On July 20, 1976, NASA’s Viking 1 lander became the first spacecraft to safely touch down on Mars. Shortly after, it beamed back our first close-up image of the surface—a drab view of pebbles strewn at the lander’s feet.
“I don’t think we’d have been surprised if there were blades of grass,” recalls Tom Young, Viking’s mission director. Scientists had speculated for years about what scenes would await Viking 1 and its twin, Viking 2, which landed elsewhere on Mars a few weeks later. Most thought any Martians would, at most, be simple, small life-forms—although Carl Sagan had impishly suggested that polar-bear-sized creatures could populate the landscape.
Humans have imagined other inhabited worlds for millennia. And we’ve even “discovered” life on Mars more than once across the last century or two. Yet each time we’ve built sharper tools and taken a closer look, all those claims have evaporated, much like the Red Planet’s ancient seas. By the time the Viking landers launched, we knew there were no signs of life that could be seen from orbit.
But there was still hope that perhaps something stirred there—hope enough to launch the Viking landers on an audacious mission to look for it. Their results, however, weren’t conclusive. Most experts agree the twin spacecraft failed to find definitive signs of organisms in scoops of Martian soil, but some scientists continue to believe they did.
Even now, a half-century later, the outcome of those investigations fuels debate, and the Viking landers remain the only missions ever sent to the surface of another world to search for extant alien life. The ambiguity that wafted from their soil samples has become emblematic of the uncertainty that plagues the greater search for extraterrestrial life—not just on Mars and our sun’s other worlds but across the observable universe. Our knowledge of life’s physical limits and the unearthly forms it might take remains so incomplete that we could all too easily declare a discovery where none truly exists—or fail to recognize genuine extraterrestrial biology hidden in plain view.
As a result, astrobiologists have, for decades, defaulted to a conservative burden of proof that leans into two aphorisms coined by Sagan when he wasn’t musing about Martian polar bears: life, he and his co-authors wrote, should be considered a “hypothesis of last resort,” largely because “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
But what if Sagan had it all wrong? If we live in a universe where life is common and not extraordinary at all, setting such an extraordinarily high bar for its discovery beyond Earth can backfire. What if life’s fingerprints have been on Mars all along, and we were too cautious to admit that we’d found them?
Already, a growing pile of evidence suggests ancient Mars could very well have been an inhabited planet—and may still be. Our search for life there is a bit like bobbing for apples blindfolded—except we don’t know what an “apple” might feel like, and the apples may exist only in scattered pieces. What’s needed, many scientists argue, is a clearer way of separating signs of “life” from “nonlife,” a quantitative method that leverages statistics and probabilities to guide our interpretations of biology’s potential fingerprints.
“There’s all these different lines of evidence that keep coming together that make me go, ‘Gosh, it’s becoming more and more difficult to explain everything on Mars abiotically,’” says Amy Williams, an astrobiologist at the University of Florida. “I’m not yet ready to say that we’ve found evidence for life, but I think the story is building to help us understand what that potential is—to put a probability on that instead of just saying ‘yes’ or ‘no.’”
Present-day Mars is marginally habitable at best, but 3.5 billion years ago the planet was almost certainly a more life-friendly world. Ancient Mars was warmer, with a thicker atmosphere and a global magnetic field that protected its surface from cosmic radiation; seas and lakes filled its basins, and rivers tumbled through its valleys. Over eons, Mars lost its magnetic field and, with it, those bodies of water and thick, insulating atmosphere.
Yet across the sweep of Mars’s lifetime, organic compounds—life’s building blocks—have rained down on the planet, delivered by meteorites and cosmic dust.
“If we live in a universe where life takes advantage of watery environments when there’s juicy chemistry going on—which is the way I picture the universe, but that’s unvalidated intuition—then something should have started happening in some of those places on Mars,” says astrobiologist David Grinspoon of the Planetary Science Institute. “So there’s this predisposition to think, ‘Either there should have been an origin of life on Mars—or we’re really wrong about something on Earth.’”
Since 2012 NASA’s Curiosity rover has been searching for signs of ancient habitable environments in Gale Crater. And in 2021 the agency’s Perseverance rover touched down in Jezero Crater with the goal of looking specifically for ancient biosignatures, not present-day life. Now, based on the results of those robotic explorations, many experts suspect that ancient Mars was indeed a biological world, even if they can’t yet prove it.
“The evidence for habitable environments and life on early Mars is getting stronger every time we look at it,” says Chris McKay, an astrobiologist at NASA’s Ames Research Center.
.
A model of NASA’s Viking 1 Mars lander (inset) against a panoramic view of the Martian surface snapped by Viking 1 on July 20, 1976. NASA/JPL-Caltech
A rare cancer tied to past industrial work has long left patients with few options and little time. Mesothelioma, most often caused by asbestos exposure, develops slowly and strikes decades later. By the time symptoms appear, the disease is often advanced. Survival averages about one year, and long-term outcomes remain poor.
Now, new research by the University of Vermont offers a different approach. Instead of protecting cells from damage, scientists are turning cancer’s own survival system against it. Early clinical results suggest the strategy may slow disease and extend lives.
A Disease With Few Options
Mesothelioma affects about 30,000 people worldwide each year. Many patients worked in shipbuilding, oil refining, or construction, where asbestos exposure was common.
Current treatments, including chemotherapy and immunotherapy, provide limited benefit. Most patients face a median survival of around 12 months. The five-year survival rate is near 10 percent.
“It’s a disease of a significant unmet medical need,” said Brian Cunniff, a professor at the University of Vermont.
Researchers have spent years searching for better treatments. Many past efforts focused on reducing harmful molecules inside cancer cells. This new study takes the opposite approach.
Turning A Survival Mechanism Into A Weakness
Cancer cells grow quickly and consume large amounts of energy. This process produces unstable molecules called reactive oxygen species. These molecules can damage cells if they build up.
To survive, tumor cells increase their defenses. They produce antioxidant enzymes that neutralize these harmful compounds. One key enzyme is called peroxiredoxin 3, or PRX3.
PRX3 works inside mitochondria, the parts of cells that produce energy. It removes hydrogen peroxide, a damaging molecule that forms during metabolism.
Scientists realized that mesothelioma cells depend heavily on this system. Without it, the cells could be overwhelmed by their own stress.
The idea was simple but bold. Instead of reducing oxidative stress, increase it. Block PRX3 and allow harmful molecules to accumulate. Push the cancer cells past their limit.
Lab Results Show Strong Effects
To test this idea, researchers removed PRX3 from mesothelioma cells in the laboratory. The results were immediate.
Cells without PRX3 grew more slowly. Their ability to multiply dropped sharply. Energy production declined, and oxidative stress increased.
In animal studies, the effect was even more dramatic. When these altered cells were introduced into mice, they failed to form tumors.
The findings showed that PRX3 is not just helpful for cancer cells. It may be essential for their survival.
.
A new therapy targets cancer’s stress defenses, showing promise in early trials for mesothelioma patients with limited treatment options. (CREDIT: Shutterstock)
The milestones for artificial intelligence keep getting grander.
In 2023, an A.I. system passed the bar exam. In 2025, the technology helped scientists identify a suspected cause of Alzheimer’s disease. In May, A.I. had advanced so far that it solved a complex math problem that had stumped experts for 80 years. Last week, two A.I. systems under testing went rogue and hacked into a company’s database.
And this is still just the beginning.
From the American Midwest to the Persian Gulf, hundreds of major data centers now under construction will be turned on in the coming years. They are set to deliver an avalanche of computing power to develop and run A.I. that has no equal in the history of the technology industry, with breakthroughs that once felt revolutionary likely to become increasingly routine.
Behind each leap in A.I. are corresponding jumps in computing power. Today, there are about 20 million A.I. chips crammed into the data centers that underpin the technology’s growing abilities and usage worldwide, according to the research firm Epoch AI.
That figure is expected to double roughly every nine months, putting the world on pace to have about 200 million of chips by the end of 2028 — 10 times current levels.
In size and ambition, this moment compares to the building of the railroads in the 1800s, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s, and the Manhattan Project to create an atomic weapon in the 1940s, technologists said.
“This is the largest scale infrastructure build-out in the history of humanity,” said Rob Wachen, a co-founder of the microchip firm Etched, which has raised more than $1 billion to meet the growing demand for A.I. components.
Peter DeSantis, who leads foundational A.I. models at Amazon — which provides computing power to the A.I. firms Anthropic, OpenAI and others — said the Seattle company has doubled its computing capacity since 2022 and would double it again by next year. “It’s hard to get your mind around the scale,” he said.
Fueling the surge is the belief that A.I. can take on more human responsibilities and solve increasingly complicated tasks with the more data and computing power you feed it. This tenet, sometimes called “the Scaling Laws,” has become the driving force behind this technological era. Those with the most computing power will create the most advanced A.I. systems, capturing the biggest share of profit and value, tech leaders argue. The biggest engine, they say, will win the race.
Confidence in the Scaling Laws has led A.I. leaders to make ever bolder predictions. Dario Amodei, the chief executive of Anthropic, has said that if these laws hold for another year or two, A.I. will be able to perform huge amounts of white-collar work. Demis Hassabis, the head of Google’s A.I. lab DeepMind, wrote recently that A.I. could usher in “10x of the Industrial Revolution at 10x the speed.”
Scientists and technologists see the coming deluge of computing power leading to drug discoveries and robotics advances, and industry analysts said it would drive more everyday use of A.I. in people’s personal and professional lives.
But the build-out has also stoked a backlash, spurring protests in many communities over how data centers could harm the environment, raise electricity prices and drain water. In the United States, data centers are shaping up as a major issue for November’s midterm elections, with a growing national movement pushing back against the tech industry and its billionaires.
Economists and investors have raised concerns that tech firms are spending faster than they can profit from A.I. Past infrastructure booms have been followed by downturns before the benefits of the technology were realized. The railroad boom in the 1800s, electrification in the 1920s, and the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s were punctuated by economic recessions and a stock market crash as companies that overspent went out of business.
“Each time you’ve had a technological revolution, this kind of bubble bursting happened,” said Philippe Aghion, who won the Nobel in economic science in 2025 for research on innovation-driven economic growth. “A.I. is like the fourth industrial revolution, and it has this aspect to it that generates a bubble.”
With more computing power coming online, geopolitical divisions are only set to widen.
The United States, home to about 5,500 data centers, about 10 times the next closest country, is far ahead of the rest of the world, including China. U.S. companies like Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta control about 80 percent of global computing power that drives A.I., according to Epoch AI. Google alone is believed to have four times as many A.I. chips as all of China’s companies, which are racing to catch up by developing new semiconductors and A.I. infrastructure of their own.
.
Amazon’s sprawling complex in New Carlisle, Ind., which is spread across an area that was once cornfields.AJ Mast for The New York Times
On Thursday, SpaceX pulled off the second consecutive successful test flight of its Starship megarocket. The launch hints at sustained progress after years of botched tests, but there is a caveat.
Just after 6:50 P.M. EDT, Starship lofted into space atop SpaceX’s Super Heavy V3 booster from the company’s Starbase launch complex in Texas. After two and a half minutes, the booster separated from Starship and returned to Earth. SpaceX was aiming for the reusable booster to make a pinpoint landing in the Gulf of Mexico, but that part of the mission didn’t go according to plan. The booster’s landing burn appeared to fail, resulting in a hard crash into the water.
Once in space, however, Starship successfully deployed its payload of 20 Starlink V3 satellites, some of which were armed with cameras to check its heat shield—and offer audiences on the ground in-flight views of the rocket in space.
The Starlink satellites are the same as those SpaceX is planning to use to further build out its orbital broadband Internet constellation. But for the purposes of this test, the Starlink craft merely attempted to establish laser communications with the wider network, before ultimately plummeting to their doom in Earth’s atmosphere.
Eventually, SpaceX wants to use Starship as its workhorse rocket, replacing the smaller Falcon 9. With its ability to carry 100 metric tons of cargo to orbit, Starship will be able to loft many more Starlink satellites at a time than the Falcon 9 rocket.
Alone in space, Starship also showed improvements over its last test flight, successfully reigniting one of its six Raptor engines for a brief burn. The spacecraft didn’t attempt this feat during its previous test flight in May because the Raptor engine shut down prematurely during launch.
The new flight, which was originally slated for last week but was delayed, ended after an hour and five minutes. After deploying its satellites, Starship splashed down successfully north of Australia in the Indian Ocean, although it did briefly catch fire in the water.
The mostly successful test is good news for SpaceX’s ambitions—but it also matters for the future of human space exploration. NASA hopes to use Starship to get humans to and from the moon as part of its Artemis program.
If SpaceX can get a lunar-lander variant of Starship ready on time, NASA could use it to send humans to the surface of the moon for the first time in more than 50 years as soon as 2028.
A watchdog report published in March found SpaceX was lagging in that effort, and NASA is also funding development of a Blue Origin lunar lander for the task.
The clock is ticking for both companies: NASA’s Artemis III, a crewed mission to test key capabilities for both vehicles in low-Earth orbit, is targeted for launch before the end of next year. The current plan is to try to dock NASA’s crew capsule, Orion, with Starship—but SpaceX still needs to show it can get Starship to orbit in the first place. That means many more test flights, if nothing else.
.
SpaceX Starship launches on July 24, 2026. NASA/SpaceX/YouTube
Dietitians recommend water as the top morning beverage for healthy kidneys.
Coffee, green tea, kefir, and cranberry juice may also support kidney health.
Choose unsweetened drinks and stay hydrated to help kidney function.
The kidneys are vital organs that filter out waste products from the blood, regulate blood pressure, and balance fluid, electrolyte, and pH levels in the body. Without healthy kidneys, waste products and excess fluid can build up, leading to serious health complications. Lifestyle habits, like diet, are key to healthy kidney function.
“Diet plays a major role in kidney health because the kidneys help to process and regulate many of the nutrients we eat and drink,” says Lydia Bunszel, M.S., RD.
The good news? Something as simple as your morning beverage can help support your kidneys. Read on for five kidney-friendly drinks worth adding to your daily routine.
1. Water
By far, experts agree that water is the best beverage for kidney health. Starting your day with water helps rehydrate your body after hours without fluids and supports optimal kidney function.
Sheila Patterson, M.S., RD, CDCES, notes that water is the best choice to help the kidneys run their essential functions that support the body. This includes filtering waste products, maintaining fluid balance, and lowering the risk of kidney stones.1 “Water helps to dilute minerals in the urine that can form crystals,” adds Amanda Roll, M.S., RD. Inadequate water intake can saturate the urine, making stones more likely to develop.1
Not a big fan of the taste—or lack thereof—of water? Bunszel suggests adding a squeeze of citrus juice, such as lemon, lime or orange, to boost the flavor.
2. Coffee
“Coffee may come as a surprise, but research suggests that moderate coffee consumption (about 1–2 cups per day) may help to lower the risk of developing chronic kidney disease and slow its progression,” shares Hannah Coven, M.S., RD. Some studies suggest that up to 3 to 4 cups per day may reduce risk, though individual tolerance can vary.23
“Black coffee is filled with antioxidants which may help protect your kidney cells from inflammation and oxidative stress,” explains Bunszel.2 This is important because the kidneys are constantly filtering waste from the blood, making them vulnerable to cellular damage over time. Antioxidant-rich foods and drinks, such as coffee, may help counteract some of that damage.2
That said, Coven highlights a common issue with coffee drinks: sugar. “Loading your coffee with sugar syrups and flavored creamers can offset many of those potential benefits by increasing added sugars and spiking blood sugars.”
While individual tolerance varies, sticking to less than 4 cups of coffee per day is recommended for most people.
Click the link below the picture for the rest of the drinks!
President Trump told a crowd of supporters in Michigan on Monday that the affordability problems they were experiencing were vestiges of the Biden administration, and spent the better part of an hourlong speech painting a dystopian picture of what the United States could look like if Democrats won competitive elections this fall.
“We had the single greatest year we’ve ever had as a country,” Mr. Trump said. “We’re not going to let these people destroy it.” The president added that “in 18 months, we’ve turned this country completely around.”
The president also assured supporters that negotiations over ending the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran, a conflict that has sent fuel and energy prices soaring, were continuing in a “friendly” fashion. Iran has not confirmed such talks with the United States.
Mr. Trump’s decision to head to Michigan, a purple Midwestern state that has been economically pummeled by his tariff policies, is part of a plan to travel the United States and defend his choices as the midterm elections draw closer. The president’s advisers say he will be ramping up such trips over the next few months.
Visiting a General Motors proving facility in Milford, where vehicles are pressure-tested before they hit the market, Mr. Trump accepted some gifts (car sculptures) and road-tested his latest insult for the Democratic Party — “Dumocrats” or “Dumbocrats”; he is apparently still mulling the spelling — as he attacked several presidential predecessors. And, aside from a moment when people waving signs that said “STOP DATA CENTERS” interrupted Mr. Trump’s speech, the crowd cheered along.
Before he spoke, Mr. Trump watched a crew of professional drivers drag-race several luxury vehicles, including a race between a black 2027 Corvette ZR1X, a car that starts at $227,000, and a silver Corvette ZR1 convertible, which costs around $207,195. Later, he told hundreds of supporters, many of them dressed in Trump regalia, that the economic pressures they were experiencing were problems inherited from the Biden administration.
“I’m one day in office, and the fake news goes ‘affordability, affordability,’” he complained.
Part of Milford is in Michigan’s Seventh Congressional District, where Representative Tom Barrett is fighting to hold onto a seat he narrowly won in 2024. Mr. Barrett, an Army veteran, was already one of the most vulnerable Republicans in the House. He has twice broken with his party and voted to rein in the president’s war powers, which appeared to have earned Mr. Barrett a smattering of boos when he took the stage earlier.
Later, speaking in front of Mr. Trump, Mr. Barrett praised the president’s policies and said he was “stepping up every single day to make sure that we bring more manufacturing jobs back to America.”
Other candidates who took the mic included Mike Rogers, a former Republican congressman running for a Senate seat this fall. Mr. Rogers told the president that if he wins, he would work to pass the SAVE Act, which would require voters to prove their citizenship, ban IDs without a photo at polling places and severely restrict voting by mail. Democrats have argued that the legislation would make it more difficult for eligible voters to make it to the polls.
.
President Trump’s decision to head to Michigan is part of a plan to travel the United States and defend his choices before the midterms. Credit…Doug Mills/The New York Times
Millions of people will take to the roads this holiday season, only to end up spending frustrating hours sitting in traffic jams. Congestion costs drivers time, fuel and patience – while also increasing pollution and placing huge pressure on transport networks.
If you’ve ever found yourself staring enviously at the lane next to you, convinced it’s moving faster, you’re not alone. Most of us instinctively believe that changing lanes will get us home sooner. But mathematics suggests this intuition is usually wrong.
As an applied mathematician, much of my research is driven by one question: how can we predict and control the behaviour of complex systems operating under uncertainty? And this can apply as much to holiday traffic as it does to emerging quantum technologies.
We tend to think traffic jams need a trigger: an accident, roadworks or a lane closure. Yet some of the most frustrating queues have no obvious cause at all. These are known as phantom traffic jams—stop-start waves that travel backwards through traffic even though every vehicle is moving forwards.
In 2008, Japanese researchers asked 22 drivers to drive around a circular track while maintaining a constant speed and safe distance from the vehicle in front. Within minutes, tiny and unavoidable differences in braking and reaction times grew into a stop-start wave that travelled continuously around the circuit, despite there being no obstacle anywhere on the road.
The explanation is surprisingly simple. One driver brakes slightly more than necessary. The driver behind reacts a little later and brakes a little harder. The next driver does the same.
In this way, the initial tiny disturbance grows as it travels backwards until drivers hundreds of metres behind are forced to stop completely, even though nobody can identify what caused the queue in the first place.
The mathematics behind traffic
Rather than modelling every driver individually, mathematicians treat traffic as a continuous flow – borrowing ideas from fluid dynamics, where the movement of vehicles is analysed much like the flow of water through a pipe.
One of the simplest relationships in traffic flow theory is q = ρv, where q is the traffic flow (the number of vehicles passing a point each hour), ρ is the traffic density (amount of cars on the road), and v is their average speed.
This deceptively simple equation explains a counterintuitive phenomenon. Initially, adding more vehicles obviously increases the overall traffic flow, as more vehicles pass along the road.
But once the road becomes too crowded, everyone is forced to slow down. Eventually, this reduction in speed outweighs the increase in number of vehicles such that the overall flow is reduced.
.
One common behavior could make traffic jams worse. Nikada/Getty Images
If you’re a new parent, the idea of starting a new hobby right now might sound ludicrous. But postpartum experts say that setting aside 10 minutes and trying one of these low-demand hobbies for new parents is actually one of the best things you can do for yourself and your family.
“When someone becomes a parent, they go through what’s called matrescence, a profound identity shift that reorients most of their time and energy toward caring for their baby,” says Erica Manto Paulson, certified doula, childbirth educator and founder of Nurture. “Taking even a few minutes for themselves can feel like stepping away from that responsibility, when in reality it’s part of adapting to their new role in a healthy way.”
These hobbies don’t require a ton of time, energy, or equipment. They’re just about reconnecting with yourself and carving out a bit of personal time, which research shows can lower the risk of postpartum depression and anxiety.
“Think low pressure, high reward,” says Tracy Carson, licensed professional clinical counselor. “The commitment you make to yourself far outweighs the actual skill learned. You showed up for yourself, and that is all that really matters.”
Keep reading to learn more about the best hobbies for new parents. After Clicking the link below the picture.
.
Daniel de la Hoz//Getty Images
.
.
Click the link belowfor the complete article (and 1o hobbies):
Carol Ann Murphy is an American film critic and writer.
.
She’s known for her insightful and thoughtful reviews of both mainstream and independent films. Over the years, she has contributed to various platforms, including print and digital publications, where her critiques often focus on deeper thematic elements, character development, and social issues in film.
.
Murphy’s style of criticism tends to be engaging and accessible to a wide audience, offering both an appreciation of cinema as an art form and a critique of the broader cultural and societal implications of the movies she reviews.
.
She has built a reputation for being fair but also unafraid to critique films when they fall short of their potential.
.
While not as widely known as some other critics, she has established a loyal following for her nuanced perspectives on both big-budget blockbusters and smaller, art-house films.
.
If you’re into more in-depth and reflective reviews, she might be someone worth reading!
On a clear afternoon this month, high above the Mojave Desert, an A.I.-powered drone launched a missile in a test that could reshape modern warfare.
Since the dawn of the jet age, the U.S. military has used the isolation over this stretch of sand to push secret, experimental aircraft to their aerodynamic and technological limits. It’s doing the same today: fine-tuning machines capable of engaging in aerial combat with barely any human intervention. These drones’ flight is controlled not by a pilot, not by human remote control, but entirely by onboard software. It’s a historic advancement in drone technology that aims to incorporate artificial intelligence into everyday warfighting.
Today’s conflicts are increasingly defined by unmanned weapons, delivering destruction over battlefields in Ukraine, Iran and Sudan. But in almost all these cases, there is a human operator sitting somewhere, steering each robot toward its target.
The two types of next-generation drones being tested over Southern California today, built for the Air Force by Anduril and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, can fly entirely on their own. They make hundreds of split-second decisions to maneuver, evade, and attack enemy targets, based upon countless hours of flight data and computer processing. A human is involved at just a few key moments in each flight: to program the drone’s mission, to start and stop the mission, and to decide whether or not the drone should launch a weapon. Late last year, the companies’ drones flew for the first time. Anduril fired its first missile two weeks ago, and General Atomics says it is not far behind.
The Air Force program is part of a sweeping overhaul in how the American military prepares for war. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in January that he intended to make the military “an ‘A.I. first’ warfighting force across all domains.” Throughout the Pentagon, Uncle Sam-style recruitment posters with Mr. Hegseth’s likeness declaring “I want YOU to use A.I.” are plastered on the walls. His department has requested $54.6 billion in next year’s budget for the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, or DAWG, a body recently set up to coordinate all autonomous weapons programs across U.S. forces.
The United States isn’t alone in this pursuit. Around the world, and particularly in China and Russia, an arms race is emerging to mass-produce autonomous, A.I.-operated war machines. President Vladimir Putin of Russia declared in 2017 that whoever leads in A.I. “will become the ruler of the world.” President Xi Jinping of China has poured billions of dollars into A.I. development for the country’s military. Prototypes of smaller, rudimentary A.I.-assisted weapons have already been reported in action in Ukraine, Libya, Azerbaijan and Gaza. In a few years, we could see swarms of self-guiding robots not only in the skies, but also at sea and on the ground.
As the world’s militaries race to weaponize artificial intelligence, the international community has failed to establish limits on its use. The United Nations has spent a decade deliberating how to restrict autonomous weapons — a rare instance of anticipating a global threat before it arrives. Yet these efforts have yielded no binding rules or codes of conduct.
Instead, global leaders are accelerating toward an era of automated warfare. The fear of body bags has been one of the greatest deterrents to conflict in history. Mass-produced, expendable robots do not carry the human or financial costs that have tempered the urge to go to war for centuries.
“Right now, we’re racing in the dark,” said Jack Shanahan, a retired Air Force lieutenant general and former director of the military’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center. “No one is talking to one another about the technology their nations are developing, and there’s an incentive to rush it into the field. I do think, unfortunately, something may go horribly wrong before it gets better.”
Film and Writing Festival for Comedy. Showcasing best of comedy short films at the FEEDBACK Film Festival. Plus, showcasing best of comedy novels, short stories, poems, screenplays (TV, short, feature) at the festival performed by professional actors.
A new therapy targets cancer’s stress defenses, showing promise in early trials for mesothelioma patients with limited treatment options. (CREDIT: Shutterstock)
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/5-Best-Morning-Drinks-for-Kidney-Health-7452849a1cd0436185446ac55db2107d.jpg)
Something for Everyone!
James' World 2 