ResidentialBusiness

While home sales and remodeling rates remain low, Thumbtack—which connects homeowners with professionals to do work on their houses—says business is booming. In fiscal 2024, Thumbtack saw revenue of $400 million, up 27% from the previous year, with billions of dollars going to the roughly 300,000 small businesses that book work through the platform. Cofounder and CEO Marco Zappacosta attributes the company’s success to more than 15 years of work helping users find the right, trustworthy professional—even if they’re not entirely sure what they need to fix a problem in their home—bolstered by recent advances in artificial intelligence. “You’ve got to remember this is, on average, a $1,000 purchase,” Zappacosta says. “It’s not something you do casually.” Zappacosta believes it’s inevitable that the vast majority of home maintenance and remodeling bookings will ultimately move online, similar to the travel and transportation industries. What sets this industry apart, however, is the sheer number of service types—Thumbtack lists professionals in about 500 different categories, from ceramic tile installation to black mold remediation. To help users understand what’s available and how services match their needs, the company has offered an AI-powered search feature since last year. It allows users to describe home issues in plain language, rather than rely on keyword searches or Yellow Pages-style lookups for terms like “plumber” or “electrician.” Thumbtack is also testing an AI feature that lets users upload photos of home issues, such as a leak through the ceiling, to get help finding the right professional. As AI grows more powerful, it can help transform the experience of booking home services from a traditional internet search into something more like a conversation with a savvy neighbor, Zappacosta suggests. “The opportunity that AI creates for our business is at any point in the process, if you have a question or concern, or if you have to make a decision, we can arm you with the relevant context to help you evaluate that and confidently take action,” he says. Even before the rise of large language models, the company offered a collection of home project guides, including advice to help people decide when to tackle a task themselves and when to hire an expert. Alongside reminders of scheduled work and tools to rebook trusted pros, the Thumbtack app also provides customized guidance on when to perform various maintenance tasks—guidance Zappacosta suggests will only improve as AI systems advance and the company gathers more data about users, their homes, and their needs. AI can also likely help professionals optimize their use of Thumbtack, Zappacosta says, enabling them to better configure platform features to find sales leads suited to their businesses. “The focus on pros is always how we can provide them more consistent value,” he says. Thumbtack’s technical edge, says Sequoia Capital partner and Thumbtack board member Bryan Schreier, gives the company a strong chance of becoming the go-to platform for home services—akin to Uber for ride-hailing or DoorDash for delivery. “Owning a home is complex, and so I think it’s just taken a while to deliver the technical achievement that is required to become the Uber of the home services space, because it is so complex,” Schreier says. “In the last couple of years, in terms of its growth and profitability, I think the secret behind [Thumbtack’s] emergence is the fact that they have cracked the technological nut behind what had been holding back a company from becoming the Uber of the home services space until now.” In parallel with its AI efforts, Thumbtack has forged partnerships with other online platforms, including providing search results for home improvement-related terms on Nextdoor. The company was also recently featured in an Amazon preview of upcoming AI enhancements for Alexa, which would be able to book professionals on users’ behalf. These partnerships now account for 10% of Thumbtack’s annual revenue and help deliver its services to users even if they don’t visit the site directly. “Hiring pros and dealing with your home is a huge activity—it happens in a ton of places on the internet,” says Zappacosta. “And increasingly, platforms are utilizing us as the best way to fulfill a homeowner’s hiring needs.” View the full article

On Maui’s North Shore, inside an industrial building that was once a pineapple cannery, an architecture office sits across the hall from a surfboard manufacturer. When the architects first moved in, they noticed something: Every few days, the dumpsters in the back would fill up with scraps of foam from making the boards. David Sellers, one of the architects, realized that the foam could be used in a building material—insulated blocks that are typically made from a mix of concrete and new polystyrene foam. “I was just like, ‘We shouldn’t be throwing this away,’” says Sellers, principal architect at the firm, Hawaii Off Grid. “We live on an island, with limited space. So how can we use this to make houses?” In 2023, the team got a small grant to pursue the idea of recycling the surfboard waste into new blocks. Then came the Lahaina fire, which destroyed more than 2,000 homes and other buildings. The small firm paused the project and focused at first on helping redesign houses. “But we also said, we’re going to need a lot of building materials,” he says. “And we’re going to need building materials that are fire resistant.” The blocks have some advantages. In addition to resisting fire, they’re also four times as strong as a two-by-four framed wall in a hurricane. They’re impervious to mold, mildew, and termites, all issues in Hawaii. The insulation properties are twice what’s required by code. (The fact that it’s energy efficient is especially important for Hawaii Off Grid, which focuses on the carbon footprint of each of its projects; the firm actually requires all of its clients to commit to net zero buildings.) The blocks use only about a third as much cement as is used in cinder blocks. It’s also an accessible alternative to wood. “Lumber is at an all-time high again, and the availability of building materials is stretched thin,” Sellers says. “This is another option that people can utilize and hopefully help them rebuild faster and not be pinched by the current tariffs that we’re dealing with in the building industry.” To make the blocks, the company uses a large machine to grind up the foam into tiny beads. Then those are mixed with Portland cement, making a consistency that Sellers compares to rice crispy treats, and pressed together in wooden molds. The one-foot-high blocks are five feet long, making them faster to stack together during construction. The design-build firm has just completed its first house using the surfboard-waste-based blocks, on the edge of the burn zone in Lahaina. More are coming. Though the fire happened 20 months ago, the process of rebuilding is just beginning, delayed by the need to decontaminate properties and by red tape. Now, as construction begins to ramp up, materials will be in more demand. With the volume of foam waste produced by its neighbor alone, the firm has calculated that it would have enough to build 10 to 20 houses a year, much more than it currently needs as a small firm. Sellers has also talked to companies like Lowe’s about recycling foam packaging after appliance deliveries. (In theory, old surfboards could also be recycled, though surfers tend to hang on to old boards and display them rather than throw them away.) The idea could be replicated by other builders, Sellers says. But he’s hoping that polystyrene foam can eventually be phased out—at which point, they’d stop using the blocks as a building material. “I hope we won’t be using petroleum-based solutions, moving forward,” he says. Surfboard companies are already experimenting with alternative materials, and other companies are trying to find foam alternatives for packaging. For now, the architects plan to keep recycling as much foam as possible to keep it out of the dump and out of nature. “We have a stockpile of foam,” Sellers says. “We’re trying to not let any foam go in the landfill.” View the full article

When the House of Cinema in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, was demolished in 2017, it was an architectural awakening for the city. A large circular concrete building completed in 1982, the House of Cinema was an instant cultural and architectural landmark in the city, then part of the Soviet Union. Its demolition, to make way for a controversial commercial development project, spurred many in the city to worry about which landmark would fall next. That led the Uzbekistan Art and Culture Development Foundation to launch a citywide research project to document endangered buildings. Most were built between the late 1960s and early 1980s when the Soviet Union sought to frame its ambitions through civic architecture. Many buildings from this time embraced modernism, with swooping facades, inventive structural forms, and artful mosaic panels adorning interiors and exteriors. As public buildings, their fates were at the whims of government leaders eager to develop the city into a 21st century economic powerhouse, which is how the House of Cinema was destroyed. Tashkent: A Modernist Capital To try to stop others from falling, the Uzbekistan Art and Culture Development Foundation funded a team of international researchers, historians, and architects to undertake Tashkent Modernism XX/XXI, a research project documenting the city’s modernist structures, and rallying for their preservation. Tashkent: A Modernist Capital “The concentration of modernist architecture is very high in Tashkent, but what truly sets it apart is the remarkable number of well-planned, innovative, and elegantly designed public buildings,” says architect Ekaterina Golovatyuk, one of the experts involved in the project and a co-founder of Grace Studio, a Milan-based architecture, design, and urbanism firm. Underway since 2018, the research project has documented 24 key modernist sites across the city. Of those, 21 have secured national heritage site status, along with 154 mosaic panels, protecting them from demolition. These buildings, and the ongoing effort to save them, is the subject of a pair of new books, Tashkent: A Modernist Capital, published by Rizzoli New York, and Tashkent Modernism XX/XXI, published by Lars Müller Publishers. The books reveal Tashkent as an under appreciated hotbed of modernist architecture, and a historical turning point for both Soviet and post-Soviet Central Asia. At one point the fourth largest city in the Soviet Union, Tashkent was chosen in the 1950s as a showcase of the “Soviet Orient,” which resulted in an architectural boom. “The city was meant to demonstrate how well socialism could adapt to a different cultural context,” Golovatyuk says. “This initiated a very interesting search for local identity, contended between architects from Tashkent and Moscow. The result was a transformation of traditional architectural elements within the framework of a modernist language.” Tashkent: A Modernist Capital This building spree took on new urgency in 1966 when a massive earthquake damaged much of the city. The city’s recovery coincided with a Soviet Union-wide emphasis on prefabricated building and new forms of construction, leaving Tashkent with a wide variety of inventive and modern buildings. Tashkent: A Modernist Capital The Tashkent Modernism XX/XXI research project has put this legacy under a new spotlight, helping to save many buildings from demolition while also underscoring their significance as the city grows. Some of these buildings are also being seen in a broader context. Golovatyuk and Giacomo Cantoni, co-founder of Grace Studio, were recently named curators of Uzbekistan’s national pavilion at the upcoming Venice Architecture Biennale. Their exhibition will focus on one project included in the research project, a large-scale scientific complex outside Tashkent known as the Sun Heliocomplex. Dedicated to studying solar energy, it was ahead of its time in both design and intention. Tashkent: A Modernist Capital Golovatyuk says this project and others that are being saved through the Tashkent Modernism XX/XXI research project are finding new relevance, especially within Uzbekistan, where contemporary architects are building on their heritage. “I think the search for national identity restarted almost from scratch when Uzbekistan gained independence in 1991,” says Golovatyuk, who first visited Tashkent in 2006. “Many buildings have sought to establish continuity with the pre-Soviet past through ornamentation, probably in a more exuberant manner than during the modernist period.” Tashkent: A Modernist Capital An emerging generation of young architects is taking particular inspiration from the buildings being preserved through the Tashkent Modernism XX/XXI research project, creating what Golovatyuk calls “a more sophisticated dialogue with both tradition and the modernist past.” Tashkent: A Modernist Capital The effort to save and recognize these buildings is city-specific for Tashkent, where modernism is now a kind of calling card. But it’s also a fight that exists in cities around the world, such as Philadelphia, where an internationally renowned police headquarters building is losing a long preservation battle, and Boston, where the government center complex is a perennial demolition target. Tashkent: A Modernist Capital “A few of these buildings faced at least some risk of transformation, but I believe it is to be expected. The city has been undergoing rapid growth for the past eight years, there is significant pressure on all real estate,” Golovatyuk says. “This kind of pressure is the fate of modernism not only in Tashkent, but worldwide.” The research project’s success in securing protected status for Tashkent’s modernist buildings could be a playbook for other cities to follow. View the full article

Chinese aerospace giant Comac has unveiled its plans for the C949, a supersonic aircraft designed to fly 50% farther than the Concorde and produce sonic booms quieter than a hairdryer. Scheduled to debut in 2049—coinciding with the centenary of the People’s Republic of China—the aircraft positions China to challenge US supersonic projects like NASA’s X-59 and Boom Supersonic’s Overture in a race to redefine global air travel. “The most important thing here is that this shows supersonic is a race—and China’s interested,” says Blake Scholl, CEO and founder of Boom Supersonic. “Advanced airplanes symbolize technological superiority, and it’s no accident that China wants that crown.” In a scientific paper published last month in the peer-reviewed journal Acta Aeronautica Sinica, Comac engineers detailed a Mach 1.6 aircraft capable of flying 4,225 miles, surpassing the Concorde’s 2,796 miles. The key to its design is a “reverse-camber” fuselage. In aerodynamics, this term refers to an unconventional curvature design in the fuselage or wings that inverts traditional airfoil shapes (which usually turns down from front to back). For the Comac C949, this term specifically describes a concave midsection—curving inward rather than outward—along the aircraft’s body. The team claims this curved midsection weakens shockwaves. This silhouette combines with a long needle-shaped nose that splits pressure pulses, and aerodynamic bulges near the engines to disperse exhaust turbulence. The airplane doesn’t have a regular cockpit. Similar to the X-59 If the long dart shape looks familiar, it’s because you probably saw it before: NASA’s X-59 uses a very similar design. According to the research paper reported by the South China Morning Post, the team led by Comac’s chief aerodynamicist Wu Dawei did simulations that demonstrate that the C949 aerodynamic features will reduce its sonic boom noise to just 83.9 perceived level decibels (PLdB), about the sound of a hairdryer. This is only 5% of the 105 PLdB noise generated by the Concorde. NASA’s aircraft will have a 75 PLdB boom—comparable to the hum of a dishwasher—so the C949 will be slightly louder. Comac, like NASA with the X-59, believes that a quieter boom will make the case for removing the supersonic flight ban over land that’s been in place since 1971. The company says that the take-off noise will be within the international limits for take-off in airports near cities. The state-owned company, which aims to become the next Boeing or Airbus, knows that this is crucial for its commercial viability all around the world. Both the C949 and X-59 employ elongated noses and redesigned fuselages to fracture shockwaves, but the C949 adds artificial intelligence systems not found in NASA’s demonstrator. The paper claims that its artificial intelligence-powered ‘fly-by-wire’ control system adjusts the aircraft’s surfaces 100 times per second to counteract instability at high speeds. The C949’s twin turbofans—the jet engines that provide the thrust—are adaptive-cycle, which means that they will alternate between two modes. One, when flying at a cruise altitude of 52,000-feet, is a fuel-efficient mode at 1.7 times the speed of sound (Mach 1.7). The other one, at lower altitudes, a “low boom” mode at Mach 1.6. Like the C949, the X-59 features a 30-meter needle-shaped nose—nearly half its length—to stretch and disperse shockwaves, while its engine is positioned atop the fuselage to direct noise upward. “It’s all about the geometry,” Lockheed X-59 program director Dave Richardson told me in an interview. “There’s no exotic technology, just a meticulous way to turn a bang into a dull thud.” Lockheed has envisioned that, using its aerodynamics, a 44-passenger commercial aircraft would be 61 meters long. Richardson acknowledges there will be obstacles: “Scaling [the X-59] requires engines that can sustain Mach 1.8 without afterburners—a challenge, but not impossible.” The Chinese engineers will have to develop a new engine too, just like Boom Supersonic. NASA’s Quesst prototype uses a virtual cockpit system that uses HD cameras to project the frontal outside view on internal screens that traditional pilot’s glass cockpit. This eliminates protuberances from the fuselage that would amplify the sonic boom sound. While Comac hasn’t disclosed if the C949 will feature a full digital cockpit, it’s the only possible design option. Overture will also use one, like the Boom Supersonic XB-1, the prototype that served Scholl and his team to test their design ideas for Overture and their idea of boom-less supersonic flight. The Overture avoids these extreme aerodynamic shapes, leveraging an atmospheric phenomenon called Mach cutoff. At 18,000 meters, its “boomless cruise” technique uses temperature and wind gradients to bend shockwaves upward, preventing them from reaching the ground. The sonic boom occurs but never reaches the ground. Not even as a dull thud, like the C949 and X-59. The company demonstrated this in two supersonic flights over the Mojave Desert, California, just a few months ago. “It’s not magic, just math,” says Scholl, who aims to offer Mach 1.7 flights at business-class prices by 2029. “We don’t need new materials, just smarter engineering,” he adds. Challenges and advantages According to Scholl, the X-59 and the C949 won’t be able to operate at current airports due to their size and shape, hindering their commercial adoption. The X-59 requires new airport infrastructure—it’s too long for existing gates, tells me. Overture, by contrast, fits current airports,” he says. Regardless, Comac faces considerable challenges. It’s a relative newcomer to commercial aviation. Its first airliner, which includes a first homegrown engine, the C919, entered service in 2023. The company lacks the certification experience or supply chain power of Boeing or Airbus. Still, its ambitious timeline includes delivering a wide-body airplane called the C929 (an equivalent to the 787 Dreamliner) by 2027; and an ultra-long haul, 400-seat airplane called the C939 (equivalent to Boeing’s 777-9) by 2039. Then it plans to launch the C949 in 2049. So many complex projects, all built from scratch, carry the risk of delays, especially with unproven engine technology, according to industry experts. But if any country can pull this off, it’s China. Beijing has developed a very mature aerospace industry. The country is manufacturing a completely new, homegrown Chengdu J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter in large quantities. It is now testing two different new sixth-generation fighters, which broke cover months before the U.S. announced its future sixth-generation fighter, the F-47, for now just a 3D render. And, to top it all, Beijing is ahead in another key aerospace race: hypersonic flight. General Mark Milley, then chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, recognized this fact when the Pentagon detected a Chinese secret test that “defied physics” in 2021, qualifying it as “close to a Sputnik moment,” referring to the day the Soviet Union left the U.S. behind in the space race. China has the economic and technological power to make it happen, and state funding shields Comac from market pressures. The supersonic endgame It’s a real danger, especially when “the U.S. is abdicating leadership,” warns Scholl. “Look at Boeing—they haven’t launched a new plane in decades” [Boeing’s last new commercial airliner was the Dreamliner, which was announced in 2003 and took off in 2009 for the first time] China aims to replicate their industrial success in aviation. “Look at what happened with cars. Chinese cars take over in markets without any tariffs. That shift happened in 10 years,” he says. “China aims to replicate this in aviation.” The C949 is feasible and fits into Chinese aerospace ambitions, but Comac still have to turn its idea into reality—and from scratch. For now, NASA’s X-59 must demonstrate that its boom is acceptable to regulators. Boom Supersonic has shown that quiet supersonic flight is possible, but needs a new fuselage and new engines that balance speed and efficiency. Almost everything remains to be done, and the race has just begun. But Scholl warns: “They have put a date on it. They have a model number. They are very serious. They’ll move as fast as engineering allows, without our regulatory red tape.” “We’ve seen what happened in semiconductors when we lost leadership. We can’t let that happen here,” Scholl urges. And Wu and his team knows it, as they write in their paper: “The winner will dictate 21st-century aviation.” For now, all three contenders are rewriting the rules for this race, almost silently. View the full article

When my emergency IAR app sounds at 3 a.m., there’s no room for ego, second-guessing, or hesitation. In that critical moment, all that matters is trust, teamwork, and execution. While I have spent decades in the corporate world, some of my most valuable leadership lessons have come from my experience as a volunteer EMS first responder. In the field, when I’m assisting in a life-threatening trauma situation or responding to a car accident, leadership is put to the test under extreme pressure. But whether I’m piloting an ambulance on a dark highway or guiding my company through turbulent times, the principles remain the same: Know your role, remove the noise, maintain a true north, and harness the power of the collective. First responders make real-time decisions under pressure, relying on trust and collaboration, and CEOs today must embrace the same mindset. While I see some leaders reverting to top-down management in response to rapid change and shifting policies, this approach can actually hinder long-term success. True leadership isn’t about command and control—it’s about creating an environment of clarity, trust, and adaptability, where teams are empowered to act decisively and navigate uncertainty together. It’s especially critical that executives embrace this ethos as their organizations—and their teams—are increasingly beset by outside noise and pressures that can potentially distract from their mission. Here’s what leaders can learn from first responders: Know When to Take a Back Seat In emergency response, knowing your role is crucial. A 17-year-old EMT might direct someone twice their age, and that’s exactly as it should be. Whether you are administering first aid, navigating traffic, or coordinating logistics, each team member must be clear about their responsibilities so they can work together in harmony. I recently watched a young ambulance corps captain in her mid-20s take command of a complex mental health emergency. With police on the scene and tensions high, she led with a calm, tactical presence that turned a chaotic situation into a controlled, compassionate response. Her ability to take charge had nothing to do with age or rank—it was about skill, confidence, and knowing when to step up. The same holds true in any organization. Leadership isn’t about titles or hierarchy; it’s about recognizing strengths and empowering the right people to lead when it matters most. Remove the Noise, Focus on Your North Star In an emergency, chaos surrounds you: passing traffic, weather conditions, bystanders, distraught family members. First responders must filter out this noise to focus on their task at hand. A clear example of this is a severe car accident I responded to where an older gentleman had driven off the highway into the woods. The vehicle was so badly damaged that we couldn’t even identify what kind of car it was. In these emergency situations, it’s the moments you take to assess the situation that make all the difference. Moving quickly doesn’t mean rushing in. It means taking the time to carefully evaluate the scene, calculating the arrival time of fire and additional emergency services, and identifying the right individual to enter the vehicle. By filtering out the surrounding chaos—the twisted metal, the external commotion, the emotional intensity—we were able to focus on our critical mission of saving the man’s life. As a leader, removing noise isn’t about ignoring those external factors. It’s about relying on a wealth and depth of experience to create a protective structure that allows your team to execute effectively. I approach an important meeting the same way I handle an emergency situation: by carefully assessing the context, gathering critical data points, and clearly outlining the objective. This ensures my team has all the information they need to contribute meaningfully toward our shared goal. Time is our most valuable currency. By setting a clear direction, I keep the focus on what matters, enabling diverse perspectives to inform—but not derail—the final decision. The Power of the Collective Individual skill is essential, but the power of the collective is truly transformative. Every first responder brings their own expertise and intuition, but success comes when these individuals work together in harmony. A single person may perform a critical task, but it’s the combined effort of all team members that ensures the best possible outcome. For executives, operating in isolation is a recipe for failure. Just like AI algorithms, leadership decisions are only as good as the inputs we apply. To harness the power of the collective, you must value every voice—regardless of volume. Some team members are naturally outspoken, while others hold back critical insights. Effective leaders create spaces that draw out diverse perspectives, whether it’s proactively calling on a subject matter expert to weigh in or setting up a roundtable discussion to give everyone a chance to chime in. It’s not just about making space; it’s about knowing when a nudge is needed. Getting Comfortable with Change Change has always been a constant in business, but its pace and unpredictability have grown in recent years. Just like in emergency response, where rapid shifts require clear thinking and decisive action, businesses must not only accept change but develop the confidence to navigate it effectively. The leaders who build strong, agile teams—not just obedient followers—will be the ones who thrive. It’s about creating the conditions where teams can perform at their best, even in the most challenging circumstances. I see this firsthand every Monday night when I’m on call from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.—and it continues to shape my leadership long after the shift ends. View the full article

The fallout from ‘Liquidation Day’View the full article

When deciding if something is worth the effort, whether you’ve already exerted yourself or face the prospect of work, changes your calculus. That’s what we found in our new research, published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. When you consider a future effort, more work makes the outcome less appealing. But once you’ve completed the work, more effort makes the outcome seem more valuable. We also discovered that hiding behind this general principle of timing there are individual differences in how future and past effort shapes people’s value for the fruits of their labor. What’s it worth to you? In our experiment, we gave participants a choice between a fixed amount of money and a household item—a mug—that they could take home if they exerted some amount of physical effort, roughly equivalent to walking up one, two, or three flights of stairs. This setup allowed us to determine the value each person placed on the effort—did it add to or subtract from the value of the item? For instance, if putting in a little more effort made someone switch their decision and decide to go with the cash instead of the mug, we could tell that they valued the mug plus that amount of effort less than that sum of money. We also manipulated the time aspect of effort. When the effort was in the future, participants decided whether they wanted to go with the cash or get the mug with some effort. When the effort was in the past, participants decided whether they wanted to cash in the mug they had already earned with effort. As we had expected, future effort generally detracted from the value of the mug, but the past effort generally increased it. But these general trends do not tell the whole story. Not everyone responds to effort the same way. Our study also uncovered striking individual differences. Four distinct patterns emerged: For some people, extra effort always subtracted value. Others consistently preferred items with more work. Many showed mixed patterns, where moderate effort increased value but excessive effort decreased it. Some experienced the opposite: initially disliking effort, then finding greater value at higher levels. These changing patterns show that one’s relationship with effort isn’t simple. For many people, there’s a sweet spot: A little effort might make something more valuable, but push too far and the value drops. It’s like enjoying a 30-minute workout but dreading a two-hour session, or conversely, feeling that a five-minute workout isn’t worth changing clothes for, but a 45-minute session feels satisfying. Our paper offers a mathematical model that accounts for these individual differences by proposing that your mind flexibly computes costs and benefits of effort. Why violate the ‘law of less work?’ Why should timing even matter for effort? It seems obvious that reason and nature would teach you to always avoid and dislike effort. A hummingbird that prefers a hard-to-get flower over an easy equal alternative might win an A for effort, but, exhausted, would not last long. The cruel world requires “resource rationality”—optimal, efficient use of limited physical and mental resources, balancing the benefits of actions with the required effort. That insight is captured by the classic psychological “law of less work,” basically boiling down to the idea that given equivalent outcomes, individuals prefer easier options. Anything different would seem irrational or, in plain language, stupid. If so, then how come people, and even animals, often prize things that require hard work for no additional payoff? Why is being hard-to-get a route to value? Anyone who has labored hard for anything knows that investing effort makes the final prize sweeter, whether in love, career, sports, or Ikea furniture assembly. Could the answer to this “paradox of effort” be that in the hummingbird example, the decision is about future effort, and in the Ikea effect, the effort is in the past? Our new findings explain seemingly contradictory phenomena in everyday life. In health care, starting an exercise regimen feels overwhelming when focusing on upcoming workouts, but after establishing the habit, those same exercises become a source of accomplishment. At work, professionals might avoid learning difficult new skills, yet after mastering them, they value their enhanced abilities more because they were challenging to acquire. What still isn’t known Sayings like “No pain, no gain” or “Easy come, easy go” populate our language and seem fundamental to our culture. But researchers still don’t fully understand why some people value effortful options more than others do. Is it physical aptitude, past experiences, a sense of meaning, perception of difficulty as importance or impossibility, moralization of effort, specific cultural beliefs about hard work? We don’t know yet. We’re now studying how effort shapes different aspects of value: monetary value; hedonic value, as in the pleasure one gets from an item; and the aesthetic value, as in the sense of beauty and artistry. For instance, we’re investigating how people value artful calligraphy after exerting different amounts of effort to view it. This work may shed light on curious cultural phenomena, like how people value their experience seeing the Mona Lisa after waiting for hours in crowds at the Louvre. These studies could also help researchers design better motivation systems across education, health care and business. Piotr Winkielman is a professor of psychology at the University of California, San Diego. Przemysław Marcowski is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California, San Diego. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

As renewable energy gathers steam around the world, the harms of mining its mineral components continue to grow. On the environmental front, for example, there’s the destruction of Indonesian rainforests to mine nickel and the draining of precious South American groundwater reserves to obtain lithium. There’s also the human toll, which can be seen in forced displacement and child labor exploitation in the cobalt-rich Democratic Republic of the Congo, as well as violence toward Indigenous people living on nickel-studded lands in the Philippines. The devastation raises the question: Is the world better off just sticking with the status quo? With these factors, is renewable energy and clean technology any better than fossil fuels? Whatever the answer, the comparison must account for the continued and additional coal, oil, and gas use that will happen in the absence of a mineral-powered energy transition. Not only does the status quo involve devastating greenhouse gas emissions that wreak havoc on the whole planet, but it also requires local ecological disruption in the form of fossil fuel extraction, which will continually expand as existing fuel deposits are depleted. Fracking and drilling for oil and gas can cause groundwater contamination, oil spills, and the uncontrolled release of planet-warming methane. And mining for coal, of course, is similarly destructive as other kinds of mining. While “there’s a lot of room for improvement with metals mining,” said Julie Klinger, a mineral supply chains expert at the University of Delaware, “look at the devastation that fossil fuel extraction has brought.” Indeed, the most mined resource today is coal, with around 8.7 billion tons produced in 2023 alone. We need fossil fuels in such large quantities precisely because they are fuels, continuously shoveled into power plants to generate energy. By contrast, solar panels and wind turbines require a fixed quantity of metals only during the construction phase—and once built, they can produce energy for several decades without additional inputs. Because of this, experts agree that the world will actually see a net decrease in energy-related mining if we replace fossil fuels with metals-powered technologies. In 2023, a team of scientists and Deloitte consultants in the Netherlands projected future metal and coal demand under an ambitious scenario where humanity reaches net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. They found that, despite a more than sixfold increase in demand for energy-related metals—bringing the total up to just over 3 billion tons—total global ore extraction would decrease by a third because of the decline in coal mining. In any case, mining for energy transition minerals will likely only ever constitute a relatively small proportion of global mining activity. Mines cover less than 0.02 percent of Earth’s surface, but many of them are for iron and aluminum, which we need in ever-increasing quantities to build the world around us, regardless of where we get our energy. “That will dwarf anything that’s actually used for the energy transition,” said geologist Gawen Jenkin of the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom. Most importantly, perhaps, while fossil fuels can only be burned once, many minerals can in principle be used many times over. The Netherlands study estimates that we could slash energy-related mining demand by an additional third in the 2050 net-zero scenario if we were to massively upscale recycling of EVs, wind turbines, and solar panels. The fundamental issue, said Raphael Deberdt, a socioeconomic mining expert at the Colorado School of Mines, is that our economic system incentivizes as much extraction as possible in order to fuel infinite consumption. But shifts to reduce resource consumption—think electric buses and trains rather than SUVs, and reusing old solar panels and EV batteries wherever possible, for instance—and a circular economy that makes the best use of every resource would do wonders to ease the burden of mining. There are other actions we can take to further reduce the adverse effects of mineral mining. For example, engineers can substitute materials connected to labor or human rights abuses with ones that can be more responsibly sourced; Tesla, for instance, has begun to equip its electric vehicles with iron-phosphate batteries that are cheaper and don’t require cobalt or nickel, which have been linked to environmental and social damage in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia, respectively. This reflects a broader shift across auto industries—with manufacturers like Renault and Volkswagen reportedly following suit—while iron-phosphate batteries are also becoming increasingly popular for general electricity storage. There are also many opportunities to extract minerals from the waste of existing mines that were originally built for different purposes. Research by mining and sustainability expert Tim Werner of the University of Melbourne has estimated that waste from a single Canadian zinc mine could supply several years’ worth of global demand for indium, which is used in solar cells, and there are already efforts to recover cobalt from old lead mines in Missouri. Nascent attempts to recover critical minerals from ocean water, plant life, and even asteroids have shown promise, though they are not developed enough to displace traditional methods. In short, the mantra “reduce, reuse, recycle”—in precisely that order—retains its importance in an all-renewables world. The more of these changes we adopt, the more luxury we’ll have to choose where and how minerals are mined. “This transition needs to happen,” Werner said. “But we have to be really strategic, really smart, and really conscientious and responsible about where they’re coming from.” — Katarina Zimmer, Grist This article originally appeared in Grist, a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Sign up for its newsletter here. View the full article

The 0.5% contraction according to Halifax contrasts with economists’ bets of a 0.1% riseView the full article

If global long-only funds start to rotate out of risk the market turmoil could get worseView the full article

Chances are, you or someone you know has been the target of a scam. According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), reported scams cost Americans more than $12.5 billion in 2024—a 25% increase from the previous year. But as scams grow more sophisticated, so do their opponents. A growing number of online vigilantes are flipping the script, turning the scam on the scammers—and racking up millions of views in the process. Mashable’s Chris Taylor recently spoke to a few who’ve turned scambaiting into full-time work. Rosie Okumura got into scambaiting after her mother was tricked out of $500 by a pop-up on her computer. Now, she channels her acting skills—mimicking well-known voices like Britney Spears and Kim Kardashian—to waste scammers’ time while entertaining her audience. Her YouTube channel, IRLrosie, boasts most than 1.6 million subscribers, with another 1.2 million followers on TikTok. “I feel like teaching people how to avoid scams is better than helping someone who’s lost a ton of money, or putting myself in a dangerous situation,” Okumura said. Ashton Bingham and Art Kulik, the duo behind the YouTube channel Trilogy Media, also have 1.6 million subscribers—but they take their scambaiting offline. Their most-watched video, “Hunting a Scammer with Cops,” has amassed more than 5.6 million views since its 2022 release. In it, Bingham and Kulik team up with law enforcement to confront a “refund scammer” in person, armed with $40,000 in fake cash and a camera crew. With a subscription platform, Trilogy+, and a freshly signed deal for an unscripted TV show, scambaiting has become a profitable venture. Some scambaiters argue that by wasting a scammer’s time, they’re preventing real victims from being defrauded. But whether this tactic actually reduces online fraud is still debated. Research has also flagged ethical concerns, as some early scambaiters used racist, extreme, or even violent methods when confronting scammers. Still, for Okumura, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. “The best part is getting recognized at restaurants,” she told Mashable. “They will comp my bill!” View the full article

Some people, it seems, merely drift through life. While others appear driven and focused. Have you ever wondered why that is? Is it personality? Upbringing? Talent? Ambition? There’s no doubt that those factors play a role in how each of us approach life. But I think there is something more important, something available to all of us, that also motivates us to live intentional lives—and ultimately become the best version of ourselves. That potential can be found in the size of the dream we choose to pursue. You see, when the goals that we choose for ourselves are meaningful—when they matter deeply to our hearts and souls—they compel us and equip us to become better versions of ourselves. Therefore, getting clear on what is most important to us is an important step in self-development. We can drift through life pursing nothing. We can take small steps to accomplish small goals. Or we can live each day with passion and ambition to accomplish something lasting. There are two ways big dreams help us grow: 1. They almost always require our hardest work. And because of that, we are forced to improve and develop ourselves if we are ever going to meet them. 2. But even more important, our dreams and goals motivate us and shape us. When we pursue meaningful pursuits, work is no longer drudgery. Work becomes meaningful. Discipline and sacrifice are not activities to avoid. Our goals make them desirable—because our focus is on a prize worth giving everything for. In that way, we don’t become better versions of ourselves by accident or because someone required us to do so. That is always a recipe for disaster. We become better because the finish line is worth becoming better for. Unfortunately, not every dream brings out the best in us. If the biggest goals in our lives center on items that bring only fleeting or passing or temporary happiness, they may motivate us for a bit. But in the long run, our hearts and souls scream out to us that the pursuit is empty. Goals of accumulating money, possessions, or popularity can motivate for awhile. But often, at some point in our lives, we realize that we sold out our greatest potential for the fading trinkets of this world. When we are focused on self, comparison, leisure, or when we allow fear to dictate the size of our dreams, we end up chasing things that can never satisfy. And our development is stunted. There’s nothing wrong with being successful in a career or becoming the best employee or boss that we can possibly become. But we sell ourselves short when our dreams stop at comfort, status, or luxury. There are more meaningful dreams available to us: —Raising a family that can carry your values and legacy into future generations. —Solving problems that we see in the world. —Loving the people around us and contributing to society in a positive way. —Serving others, benefiting others, using our talents and gifts to help others. —Passing on wisdom and understanding to move people forward. —Bringing about the greatest good in the world with the one life that we have to live. These are the kinds of dreams that change us in the long-run. They shape our mornings, afternoons, and evenings. They shape how we spend our money and our hours. They redefine fulfillment and meaning. And in so doing, they compel us to become better versions of ourselves each day and every day. So dream bigger dreams for your life than possessions or money or status. The bigger the dream, the better version of ourselves we become. And everybody benefits from that. The post The Bigger Your Dream, The Better Version of Yourself You Become appeared first on Becoming Minimalist. View the full article

Deloitte report finds more businesses seeking shareholder approval for new policies to compete with USView the full article

Greece’s Yannis Stournaras says looming trade war will drag down both growth and inflationView the full article

Defence secretary’s trip comes after Washington threatens to retake waterway because of Chinese influenceView the full article

Given its record, the risk is that the US central bank will do just that View the full article

Beijing has room to more strictly enforce export controls and step up pressure on US companiesView the full article

Tariff fears pummel Australian stocksView the full article

UK government proposes lifting regulation threshold from £100mn of funds under management to £5bnView the full article

Declines come after the worst week for Wall Street equities since the pandemic View the full article

New rules will allow manufacturers to sell full hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles until 2035View the full article

Pensions and endowments seek exit from battered portfolios in blow to buyout industryView the full article

Far right leader addresses supporters at demonstration after conviction that could ban her from standing for presidentView the full article

Treasury secretary rejects recession fears and says tough reciprocal levies will not be delayedView the full article

The City of Raleigh has opened the fourth and final application cycle for its 2025 Facade Rehabilitation Grant Program, a long-standing initiative designed to support exterior improvements to commercial properties across the city. Applications for this round opened on Thursday, April 3, and will be accepted through Sunday, April 27. Award notifications are expected by Friday, May 16. Originally launched in the 1980s, the Facade Rehabilitation Grant Program provides matching reimbursement grants of up to $10,000 for eligible small business owners and property owners to enhance the exteriors of their buildings. The program aims to stimulate economic activity and revitalize older commercial areas by making storefronts more attractive and functional. According to the city, more than 100 businesses have benefited from the program over the years, transforming their buildings to better market their goods and services. To qualify, the proposed improvements must be visible from public streets, and the property must be located within the city limits. Residential properties and interior-only renovations are not eligible. The grant is structured as a matching program, reimbursing applicants up to 50 percent of qualified rehabilitation costs. Businesses located within the city’s designated Economic Development Priority Areas are eligible for up to $10,000 in reimbursement, while those located outside of these zones may qualify for up to $5,000. Qualifying exterior improvements include the removal of false fronts, repairs or replacements of windows and doors, façade materials, cornices, exterior lighting, and exterior painting when part of a larger rehabilitation effort. For projects involving murals or public art, funds may be used for artist fees, labor, construction, equipment rental, and related materials. Routine maintenance and projects that do not require permits are not eligible. Additionally, projects already underway or that have received permits prior to application are disqualified from grant consideration. Murals on façades already in good condition are also excluded from eligibility. To apply, interested property owners or business representatives must first complete a pre-application during the active cycle to determine eligibility. Upon approval, applicants will receive an official application form via email. Ineligible applicants will also be notified. The city requires all applicants to review the full list of program requirements available in the official program brochure before submitting a pre-application. Assistance and resources, including a Grant Portal User Guide, are also available online. Businesses can check if they are located within a designated Economic Development Priority Area by entering their address through a tool provided by the city. With the application window now open, Raleigh officials encourage interested parties to act quickly to take advantage of the opportunity to invest in property improvements and contribute to the city’s ongoing commercial revitalization efforts. This article, "Raleigh Opens Final Round of Facade Rehabilitation Grants for 2025" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article