ResidentialBusiness

It looks more like a racing yacht than a cargo ship. But this new 100% wind-powered vessel will soon begin bringing goods from Europe to the U.S.—and could make deliveries faster than conventional cargo ships. Vela, a French startup, pulled technology from the racing world to make the vessel run as fast as possible. It’s a trimaran, meaning it has three hulls, which helps it cut through water efficiently. The wide, stable shape allows it to carry large sails. As in racing yachts, the mast is made from carbon fiber, and the sails are made of high-performance fabric designed for strength. The ship also uses navigation tech developed for racing to help route toward ideal wind conditions as it crosses the Atlantic. “We’re using the exact same tools to navigate our vessel,” says Vela cofounder Michael Fernandez-Ferri. All of this “isn’t just a fancy gimmick,” he says. “It’s really about bringing speed in operations, because speed is of the utmost importance.” Vela is one of a small but growing number of startups working to make wind-powered cargo ships feasible. A wind-powered cargo ship from French company TOWT (TransOceanic Wind Transport) made its first cross-Atlantic delivery last fall, and a hybrid wind-diesel ship just made its first crossing in October. A workaround for bottlenecks at port Vela designed the ship to tackle one part of the global supply chain: companies making high-end goods, such as luxury cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, that are trying to find a way to decarbonize transportation. For these companies, air freight can be one of the largest parts of their carbon footprint. Shifting to sea transportation—even a regular, diesel-powered cargo ship—would help, but that hasn’t been an option because most cargo ships are unreliable. Typical cargo ships have long delays at ports. “Traditional container shipping has been evolving for bigger and bigger ships, to the extent that these ships are so big that they can only go to a few main harbors,” Fernandez-Ferri says. “This is the bottleneck now of the shipping industry.” The new sailing cargo vessel is much smaller than a container ship—around 220 feet long, versus as much as 1,300 feet for an ultra-large container ship. It carries only 600 European pallets, compared to hundreds of thousands on a large ship. But the small size means it can access less-crowded terminals at ports, avoiding long lines. It’s also much faster to load and unload than a container ship, which can take as long as a week to unload, depending on its size. The racing-inspired design helps Vela’s vessel cross the ocean at speeds similar to a standard ship. (Depending on the time of year, crossing from Europe to the U.S. could take 10 to 13 days, according to modeling based on wind patterns from the past decade; a regular cargo ship might take 9 or 10 days.) Because it saves time at ports and the total delivery time is shorter, it’s more reliable for customers. For freight—which can run as much as $1 million in commercial value for a single pallet—it’s also safer, since cargo stays inside the ship until it’s transferred to secure storage. Deliveries from the U.S. back to France will also be possible on the ship. Right now, large container ships have to travel in a large loop through the Northern Atlantic, taking as long as two months to reach France—too long to be viable for many customers. Vela can make it to France in 12 days. The cost is less than air freight, and similar in cost to “less than container load” shipments by sea, or cargo that shares space in a shipping container rather than filling the whole box. A system to cut emissions by 99% On board, the ship is plastered in more than 2,500 square feet of solar panels that feed a battery. Two hydro generators also create electricity as the ship moves through the water. This helps power refrigeration for cargo like pharmaceuticals, along with other electricity used on the ship. The ship’s propulsion runs almost entirely on wind, except for navigation inside ports. The system cuts emissions by 99% compared to air freight and 90% compared to container ships. It’s also better for marine life because it doesn’t create noise as it sails. (The noise from cargo ships makes it hard for whales and other animals to communicate, and can even cause permanent hearing damage.) It doesn’t pollute water with ballast water or fuel, either. The body of the ship is made from aluminum—lighter than a typical steel cargo ship, and easier to recycle at the end of a ship’s life. The company’s first ship is currently under construction in the Philippines, at a shipyard that specializes in three-hulled aluminum vessels. Next spring, it will begin the trip to France. A year from now, if all goes as planned, it will begin making its first deliveries for companies like Takeda Pharmaceuticals, medical device provider Echosens, and cosmetics company Greentech, among others. Vela raised 40 million euros (roughly $43 million) in a Series A round of funding in 2024, and after the first commercial journey, plans to raise more money to build another four vessels. With a fleet of five ships, it can make departures roughly once a week, enough to meet the needs of its customers. Later, it plans to license the tech to partners to build more routes in other parts of the world. Fernandez-Ferri says, “We see a future with a network of local players leveraging our technology to bring sailing transportation to its full potential.” View the full article

There’s a commercial break on the TV — why not scroll through a few TikToks to pass the time. Ten minutes early for an appointment? Catch up on Instagram Stories. Train delays? A quick doomscroll of the news while you wait. It’s a common reflex: Americans check their phones 144 times a day, on average, according to a survey from Reviews.org. It’s also a habit many are trying to break. “My biggest fear is that I’ll lie on my deathbed and regret how much time I spent on my phone,” TikTok creator Sierra Campbell said in a video posted in May. Her answer? An analog bag. Campbell carries with her a bag of analog activities at all times, including crossword puzzles, watercolor paints, knitting needles, anything that can be reached for in those in-between moments to keep from scrolling. Inspired by Campbell, the analog bag trend has, somewhat ironically, caught on online. The hashtag #AnalogLife is up 330% this year, according to TikTok data shared with Axios. The idea isn’t “less technology,” explained Campbell. “It’s more analog fun.” Other screen-free alternatives include coloring books, journals, embroidery or word searches. By keeping a bag of activities in arm’s reach, it’s easy to resist the urge to mindlessly reach for our phones for a quick distraction or dopamine hit. This trend fits into a broader revival of analog hobbies — also known as “grandma hobbies” — to help us slow down and tackle digital fatigue. In a survey of 2,000 U.S. adults, 71% had participated in a craft project in 2024, said research firm Mintel. “Analog wellness” was named a top trend for 2025 by the Global Wellness Summit. The benefits of analog bags are backed by research. A study published in 2023 by Nature Medicine suggests that having a hobby is good for your health, mood, and more, while digital detoxes can improve focus, mood, and sleep quality. That doesn’t mean you need to give up your phone entirely and wholeheartedly embrace an analog life. But armed with a crossword or some knitting needles, each of us could all work towards being more mindful in those in-between moments during the day. In a world full of brain rot, be an analog bag. View the full article

Let’s be honest: we’ve all got that one celebrity, influencer, or podcast host who lives rent-free in our heads. You know their dog’s name, their morning routine, their trauma story, and their oat milk brand of choice. You might even find yourself defending them in comment sections like they’re your actual friend. Congratulations, you’ve formed a parasocial relationship. For those who aren’t as active on social media, that’s a one-sided bond we form with people we don’t actually know. And while these connections can sometimes sound a little delusional, here’s the twist: they’re not all bad. In fact, parasocial relationships can meet some very real psychological needs. Where it gets dangerous is when you start to forget where the screen ends and real life begins. What’s a parasocial relationship anyway? Sociologists Donald Horton and Richard Wohl coined the term in the 1950s. Parasocial relationships describe the illusion of intimacy audiences feel toward media personalities. Back then, it was people writing fan letters to their favorite TV hosts. Now, it’s me crying in sync with a YouTuber’s breakup vlog or feeling like I know my favorite podcaster personally. On a neurological level, this makes sense. After all, our brains don’t perfectly distinguish between real and mediated (through a screen) interaction. When someone looks into the camera and speaks directly to you, your mirror neurons light up just as if you’re talking to them face-to-face. This is why parasocial relationships can feel genuinely comforting. They activate the same circuits of familiarity and trust as real friendships. And in an increasingly disconnected world, that comfort definitely counts for something. The surprising benefits of one-sided bonds 1. They can buffer loneliness During lockdowns, many of us maintained a sense of social connection through our favorite online creators. Studies show parasocial relationships can actually reduce feelings of isolation and even improve mood regulation, especially when people lack strong offline networks. 2. They model vulnerability and emotional expression Watching creators openly discuss anxiety, grief, or trauma can normalize emotional honesty and destigmatize speaking about challenges like mental health. This helps us feel seen in our own mess. We can tell ourselves, “Okay, I’m not the only one falling apart on a Wednesday.” 3. They inspire growth A parasocial connection can serve as a mirror. It can show you the kind of energy, confidence, or values you want to embody. This is why certain influencers become aspirational figures. As long as you keep awareness intact, these relationships can spark genuine motivation. When parasocial relationships turn dangerous It is worth noting, however, that there is a very thin line between “inspired” and “attached” is thin. And unfortunately, powerful algorithms are built to blur it. These algorithms reward creators for being relatable, which means sharing enough personal details to make you feel like you’re in their inner circle. That emotional intimacy creates loyalty, engagement, and ultimately, a chance for monetization. This isn’t inherently evil, but it can distort our sense of reciprocity. You might start to feel like this person owes you honesty, consistency, or moral perfection. And when they slip up (as humans inevitably do), the disappointment can feel personal—like a friend’s betrayal. These one-way relationships can also subtly erode our capacity for deeper real-world intimacy. When we satisfy our social cravings with curated, low-risk digital connections, we stop practicing the messy vulnerability of actual human contact, the kind that requires our patience, discomfort, and presence. The psychology behind the pull Parasocial attachment is driven by the same neural systems that govern all bonding. Dopamine fuels the anticipation of new posts or updates. Oxytocin, the “bonding hormone,” spikes when we watch someone share emotionally or make eye contact with the camera. But here’s the kicker: unlike reciprocal relationships, parasocial ones never demand anything of you. No commitment. No conflict. No compromise. No vulnerability. It’s a connection on your terms: all of the closeness, none of the interpersonal risk. It’s no wonder our brains love it. Especially in a culture where real connection often feels draining, these one-sided bonds offer safe (and lazy) intimacy; it’s like a form of social snacking. The problem is that snacks, while comforting, don’t nourish us long-term. So where do we draw the line? Here’s the thing: you don’t need to quit parasocial connections. You just need to bring consciousness to them. Try this quick self-check by asking yourself a series of questions. Are you replacing or complementing real-world connections? If your closest relationship is with someone who doesn’t know you exist, it’s time to recalibrate. Do you feel possessive or reactive when your favorite creator posts (or doesn’t)? That’s a sign of emotional overinvestment and might be a sign to step back and reanchor. Lastly, figure out if their content is influencing your self-worth. If their wins make you feel inadequate, mute or unfollow for a while. Inspiration should energize you, not erode you. How to keep a healthy parasocial relationship Take the following steps to prevent a parasocial relationship from becoming unhealthy: 1. Diversify your social diet Online creators can be a supplement, but real relationships are the main meal. Reach out to friends, join local groups, or talk to someone face-to-face. 2. Practice digital discernment Notice the kind of creators you gravitate toward. Do they invite reflection and growth or feed comparison and self-doubt? 3. Set parasocial boundaries No DMs. No stalking their partner’s feed. And definitely not forming an identity around being in a relationship with them of any kind. 4. Do regular connection audits Once a month, ask: Who are the five people I feel most connected to right now? If you find that most of them are social media figures, it might be time to rebalance. Parasocial relationships aren’t a glitch in modern life; they’re normal. And they act as a mirror, showing us what we crave—intimacy, belonging, inspiration. When you hold them consciously, they can even bridge moments of loneliness or offer glimpses of our better selves. But the minute we start mistaking someone else’s content for actual closeness, we drift into illusion. That’s when we can confuse visibility for intimacy. So by all means, keep cheering for your favorite podcaster and cry with your comfort YouTuber. Just make sure you’re also tending to the relationships that see all of you—not just your username–because they’re the ones who will keep you grounded in what’s real. View the full article

Phones have always been fashion statements. What started as simple cases to protect your phone has evolved into decking out the devices with every accessory imaginable: dangling charms and key chains, PopSockets, phone wallets, straps, and now . . . pockets? Apple just launched a new product called the iPhone Pocket, and it’s effectively a knitted bag for your iPhone. Apple designed the pouch in collaboration with high-end Japanese fashion brand Issey Miyake, whose relationship with Apple stretches back to the Steve Jobs era. (Jobs’s signature turtlenecks were designed by Miyake, who retired the iconic shirts following Jobs’s death in 2011.) The tech giant says the 3D-knitted design is meant to serve as an additional pocket for an iPhone and small essentials like AirPods or lip balm. The ribbed pleats—a nod to Miyake’s signature style—are designed to hold any iPhone, stretching just enough to offer a peek at the screen. Given the stretchy fabric, it can be carried by hand, attached to a bag, or worn across the body. The shorter version—available in bright shades like orange, pink, yellow, and turquoise—costs $149.95 and can be worn on the wrist or attached to a bag as a charm. The cross-body version comes in blue, brown, or black. That extra fabric will cost you, with a price of $229.95. The iPhone, accessorized Unsurprisingly, the internet is balking at the price. Marques Brownlee, an influencer with more than 20 million subscribers, reacted on X: “TWO hundred and thirty dollars. This feels like a litmus test for people who will buy/defend anything Apple releases.” A wave of responses quickly followed. “Can’t wait for the $8 Amazon knockoffs,” wrote one user. Another added: “What are they gonna do? Stop making pockets on our pants so we have to start wearing our phones like a purse? C’mon man, Apple will do anything BUT innovate on a new phone.” Many have noted that the pouch takes inspiration from Jobs’s 2004 iPod Sock, which he jokingly described at the time as “a revolutionary new product.” The Miyake collab lacks the same sense of humor, but it at least signals a hint of playfulness coming out of Cupertino. Apple has historically taken a minimalist approach to accessories, with iPhone cases designed to be a simple second skin to the devices. For the most part, the company has left any sort of self-expression to third-party accessory brands, which can have a heckuva lot more fun with their design. This year, though, Apple seems to have taken notice that people want to accessorize their phones—you know, the object that humans carry with them for hours a day and coddle like a baby. The company dipped its toes into wearable iPhone fashion with a $59 cross-body strap released alongside its September iPhone lineup. Now, the iPhone Pocket marks Apple’s second venture into phone-as-accessory territory. The Pocket is getting roasted, and perhaps fairly so. But the product very clearly has its audience in mind: the small Venn diagram of people who care enough about technology and fashion to wear it on their bodies—and have enough money to pay for the pleasure of doing so. View the full article

People often take walking for granted. We just move, one step after another, without ever thinking about what it takes to make that happen. Yet every single step is an extraordinary act of coordination, driven by precise timing between spinal cord, brain, nerves, muscles, and joints. Historically, people have used stopwatches, cameras, or trained eyes to assess walking and its deficits. However, recent technological advances such as motion capture, wearable sensors, and data science methods can record and quantify characteristics of step-by-step movement. We are researchers who study biomechanics and human performance. We and other researchers are increasingly applying this data to improve human movement. These insights not only help athletes of all stripes push their performance boundaries, but they also support movement recovery for patients through personalized feedback. Ultimately, motion could become another vital sign. From motion data to performance insights Researchers around the world combine physiology, biomechanics, and data science to decode human movement. This interdisciplinary approach sets the stage for a new era where machine learning algorithms find patterns in human movement data collected by continuous monitoring, yielding insights that improve health. It’s the same technology that powers your fitness tracker. For example, the inertial measurement unit in the Apple Watch records motion and derives metrics such as step count, stride length, and cadence. Wearable sensors, such as inertial measurement units, record thousands of data points every second. The raw data reveals very little about a person’s movement. In fact, the data is so noisy and unstructured that it’s impossible to extract any meaningful insight. That is where signal processing comes into play. A signal is simply a sequence of measurements tracked over time. Imagine putting an inertial measurement unit on your ankle. The device constantly tracks the ankle’s movement by measuring signals such as acceleration and rotation. These signals provide an overview of the motion and indicate how the body behaves. However, they often contain unwanted background noise that can blur the real picture. With mathematical tools, researchers can filter out the noise and isolate the information that truly reflects how the body is performing. It’s like taking a blurry photo and using editing tools to make the picture clear. The process of cleaning and manipulating the signals is known as signal processing. After processing the signals, researchers use machine learning techniques to transform them into interpretable metrics. Machine learning is a subfield of artificial intelligence that works by finding patterns and relationships in data. In the context of human movement, these tools can identify features of motion that correspond to key performance and health metrics. For example, our team at the Human Performance and Nutrition Research Institute at Oklahoma State University estimated fitness capacity without requiring exhaustive physical tests or special equipment. Fitness capacity is how efficiently the body can perform physical activity. By combining biomechanics, signal processing, and machine learning, we were able to estimate fitness capacity using data from just a few steps of our subjects’ walking. Beyond fitness, walking data offers even deeper insights. Walking speed is a powerful indicator of longevity, and by tracking it, we could learn about people’s long-term health and life expectancy. From performance to medicine The impact of these algorithms extends far beyond tracking performance, such as steps and miles walked. They can be applied to support rehabilitation and prevent injuries. Our team is developing a machine learning algorithm to detect when an athlete is at an elevated risk of injury just by analyzing their body movement and detecting subtle changes. Other scientists have used similar approaches to monitor motor control impairments following a stroke by continuously assessing how a patient’s walking patterns evolve, determining whether motor control is improving, or if the patient is compensating in any way that could lead to future injury. Similar tools can also be used to inform treatment plans based on each patient’s specific needs, moving us closer to true personalized medicine. In Parkinson’s disease, these methods have been used to diagnose the condition, monitor its severity, and detect episodes of walking difficulties to prompt cues to the patients to resume walking. Others have used these techniques to design and control wearable assistive devices such as exoskeletons that improve mobility for people with physical disabilities by generating power at precisely timed intervals. In addition, researchers have evaluated movement strategies in military service members and found that those with poor biomechanics had a higher risk of injury. Others have used wrist-worn wearables to detect overuse injuries in service members. At their core, these innovations all have one goal: to restore and improve human movement. Motion as a vital sign We believe that the future of personalized medicine lies in dynamic monitoring. Every step, jump, or squat carries information about how the body functions, performs, and recovers. With advances in wearable technology, AI, and cloud computing, real-time movement monitoring and biofeedback are likely to become a routine part of everyday life. Imagine an athlete’s shoe that warns them before an injury occurs, clothing for the elderly that detects and prevents a fall before it occurs, or a smartwatch that detects early signs of stroke based on walking patterns. Combining biomechanics, signal processing, and data science turns motion into a vital sign, a real-time reflection of your health and well-being. Azarang Asadi is a data scientist at Oklahoma State University. Collin D. Bowersock is a principal scientist at the Human Performance and Neuromechanics Research Institute at Oklahoma State University. Matthew Bird is a performance science coordinator at the Human Performance and Nutrition Research Institute at Oklahoma State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

ONS wants to free staff to work on improving quality of critical statistics and surveysView the full article

In 2010, Phil Gilbert was a longtime startup entrepreneur when IBM acquired the software company he ran. The “slower, process-oriented culture” was a struggle for someone who was used to the faster pace of startup life, he writes in his new book, Irrestible Change: A Blueprint for Earning Buy-In and Breakout Success. When IBM tapped him to lead a transformation of the company, it was a daunting task. Over the next few years, Gilbert guided IBM’s shift toward design-thinking and re-trained thousands of employees to work differently, all without mandating a thing. Today, he sees corporate mandates as pointless: They don’t work, he says. And yet, they’re ubiquitous—take the RTO mandates that companies are enforcing, often to the frustration of their employees. At Paramount, about 600 workers took a voluntary buyout rather than accept the company’s 5-day RTO mandate. But change is inevitable, whether it’s about remote work or AI integration. So how do companies get employees on board? Gilbert, now a leading culture change expert, spoke with Fast Company about the lessons he learned from his undertaking at IBM and what company leaders should know about getting employee buy-in for their own change initiatives. We’re in a time when companies are undergoing and implementing lots of changes, from RTO to AI to DEI—all the acronyms. In your book, you talk about the importance of treating change like a product. What do you mean by that? My predisposition, based on years of experience, is that mandating changes in the workplace is hugely inefficient and hugely ineffective. Cultures drive outcomes. Mandating culture changes to achieve different outcomes doesn’t work. [At IBM], I had to start thinking, “Okay, if those two things are true, how do I change a culture without mandating it?” And it hit me that this is very much the same problem that any startup faces: bringing a new product to market. You have a new solution to a problem, and nobody knows who you are. It struck me that what I was really doing was constructing a new product for the marketplace that was IBM. I had to make this product so desirable that the teams would choose to adopt it. And in doing so, they would work better together and deliver better outcomes. That was an aha moment of, “Oh, I’ve done this before. I know how to build products, I know how to deliver products.” If you’re thinking about introducing this [change] as a product, you have to understand that a product is bigger than a technology. A product is much more holistic than just a single tool. We have to name it. We have to put the brand values into it. You have to prove value. RTO is something so many companies are struggling with. You talk about making change desirable, but what advice do you have for leaders when the change they want to implement is getting pushback? I’m telling leaders today, “If you are getting pushback from people returning to the office, don’t think it’s on them—it’s on you.” If you introduce something that people reject after giving it a try, there’s one of two reasons: The first one is that it’s not actually a good idea. The second one, which is more common, is that it’s not a bad idea, but you have not executed it very well. I’m a big believer in people being at the office, but not for the reason most leaders are saying today. I’ve come across company after company where the CEO will say, “Get back to the office because collaboration is better.” And then when you get to the office, you find out that three-quarters of your team is not even in that location. Collaboration is actually happening very well over Zoom and Teams and Webex. It’s all the other stuff that makes up a person’s career and a person’s wisdom, the collaborations that are not happening via Zoom, [that we’re missing]. Those are the experiences we should be majoring on in our physical spaces, and they should be apparently valuable. That’s what irresistible change is all about. It’s about reversing the ownership of noncompliance. In the old model, noncompliance was a failure of the employee: “They don’t get it. I’m going to start looking at the badge readers every day and find out who badged in and who badged out and when they did it.” That’s the old model, and it engenders resentment from day one. The irresistible change model says, “If folks aren’t coming back to the office and staying willingly, why is that? And what can I do to make that environment so valuable to them that they want to be there?” What surprised you most during the transformation at IBM? I believed in this thing called the “frozen middle.” I thought middle management was resistant to change—that had been my experience. So when I designed the program, [I thought], I’ve got to keep the very top engaged—that meant our CEO, her directs, and their directs. And I have to keep the workers at the edge very engaged. They’re the canaries in the coal mine. My assumption was that we would get to the middle over time. A couple years into the program, [our] research showed that middle managers did not resist change. In fact, they were almost as rabid about change as the people at the edge, the earlier-career people. But middle managers do the hardest job in the business. They’re the translators. They’ve got to translate the high-level strategy and communications to the very senior people. And they’ve got to rationalize the chaos of what’s going on on the ground. This role of translation is very hard, and we had just made it exponentially harder because we introduced new teams under their purview that were operating in radically different ways from their old teams. We hadn’t given them the tools to manage teams that were using these new practices. Once we acknowledged that and gave them the tools, their ability to manage these teams was greatly expanded. That was a huge accelerant. Had we had that at the beginning, we would have shaved at least a year, if not two, off the program. If people could take one lesson from your book, what would you want that to be? The first question I ask every CEO when I’m approached—unfortunately, I’m not approached as often as I’d like to be before the transformation starts; I’m typically approached after it’s failed—is, “Tell me about the teams you’ve put through the program.” And almost always, I hear something like this: “Oh, our best people. We pulled them off their projects. A tiger team.” Getting those first teams correct is a huge part of winning or losing. These are not cherry-picked employees. These are teams that are funded to do what they’re going to do, whether you transform them or not. These are not innovation teams in some cool office in San Francisco with bricks and exposed ductwork and VW buses sticking out of the wall. These are teams in your mainstream business—whoever is on them. Virtually everybody gets that wrong. View the full article

You might not have noticed if you’re the type to upgrade your smartphone frequently, but the main cameras that they use have been getting wider and wider in their field of view throughout the years. While phones are now indisputably the most popular cameras in the world, most manufacturers have settled on a type of lens that used to be considered quite exotic and challenging to use in the camera space. The main camera on the iPhone 17 Pro, for example, has the same field of view as a 24mm lens on a full-frame camera, which is the general photographic standard for measuring focal lengths. This is a perspective that few companies would have considered using on a point-and-shoot camera in the past—it’s compositionally awkward for a non-zooming lens. Nonetheless, it is clearly now a new standard of its own. Another way But what if there’s another way? Recently, I’ve been using the Z80 Ultra from Nubia, a relatively niche consumer brand owned by the Chinese telecoms giant ZTE. Nubia’s core philosophy around smartphone cameras is that we’ve gone way too far out with 24mm lenses—instead, there’s a lot to be gained by bringing things back to 35mm. For much of photographic history, the 24mm-ish lenses we’re all so used to now were considered pretty wide. Fabled German camera maker Leica, for example, didn’t start designing 24mm lenses until the ‘90s; its classic focal lengths throughout much of the 20th century were 50mm, 35mm, 28mm, and 21mm. Anything wider than 24mm was typically referred to as ultrawide, while 35mm was at the longest end of the “wide-angle” spectrum. And 35mm lenses on smartphones aren’t new—in fact, most devices in the early days used that kind of lens. This held for every iPhone all the way through to the iPhone 5S in 2013, which came in slightly longer than 28mm-equivalent. By the time of the iPhone XS in 2018, the field of view had widened to around 26mm, and 2022’s iPhone 14 Pro went wider still, to about 28mm. More stuff in view Why the shift? One obvious advantage to a wider lens is that you can simply fit more stuff in the shot. The 28mm focal length is easier to use than 35mm for shooting groups of people, for example. The field of view also tends to be easier to design physically shorter lenses for, which was critical as phones started to get thinner. And if you want a 35mm-equivalent field of view, you can always crop in from the wider focal length; Apple has been actively promoting this as a built-in feature in recent years with 1.2x (28mm) and 1.5x (35mm) options in the iPhone camera app. But you do lose the qualities of a native 35mm-equivalent lens when you do this. Cropping your image will always compromise on quality to some extent, and you don’t get the same compressed perspective that comes from a longer focal length. 35mm is a natural perspective that offers more subject isolation with blurrier backgrounds than if you were using a 28mm-equivalent lens on the same sensor. There’s a reason Fujifilm opted for 35mm on its ultra-popular X100 line of enthusiast compact cameras. A worthy option While I wouldn’t say the Nubia Z80 Ultra has the world’s greatest camera system—its image processing leaves a lot to be desired when compared to the likes of Oppo and Xiaomi—the shooting experience is good enough to convince me that 35mm is a worthy route to pursue. Coupled with a genuinely useful two-stage shutter button, the 35mm lens on the Z80 Ultra just feels more like a real camera than most other phones. Of course, sometimes you will want a wider perspective. Nubia’s answer to that is simply to provide an 18mm-equivalent ultrawide camera that’s capable enough for you to crop into 24mm and get passable results. Even the highest-end phones have been compromising on ultrawide camera hardware in recent years, but the Z80 Ultra’s ultrawide has a relatively huge 1/1.56” inch sensor—that’s as big as the main camera on many upper midrange phones. The 24mm results aren’t going to blow you away, but they’re more than serviceable. Refreshing choices Camera design is always about trade-offs, so it’s refreshing to see a phone that makes different choices; the 35mm main lens on the Z80 Ultra is just one of them. Nubia also opted for an almost-invisible under-display selfie camera, for example, which gives you a genuinely full-screen image when watching video—at the expense of, well, selfie quality. While the execution isn’t fully there just yet, I really think Nubia is onto something with this 35mm design. Coupled with a strong 18mm ultrawide, a solid 70mm telephoto, and a real shutter button, the Z80 Ultra presents a photographer-forward system that feels meaningfully different to other phone cameras. When it comes to photography, what’s not in the frame is just as important as what is. Smartphone cameras have come to dominate the world, so it’s worth considering the trade-offs when it comes to their wider perspective. View the full article

Senior figures appear to gear up for a post-Starmer future; others see briefings as cock-up rather than conspiracy View the full article

When most people think about immigration enforcement, they picture border crossings and airport checkpoints. But the new front line may be your social media feed. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has published a request for information for private-sector contractors to launch a round-the-clock social media monitoring program. The request states that private contractors will be paid to comb through “Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Tumblr, Instagram, VK, Flickr, Myspace, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, Reddit, WhatsApp, YouTube, etc.,” turning public posts into enforcement leads that feed directly into ICE’s databases. The request for information reads like something out of a cyber thriller: dozens of analysts working in shifts, strict deadlines measured in minutes, a tiered system of prioritizing high-risk individuals, and the latest software keeping constant watch. I am a researcher who studies the intersection of data governance, digital technologies, and the U.S. federal government. I believe that the ICE request for information also signals a concerning, if logical, next step in a longer trend, one that moves the U.S. border from the physical world into the digital. A new structure of surveillance ICE already searches social media using a service called SocialNet that monitors most major online platforms. The agency has also contracted with Zignal Labs for its AI-powered social media monitoring system. The Customs and Border Protection agency also searches social media posts on the devices of some travelers at ports of entry, and the U.S. State Department reviews social media posts when foreigners seek visas to enter the United States. ICE and other federal law enforcement agencies already search social media. What would change isn’t only the scale of monitoring but its structure. Instead of government agents gathering evidence case by case, ICE is building a public-private surveillance loop that transforms everyday online activity into potential evidence. Private contractors would be tasked with scraping publicly available data to collecting messages, including posts and other media and data. The contractors would be able to correlate those findings with data in commercial datasets from brokers such as LexisNexis Accurint and Thomson Reuters CLEAR along with government-owned databases. Analysts would be required to produce dossiers for ICE field offices within tight deadlines—sometimes just 30 minutes for a high-priority case. Those files don’t exist in isolation. They feed directly into Palantir Technologies’s Investigative Case Management system, the digital backbone of modern immigration enforcement. There, this social media data would join a growing web of license plate scans, utility records, property data, and biometrics, creating what is effectively a searchable portrait of a person’s life. Who gets caught in the net? Officially, ICE says its data collection would focus on people who are already linked to ongoing cases or potential threats. In practice, the net is far wider. The danger here is that when one person is flagged, their friends, relatives, fellow organizers, or any of their acquaintances can also become subjects of scrutiny. Previous contracts for facial recognition tools and location tracking have shown how easily these systems expand beyond their original scope. What starts as enforcement can turn into surveillance of entire communities. What ICE says and what history shows ICE frames the project as modernization: a way to identify a target’s location by identifying aliases and detecting patterns that traditional methods might miss. Planning documents say contractors cannot create fake profiles and must store all analysis on ICE servers. But history suggests these kinds of guardrails often fail. Investigations have revealed how informal data-sharing between local police and federal agents allowed ICE to access systems it wasn’t authorized to use. The agency has repeatedly purchased massive datasets from brokers to sidestep warrant requirements. And despite a White House freeze on spyware procurement, ICE quietly revived a contract with Paragon’s Graphite tool, software reportedly capable of infiltrating encrypted apps such as WhatsApp and Signal. Meanwhile, ICE’s vendor ecosystem keeps expanding: Clearview AI for face matching, ShadowDragon’s SocialNet for mapping networks, Babel Street’s location history service Locate X, and LexisNexis for looking up people. ICE is also purchasing tools from surveillance firm PenLink that combine location data with social media data. Together, these platforms make continuous, automated monitoring not only possible but routine. ICE is purchasing an AI tool that correlates people’s locations with their social media posts. Lessons from abroad The U.S. isn’t alone in government monitoring of social media. In the U.K., a new police unit tasked with scanning online discussions about immigration and civil unrest has drawn criticism for blurring the line between public safety and political policing. Across the globe, spyware scandals have shown how lawful access tools that were initially justified for counterterrorism were later used against journalists and activists. Once these systems exist, mission creep, also known as function creep, becomes the rule rather than the exception. The social cost of being watched Around-the-clock surveillance doesn’t just gather information—it also changes behavior. Research found that visits to Wikipedia articles on terrorism dropped sharply immediately after revelations about the National Security Agency’s global surveillance in June 2013. For immigrants and activists, the stakes are higher. A post about a protest or a joke can be reinterpreted as “intelligence.” Knowing that federal contractors may be watching in real time encourages self-censorship and discourages civic participation. In this environment, the digital self—an identity composed of biometric markers, algorithmic classifications, risk scores, and digital traces—becomes a risk that follows you across platforms and databases. What’s new and why it matters now What is genuinely new is the privatization of interpretation. ICE isn’t just collecting more data, it is outsourcing judgment to private contractors. Private analysts, aided by artificial intelligence, are likely to decide what online behavior signals danger and what doesn’t. That decision-making happens rapidly and across large numbers of people, for the most part beyond public oversight. At the same time, the consolidation of data means social media content can now sit beside location and biometric information inside Palantir’s hub. Enforcement increasingly happens through data correlations, raising questions about due process. ICE’s request for information is likely to evolve into a full procurement contract within months, and recent litigation from the League of Women Voters and the Electronic Privacy Information Center against the Department of Homeland Security suggests that the oversight is likely to lag far behind the technology. ICE’s plan to maintain permanent watch floors—open indoor spaces equipped with video and computer monitors, that are staffed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year—signals that this likely isn’t a temporary experiment and instead is a new operational norm. What accountability looks like Transparency starts with public disclosure of the algorithms and scoring systems ICE uses. Advocacy groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union argue that law enforcement agencies should meet the same warrant standards online that they do in physical spaces. The Brennan Center for Justice and the ACLU argue that there should be independent oversight of surveillance systems for accuracy and bias. And several U.S. senators have introduced legislation to limit bulk purchases from data brokers. Without checks like these, I believe that the boundary between border control and everyday life is likely to keep dissolving. As the digital border expands, it risks ensnaring anyone whose online presence becomes legible to the system. Nicole M. Bennett is a PhD candidate in geography and the assistant director at the Center for Refugee Studies at Indiana University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

US president says he intends to pursue legal action because UK broadcaster ‘defrauded the public’View the full article

Below, co-authors Suzy Burke, Rhett Power, and Ryan Berman share five key insights from their new book, Headamentals: How Leaders Can Crack Negative Self-Talk. Suzy, president and co-founder of the leadership consultancy Accountability Inc., is an organizational psychologist and seasoned executive with an exceptional track record in a diverse array of businesses, from a Fortune 20 technology company to a highly successful beverage start-up. She is also a National Institute of Mental Health scholar and member of the Marshall Goldsmith 100 Coaches Agency. Rhett is the CEO and co-founder of Accountability Inc. and was named the #1 Thought Leader on Entrepreneurship by Thinkers360. He is also a Marshall Goldsmith 100 Coach. His expertise has been featured in Forbes, Inc., Fast Company, Wall Street Journal, and on CNBC. Ryan is the founder of Courageous and host of the Courageous Podcast. For over 25 years, Ryan has helped corporations who are stuck, scared, or stale to choose courage. He has counseled many companies, including Google, Procter & Gamble, Kellogg’s, Kraft Heinz, LA Galaxy, and Snapchat, to name a few. What’s the big idea? Leaders aren’t failing because they don’t have a strategy or skill. They are stuck because of their internal battles—their self-talk—not because of the challenges happening with customers or in the market. Headamentals is about directing that inner voice so that it becomes a competitive advantage and helps you build great teams. Once you fix that conversation in your head, you fix how you lead, connect, and perform. Leading others starts with self-leadership. Listen to the audio version of this Book Bite—read by Suzy, Rhett, and Ryan—below, or in the Next Big Idea App. 1. Self-talk is the hidden saboteur of leadership We’ve always had societal-scale worry wars, but we like to refer to the pandemic as Worry War I. Now we are in Worry War II, which confronts the rising cost of food, the emergence of AI, the erosion of empathy at work, and political division. If Worry War I was the pandemic, fueled by isolation and fears of illness, then Worry War II is pandemonium. It is all these forces—pushing us, nudging us, spiraling us out—and each of us is dealing with it in our own way. Layer on top of that the things we told ourselves as kids, what our parents might’ve said, which have stuck in our minds. You start to see why we’re spiraling and where our self-talk comes from. Think of that voice inside your head: Where does yours come from? That voice triggers how you show up in different situations. Sometimes a self-talk spiral is triggered by what’s happening in the world right now, like when you try to watch the news. Or other times, even as an older adult, your self-talk can spiral when something reminds you of a challenging experience or feeling from your childhood. Self-talk, unbeknownst to those around you, can spiral out of control and become a hidden force holding back yourself and your teams. 2. Every leader has a monster The hardest part of being a leader isn’t the market pressure. It’s not the late nights, the impossible deadlines, or even your fiercest competitor. The hardest part is the voice in your head that makes you rewrite an email at midnight because of how it might land, pause before you speak (even when you’re the expert in the room), and turns every compliment into a question mark. This voice is the one that whispers, or sometimes roars, that you don’t belong. That voice doesn’t just shape your day, it shapes everything. It determines whether you share your thoughts in that high-stakes meeting or let the moment pass; whether you inspire confidence or let doubt leak into the room; whether your team feels a calm, steady presence or the weight of uncertainty. It shapes the culture your team breathes every single day. What gets celebrated, what gets overlooked, and what never gets said out loud. “Your self-talk becomes team talk.” If you want a team that’s bold, resilient, and innovative, it doesn’t start with your strategy. It doesn’t start with your offsite. It starts with a conversation happening in your head—that’s your monster. And almost every leader has one. What matters is whether this voice is left in charge, because when your monster speaks, your team listens. Your self-talk becomes team talk. According to the National Science Foundation, we have up to 60,000 thoughts a day: 80 percent of them are negative, and 95 percent are repetitive. That’s 48,000 mental reruns of doubt every single day. Given that reality, it is no surprise that most of us wrestle with imposter syndrome: 62 percent worldwide, 71 percent in the U.S. If you’re a high achiever, that percentage is even greater. Albert Einstein, one of the greatest scientific minds in history, once confessed that he felt like an involuntary swindler. The man who reshaped our understanding of the universe worried that he was faking it. Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice, has also admitted to feeling like a fraud. She once said in a speech, “I’m always looking over my shoulder, wondering if I measure up.” And Howard Schultz, former CEO of Starbucks, admits that very few people get into the CEO seat and truly believe they belong. If Einstein can doubt his brain, Sotomayor can doubt her success, and Schultz can doubt his right to the corner office, then self-doubt isn’t a glitch. It’s the default. Your monster doesn’t care about your resume, titles, or trophies. 3. Your mindset isn’t fixed Your mindset is programmable, and you are the programmer. To program it, it’s important to understand why we’re plagued by our monsters in the first place. The answer is evolution. Our brains are wired for survival, not growth. Our brain’s default mode fixates on past threats to help us avoid future danger. If you were laughed at for speaking up in class, your brain filed that away so that now, when you’re thinking about speaking up in a meeting, that same voice might whisper don’t. If your first boss pounced on every small slip, your inner critic learned that imperfection equals incompetence. Years later, it still sounds the alarm. “Don’t try to ignore your monster.” Conventional wisdom says to cast your inner critic as a bully and either ignore, suppress, or conquer it. But our monsters are trying to protect us, not destroy us. The moment you step outside of what’s familiar—giving tough feedback, launching a bold idea, taking on a new role—you invite risk and vulnerability. That’s when your monster pipes up, saying, What if you fail? But staying safe trades impact for comfort and progress for predictability. The irony is that true psychological safety doesn’t come from avoiding risks, but rather from knowing that you can take them and still be okay. Don’t try to ignore your monster. Get curious about it. The 3-C Maverick Method as a tool for reframing negative self-talk in real time: Catch, Confront, Change. When you think about something, it shapes how you feel about it, which in turn shapes how you act. When you recreate the story you tell yourself, you change the outcome. If you see setbacks as invitations to grow, then feedback stops feeling like criticism and begins building confidence. That’s the power of changing the conversation in your head. You often can’t control what happens to you, but you can control how you think about it and respond. This is the essence of cognitive reframing and our antidote to negative self-talk, and the cornerstone of our three-step method: Catch yourself when your mind is saying you’re not smart or tough enough to succeed. Your emotions are an alarm system. Anxiety is often the first indicator that the monster is moving in. Tune in, identify the counterproductive thought. Confront that thought. Challenge your monster with facts that prove it wrong. Change the narrative by reframing the story your monster is telling you. 4. There is more than one type of monster Sports coaches say you practice 95 percent of the time for the 5 percent of the time that you actually play. In business, it is almost entirely the opposite. Think about how long the orientation phase is as a company: you’re given an hour of orientation to find out where you’re supposed to go, and then practice is over. But we need more practice, specifically for retraining the brain to have stronger tools for dealing with self-talk. There are five monster archetypes holding us back that we need to practice dealing with. We call these cognitive distortions CAMOS, because they camouflage or conceal your truth: Catastrophizer – assumes the worst will happen, even if it probably won’t. Always Righter – needs to be right, no matter what. Mind Reader – tries to tell you what you’re thinking, before you even know what that is. Over-generalizer – takes one bad thing and paints everything with it. Should-er – lives by unrealistic “should” and “musts,” creating unnecessary pressure. 5. Self-talk can be your leadership plutonium All leaders eventually discover that self-talk is their most powerful, volatile energy source. It can fuel extraordinary growth or cause quiet, invisible damage. Every day, there’s a voice running in your head—evaluating, judging, predicting, doubting, encouraging—and it never stops. As a leader or founder, that voice becomes the unseen soundtrack for your company. We tend to think of our thoughts as private, but they’re not. They leak out in our body language, decisions, energy, and how we communicate. When a founder walks into a room and he’s full of stress, teams don’t just hear it; they feel it. If your self-talk is full of fear, your team starts to operate out of fear. If your self-talk is reactive, your team becomes reactive. But if your self-talk is grounded in belief and clarity, then your team learns to respond the same way. You can’t create a calm, confident, accountable team if you’re running around with a chaotic inner dialogue. Culture starts with what you say to yourself in those private moments before the big decision, before the investor pitch, or before the tough conversation. Leaders who have built billion-dollar companies share the quality of disciplined thinking. They don’t let the wrong stories take root. They challenge their own narratives and are intentional about what they say to themselves because they know it shapes how they show up for everyone else. Plutonium, like the power of self-talk, can power cities or destroy them. The teams that are winning are not just on the same page strategically, but are also on the same page emotionally and mentally. They’ve built shared language and a rhythm of confidence and clarity that amplifies everyone’s performance. That alignment is leadership plutonium. When your self-talk and your team’s talk are synced, you’ve created an unstoppable force. Enjoy our full library of Book Bites—read by the authors!—in the Next Big Idea App. This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission. View the full article

Recriminations fly in Downing Street after prime minister highlights weakness of his own position View the full article

Sir Keir Starmer’s allies say prime minister is prepared to fight any attempt to topple himView the full article

Self-growth requires two things parents often lack: time and energy. Between cleaning messes, cooking meals, and managing extracurriculars, the average parent gets just two hours a week to focus on personal development. Growth doesn’t stop when you become a parent. Raising children offers lifelong learning. Yet, for parents used to measuring their success in qualifications and promotions, it often doesn’t feel like growth—especially when you’re sleep-deprived and energy-drained. To them, professional development and personal development are one and the same. It’s no wonder 50% are left feeling as if parenthood has hijacked or delayed their growth. As Headway’s productivity coach, I’ve seen this situation play out all too many times. Working parents worry they’re falling behind, so they spend every spare second they have trying to catch up, often sacrificing their sleep, social life, and self-care. It’s mentally taxing and typically leads to self-doubt, burnout, and parents putting their career growth on pause rather than any meaningful progress. Ambition on hold: Self-improvement is designed for the childless Growing by almost 5% annually, the global personal development market is on track to reach $69 billion by 2032. With a constant flow of new material from leading experts, it’s never been easier to improve yourself. Unless, of course, you’re a parent. When the best self-help books span hundreds of pages, for those lucky to find two hours a week for themselves, it’s a nonstarter. Parents aren’t excluded from growth by ability or desire, but by design. The booming self-improvement industry simply wasn’t built for those without free evenings and quiet weekends. Parents might not be reading a book a week or asking for career development funding, but they still want to learn. They do, and they try, sneaking in learning while the children are napping, during their commute, or over the weekend instead of resting. But it rarely sticks. And when it doesn’t, it can feel like failure. That sense of falling behind fosters frustration, discouragement, and hopelessness. While the most laborious moments of parenthood are temporary, 41% admit that having children has sapped their ambition, and 18% say it has “destroyed” their career prospects. But it doesn’t have to be that way. With the right tools and approach, parents can keep learning and growing without burning out or putting their children second. Burp, feed, learn, repeat: Making self-growth possible for parents Traditional approaches to self-growth—long courses, bulky books, and complicated apps—aren’t compatible with the realities of raising children. What parents need is short and flexible content and tools that enable micro-learning, enabling them to make progress in small pockets of time without making learning draining or burdensome. Studies show it’s no less effective. In fact, micro-learning can boost knowledge retention by as much as 20%. Even small amounts of consistent learning add up, making progress possible for parents without feeling like they’re sacrificing in other areas of life or constantly falling behind. How to maintain your self-growth during parenthood (without losing sleep) If it feels like you have to choose between parenting and personal development, here’s how you can banish the self-doubt and get your self-growth back on track: Set realistic goals: Hustle culture insists we should sleep less and do more, but it doesn’t work. Burnout isn’t effective for learning. You’ll just spend your free time worrying about your job performance, stressing over your home life, and questioning whether you should give up. Speak to your employer: Your productivity may slump, but your employer already knows you’re capable. Have the conversation and ask how they can support you. They might offer a few hours out of the workday each week for personal development or cover the cost of a micro-learning subscription. Show yourself compassion: Parenthood is never easy, despite what some claim. You will face interruptions, skip days, and completely forget things you learned five minutes ago. That’s normal, so show yourself some compassion. Learning to be kinder to yourself is still a form of growth, even if it doesn’t come with a certificate or qualification. Remember, this isn’t forever: “My career is over,” “The person I was is gone,” “I’ll never achieve my goals.” It’s easy to fall into a mindset of doom and gloom, but that’s the sleep deprivation talking. Kids grow up, demand less time, and normalcy resumes. View the full article

Performance has lagged at Paul Singer’s hedge fund amid concerns that large size is barrier to strong returnsView the full article

International energy watchdog sets out new pessimistic scenario to reflect fading commitment to climate changeView the full article

Arjun Sethi says users are hindered by dire warnings and hurdles that slow down transactions View the full article

The issue is The President’s Achilles heel — and the US president knows itView the full article

Dismembering salary sacrifice is a short-sighted tax grab that will accelerate the UK’s retirement savings crisisView the full article

Europe’s manufacturing champion is in free fall. Economists are suggesting radical steps to save what is leftView the full article

One-off phone call between national security adviser and Russia’s foreign policy aide said to have ‘not gone well’View the full article

Second-lien mortgages make up the collateral pool. Those assets normally have a high expected loss severity, but the borrowers appear to be of prime credit quality. View the full article

Third-quarter mortgage earnings revealed swings in profitability, but the real story, according to the Chairman of Whalen Global Advisors, is that hedging MSRs is unnecessary for well-managed lenders. View the full article

On Tuesday, SoftBank, the Japanese financial giant, announced plans to dump all 32 million of its shares in Nvidia, the AI chip maker. The news won’t be the needle that pops the AI bubble, but it did cause enough of a stir to make Nvidia’s shares drop 2% Tuesday morning. The bad vibes were muted somewhat by news of what SoftBank says it will do with the proceeds of the sell off, along with those from the sale of some of its $9.17 billion T-Mobile stake: The firm will double down on another big bet in the AI space–OpenAI. SoftBank expects to directly invest $30 billion in OpenAI this year, according to its second-quarter financial statement in September. And it had already committed $19 billion to the $500 billion Project Stargate infrastructure initiative (with OpenAI and Oracle). To bankroll these commitments, Masayoshi Son, SoftBank’s CEO, likely needed to free up funds. Hence the Nvidia sell-off. For years, Son has talked about SoftBank’s strategy to invest in the “computing platforms of the future,” including AI. His firm amassed a reported $4 billion stake in Nvidia back in 2017, only to dump the shares in 2019. At the time Son had called Nvidia the “the core company of the AI revolution.” He now believes that OpenAI will be that core company. During SoftBank’s annual general meeting in June, Son declared he is “all in” on OpenAI. He’d always wanted to be an early major investor in the AI super-startup, he said, but Microsoft beat him to the punch. OpenAI, he predicted, will one day go public and eventually “become the most valuable company in the world,” he said. Nvidia reported $46.7 billion in revenues during its July-ending quarter (and crossed $4 trillion in market cap), while OpenAI doesn’t expect to turn a profit until 2029. But by divesting of Nvidia and doubling down on OpenAI, Son can play a more active role in the platform’s expansion via initiatives like the Stargate Project, which will finance a major buildout of AI infrastructure. SoftBank is still indirectly entwined in Nvidia’s fortunes, which also rest on the broad expansion of AI. The entire stock market is being propped up by confidence in big tech companies that are investing huge amounts in AI. Investors are placing a lot of faith in the idea that generative AI, a mostly unproven technology, will create valuable new efficiencies for businesses in the coming years. Compounding the concern is the fact that a relatively small group of wealthy companies–SoftBank, Nvidia, and OpenAI–are investing in each other, which has fed fears that they’re involved in a sort of self-inflating bubble. It’s unclear if or when that bubble will popThat bubble may well pop at some point. For nowUntil then, Son has made his preference clear: software over hardware, a bet that feels like a big vote of confidence for AI. View the full article