy posits that this extra expansion might have resulted from an additional repulsive force that was pushing against space at the time and has since died out.

This suggestion is finally facing real-world tests, as experiments are just now becoming capable of measuring the kinds of signals early dark energy might have produced. So far the results are mixed. But as new data come in over the next few years, we should learn more about whether the expansion of the cosmos is diverging from our predictions and possibly why.

The idea that the universe is expanding at all came as a surprise in 1929, when Edwin Hubble used the Mount Wilson Observatory near Pasadena, Calif., to show that galaxies are all moving apart from one another. At the time, many scientists, including Albert Einstein, favored the idea of a static universe. But the separating galaxies showed that space is swelling ever larger.

.

Chris Gash

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________